Exploring Nature’s Duality Through the Development of a New Supersymmetric Principle
As the theory of Supersymmetry attempts to explain how the universe works by claiming that each atomic particle exists with its own counterpart (twin) through the marriage of ideas shared in quantum mechanics, and relativity (commonly known as quantum field theory); I am wondering if that idea could use a bit of tweaking.
Supersymmetry attempts to apply the balance found in nature to the structure of subatomic particles. Basically, all masses of elementary particles are believed to come from the Higgs field, but the Higgs’ mass gets a big boost when it interacts with itself, which makes it impossible for us to examine the physics of it in shorter distances. Since gravity is assumed to be unified with the other forces at shorter distances (Planck length ) it appears that unifying quantum mechanics and gravity will never happen.
This is where the concept of supersymmetry really gets its wings, by repeating history in an effort to solve similar problems. How supersymmetry works is that for every particle out there, scientists believe that there is superpartner or twin particle that offers a spin that differs by half of its counterpart. This basically doubles the number of particles currently known. The original particle spin is a type of angular momentum that the elementary particles, and composite particles (hadrons) and atomic nuclei originally carry in quantum mechanics. The other spin is orbital angular momentum. This nuclear spin represents the way the particle rotates and at what speed it rotates. When this spin is altered by half, and the number of particles double, there is a cancellation between the process with regular particles and a different process with their twin. The Standard model so far describes the physics to the particle’s Planck length, which makes the unification of these terms more plausible. In fact, this unification is actually necessary for string theory and the quantum theory of gravity to work.
Supersymmetry actually makes it possible to unify the other forces (weak, strong, and electromagnetism) in the universe. Without supersymmetry, the strength of those forces change as a function of energy, they get closer to each other. It is supersymmetry that makes them equal to one another within a percent-level of accuracy.
What is Project Gemini?
Project Gemini is a thought process suggesting that these twin particles are not actually separate particles acting in opposing ways, but current particles acting as its own counterpart. Meaning that the particles gain mass in order to operate at half the spin of elementary particles when needed in nature in almost deterministic manner in the same way as an asexual amphibian might act as both male and female to ensure it reproduces.
We know that the Higgs field adds mass or lessens mass of the elementary particles, so I am now wondering if particles themselves play a near sentient role in making that happen. I wonder if those particles do so with an awareness of what is required at any given time. There are a few theories that may lend support to that conclusion. The Double slit experiment conducted by Thomas Young offered an introductory glimpse into the potential for particle duality when it showed that particles act as both a wave and a particle depending on whether or not they were being observed, which showed that they act in a manner displaying sentient behavior, The sentience described in the double slit experiment implies that the particles are ‘aware’ that they are being observed in the first place, which would also allow for the possibility of deterministic behavior in their ability to act in a dualistic manner. Unlike the derterministic behaviour found in dynamic nature, this would imply an almost willfulness behind their behavior. With particles being able to exhibit the properties of light and/or energy, their mutability is practically guaranteed.
With the dualistic nature of particles being evident in their behavior when observed, the focus is easily shifted toward the reason behind this behaviour. The question becomes, why would they move in and/or out of wave behavior or vice versa at all? My first thought would be the creation of matter because that is what happens. We know that all matter is created by atoms, which is made up of subatomic particles acting together to create a nucleus of protons, neutrons and a cloud of orbiting electrons. Since most electrons don’t ‘live’ in orbitals, the purpose implies intent behind them making a ‘home’ around a nucleus in the first place. Once the particles unify to create the stuff that matter is made of, those things unify in creating the stuff that life is made of. All of this because of dualistic behavior that is evident in subatomic particles. With this dualistic behaviour being evident, I cannot help wondering if those same dualistic properties can be found within the nature of the particles themselves.
The Nature of Particle Duality in Creating the New Supersymmetric Principle
We all understand that there is an infinite balance to all things contained within our universe. Almost everything in the known universe exists in both its evident truth and its counterpart. This is accepted and generally understood as existing in all things. In fact, it can be reasoned that this duality is a necessary component, in that, one thing cannot exist without its counterpart. It is the foundation that supersymmetry is based on. It is also the foundation behind our philosophical understanding of the universe and ourselves. In theology, it is also the primary theme.
In philosophy, this duality is explored within human nature (good/evil) as well as human construct (mind/body). In life forms, all things exist in unison with one another in a simultaneous manner. For example, a person exists as both good and evil. A person is made up of both form and matter. Outside of the constraints of living beings, this balance is also evident. In nature we see night and day (light and darkness). In the universe we see matter and anti-matter, we see particles as waves and particles. It is truly evident in all things. It isn’t until you dissect it that the confusion starts because for all arguments made, an opposing argument exists to dispute it. It is why progress cannot be made in almost any area of study. In fact, this opposition found in all things, is so deeply embedded in our psyche, we cannot imagine anything without considering its opposing qualities, so we cannot actually thoroughly reconcile ourselves to any one truth. However, we can dissect and over-analyze every detail until we arrive back at nothing, so why not. But that will be discussed in a later article.
One of the greatest problems scientists and physicists are having in proving supersymmetry is that these twin particles cannot be found. Even CERN’s Large Hadron Collider Experiment is not finding it, although the latest run did offer the chance for a new quark, which are the building blocks of protons and neutrons. They also think they may have discovered another boson (possibly a graviton) in the ATLAS zone of the LHC. The graviton is a particle that is hypothesized to be associated with gravity, and are linked to theories that include additional dimensions of space to include height, width, and depth. The belief is also wondering if they found a supersymmetric particle because the weight of the particle they may have seen is simply too high to be anything that has already been discovered in the standard model. This new particle weighs in at a heavy 750 GeV/c² to put this in perspective, the proton weighs in at 0.9 GeV/c² and the Higgs weighs in at 126 GeV/c² (which inconveniently fails to prove or disprove arguments for both the multiverse theory and supersymmetry).
