# R. Feynmans Mass Question

Author:
mustardness,

Topic's posts

Posts in total:
22

206.7572826 ismuon-electron mass

206.7572826 minus 0.511{ electron mass } = 206.2462826

Electron { 0.511 } repeats itself { 0.511 } plus 206.2462826

Feynmans question to self, was, why does the mass of the electron repeat itself at approximately at 206.7572826?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pi = 3.14 and

**66**is value of the number of relationships between 12 vertexes in 3D { \Y/ } or 12 nodal points in 2D { V }.Pi { 3.133 approximation } * 66 = 206.778 is approximate to mass of the muon-electron

Pi { 3.125 approximation } * 66 = 206.514 approximate to the increased mass value of electron

0.008 is differrence between two Pi approximates and 0.016 59 26 53 58 97 932384626433832795 is differrence between Pi { 3.14 } and 3.125

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Related considerations

Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.

*00*62 7**66**802998Pi^4{ XYZ + time }, minus 31 =

**66**.4 { Pi-Time }Pi^4/4{ re-normalization } = 24.35 22 7 27 585

*00*60 9309110083172176~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Relationship to great circles ---ergo Pi-- of torus and specifically the four level/line, numerically sequential, spiral helix with inversion-outversion at from peaks of outer an inner surface of curvature. (><)(><) LINK

0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 and that is close to 0.511 { electron mass }.

...James Bond { 007 } even at the quantum scales of existence...

Here above I chose to reduce Pi-value { 3.14 } or any approximate Pi-value ---ex 3.11---, rather than reduce my Pi-Time value of 66.4.

I.e. Ive reduced the approximated Pi-ratio of 3.11 used to get muon-electon mass value--- by a factor of 3.1 to arrive at 0.0077.

So what does it mean, to reduce Pi or any Pi associated value? Pi is not a size consideration so I cannot just say were looking at something that more and more micro in size.

Can we say that the ratio reduction is related to some portion of the circumference of a circle, that is not accounted for as an actual { completed } circumferential value?

I believe we can do this and in actuality, is what I do with my linear, numiercal, spiral helixed torus, that, has at minimum two kinds of primary great circles ( )( ) horizontal { side } view and (( )) birds-eye{ top }-view of a torus.

More on those specifics later.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Related considerations

Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.

*00*62 7**66**802998...5-fold icosa{20}hedron has 31 left and right skew primary great axi-spun circles/polygons { or tori } LINK .....

Pi^4{ XYZ + time }, minus the 31 { XYZ } =

**66**.4 { Pi-Time }Pi^4/4{ re-normalization } = 24.35 22 7 27 585

*00*60 9309110083172176....4-fold cubo{6}octa{8}hedron has 24 surface chords/edges LINK .....

I believe we can do this and in actuality, is what I do with my linear, numiercal, spiral helixed torus, that, has at minimum two kinds of primary great circles ( )( ) horizontal { side } view and (( )) birds-eye{ top }-view of a torus.

This set of two primary kinds of great circle of torus, are at 90 degrees to each other. Ergo the horizontal and vertical are at 90 degrees to each other.

Yes from a cosmic perspective there is no horizontal or vertical of any cosmically conceptual torus, there is only the 90 degree-ness relationship to those two viewpoints.

0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 and that is close to 0.511 { electron mass }.

Previously I presented to kinds of great circle associated with a torus;

1 } ( )( ) is two equatorial {

**great**} cross sectional planes of the tube --not whole torus-- so either one is great circle, 2} (

**(**( )**)**) the central inside the tube**great**circle plane divides the whole torus into two equal halvesHow the greatly reduced Pi, 0.007 is applied to a torus is difficult to make sense of, in a rational, logical common sense way. The most practical conclusion Ive arrived at is to see how Pi-time 66. 4 is applied.

What I came to is to think of --for starters--- is that my numerical based spiral helixed torus has 66.4 revolutions around the tube before in the process of creating a whole torus.

/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / = 22

/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / = 22

/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / = 22

...............................................= 66 total

The .4 means that the spiral inverts --inside the tube--- before making 67th revolution. I break this above into three sections of 22, because my geometric

**Standard Model**associates the electron with the three great circles{ planes } of the octa{8}hedron, that are each perpendicular { 90 degrees } to the other.It may be too early to bring this into view, but in Synergetics we see that the octahedron as developed by the VE/

**jitterbug**process, is actually composed of three sets of double-**bonded/valenced**great circles or planes ergo a set of 6 great circles or planes define the octahedral electron that is composed of 12 sets of two double-bonded/valenced vectorial edges. LINK~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Related considerations

Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.

*00*62**7****66**802998...

**..................................7**is in the overall**7th**position.....Pi^4{ XYZ + time }, minus 31 =

**66**.4 { Pi-Time }Pi^4/4{ re-normalization to XYZ- 3D } = 24.35 22

**7**27 585*00*60 9309110083172176....

**...........................................................................7**is in overall 7th position............A regular heptagon { 7 sided regular/symmetrical polygon } has

**7**irrational internal-external angles { 128.57 }, unlike many other regular polygons.0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 and that is close to 0.511 { electron mass }

Previously we divided 66.4 revolutions of the tube of a numerical torus, by

**three**great circles/planes associated with octahedron, to arrive at the value 22.133. 66.4 / 3 = 22.133Next we reconsider the double-bonded/valenced octahedron ergo

**six**great circles/planes and arrive at 11.066 via 66.4 revolutions divided by 6.I'm not sure this latter above is a crucial step for consideration. What may be more crucial, is how the mechanisms of an electron are defined by the revolutions --based on three--- and those revolutions along with their inversion-outversions creating the fuzzy cloud of electron uncertainty.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Related considerations

Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.

*00*62**7****66**802998...

**..................................7**is in the overall**7th**position.....Pi^4{ XYZ + time }, minus 31 =

**66**.4 { Pi-Time }Pi^4/4{ re-normalization to XYZ- 3D } = 24.35 22

**7**27 585*00*60 9309110083172176....

**...........................................................................7**is in overall 7th position............A regular heptagon { 7 sided regular/symmetrical polygon } has

**7**irrational internal-external angles { 128.57 }, unlike many other regular polygons.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

...."An electron bound in a hydrogen atom takes on various shapes depending on its energy, such as shown here in this physically-accurate mathematical plot. Note that this image shows a single electron. Each of the white spots is one of the peaks of the electron's wavefunction. Public Domain Image, source: Christopher S. Baird."....

0.028 59 26 535897932384626433832795

The above value is the differrence Pi { 3.14 etc } and 3.113 { used to calculate electron mass0.511 mass }.

3.14 = Pi

3.113 * 66.4 = 206.7032 approimate electron-muon mass

0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 approximate electron mass

3.1053 is the differrence between 3.113 and 0.0077

3.13 38 92 6535897932384626433832795 is diffferrence betwee 3.14 and 0.0077

What I'm looking for is a rational, logical way to adjust Pi instead of adjusting 66.4 revolutions of torus, in regards to my numerical torus.

I previous I saw no rational way to incorporate these variations of Pi into my numerical torus. So this is why I'm reviewing the above info to clarify to self how I got here in hopes of seeing a Pi-like relationship forward in regards to the torus that does not adjust mess with the 66.4.

23 days later

What I'm looking for is a rational, logical way to adjust Pi instead of adjusting 66.4 revolutions of torus, in regards to my numerical torus

Actually not looking for way to " adjust ", I'm actually looking for way to justify the accounting Ive already identified, within context of my numerical, inverted-outverted torus, or some integral set of three or more great tori.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

3.113 * 66