Without finding any of these twin particles (whose existence are identified with their mass), the belief of many is that there aren’t any. Until they actually find some, this is true. However, this idea has me wondering if a few different reasons might be why:
1) The particles do not ‘want’ to be observed (you cannot see them because they display similar sentient properties as displayed in the double-slit experiment).
2) They cannot be observed without other factors being discovered to make them observable (think of how it is nearly impossible to see with the naked eye the dust particles floating randomly in the air without a beam of light allowing them to be observed).
3) The particle does not interact with the other forces in the universe’s (like dark matter not interacting with electromagnetic force)
4) The particle is actually a composite of other particles or quarks and not a single entity.
5) It is not a particle at all, but shares/mimics the characteristics and/or behavioral properties of one.
6) It is a boson (like perhaps even a variant of the popular Higgs Boson).
7) The twins are not particles, but virtual particles popping and out of existence
The possibilities here are boundless until the truth is discovered, but you get the point. The fact is that unless the LHC definitively finds evidence of these twin particles, there may be other explanations as to the nature of the particles themselves. So the task falls on philosophical idealism to maybe fill in the gaps. This is where the sentient properties behind particle behaviour comes into play again.
Applying Sentience to Supersymmetry
When you truly consider the dualistic nature of particle behaviour to supersymmetry, the largest tasks you have before you would be: 1) Rectifying how these particles would be able to shed mass without suffering the eventual decay that would follow to sustain living matter. 2) Rectifying the deciding factor in why the particles are taking on/shedding mass in the first place, and 3) Reconciling how the differences existing between particles can bring them together, where they would otherwise avoid one another. From there you would have to reconcile these ideals with their journey through the Higgs field, which all particles must trudge through in order to determine their mass, which in turn will determine their function in terms of creation.
If the particles passing through the Higgs field determines their overall function, it helps to understand the process. All particles have a corresponding field that permeates throughout the universe, and each field has a virtual particle representative. For example, the electromagnetic field (EM) has its virtual photon representative. When another particle interacts with the EM field, that particle absorbs and emits a constant stream of virtual photons (photons that come into existence momentarily) just to mediate the particle/field interaction. The temporary existence of the virtual particles is used to help with the integration. The same thing happens when particles approach a Higgs field.
Imagine a particle approaching the Higgs field with the intent on picking up mass. The field becomes excited and generates virtual Higgs particle, which then mediates the integration of the particle and the field so that the particle can pass through it. The level of the Higgs field’s excitement is determined by the higgs virtual particle. But since the higgs boson is so heavy in its own right, it is difficult to excite enough to then excite the field. The Higgs field is often viewed like a flow of syrup that permeates the universe. This syrup engulfs the particle when it runs through it, weighing it down; thus providing the particle with mass. Lighter particles take on less mass, while heavier particles run through the field at a slower rate and therefore pick up more mass.
In determining the mediation process that takes place between virtual particles and the Higgs field, I again refer to the sentient nature of the particles that pass through it. In determining the amount of mass that will take place, I wonder if the particles (knowing what they require) communicate with the virtual representative what their needs are; who then either hypes up the field a lot or a little to determines how thick the field syrup will be. Basically, I wonder if the approaching particles tell the virtual particles how much mass they need (in accordance to their purpose), which sends the VP’s to the field with the message, and then passes through the field again at whatever speed is necessary to accomplish its goal. It is almost like particles approach with a mission, relay that mission to the virtual particle, who then relays the message to the field. From here it is the particles job to enter the field at the correct speed, and the Darwinian process of natural selection ensure that only the strongest/fittest particles make it through intact and stabilize to later form matter. The weaker members of that particle strain may enter the field at the wrong speed and come out of it having transformed the particle into another one.
Add this level of sentience to the theory of supersymmetry, which predicts that particles in the standard model have twin particles that move with a spin that differs by half a unit and differs in their collective properties; you are left wondering about those collective properties, since the spin itself can be explained through that sentient behavior. The question now centers around whether or not those particles can also shed/attain its properties with the same degree of sentience.
Can Particles Change their Properties?
With Supersymmetry helping to fill in the potential gaps in the standard model by allowing for each particle to have its own twin that has different properties. The answer to whether or not they can change properties lies in whether or not those properties are mutable or adaptive either independently or in conjunction with one anther. I will approach this question in a few ways:
1) Are the properties that make the particle ‘stable’ fixed or are they equally mutable as when particles alter themselves to be both waves and particles? And is this potential mutability relative to an observer being present?
2) Can particles alter their properties to adapt to the field they are moving through?
3) Is water a component that may make particles mutable?
Is water the fundamental component that a particle consists of? Is this why particles are so mutable and adaptable? Water exists in numerous states and it may be present in all elementary particles. Or even just one. It exists as gas, liquid, solid etc so maybe it can explain things a bit. It could explain why particles can act as both waves and particles. It may explain the ether in space. It may be the building block of the building block of the entire universe. It may explain why matter in living things needs water to exists. It may be why physical properties in living things depend on it. It may also be why and how we are shaping our own realities. Maybe slight changes or variants in the surrounding fields are what give the water particles their specific densities (viscosity).
Naturally this project is not finished and needs quite a bit more research, but, it is a start. This is just one of the ideas we’ve been floating around here. Any fresh research conducted on my part will add to this piece later and added to this one, so check for updates as this is only the beginning of Project Gemini. See what we come up with here at Freethinker Nation.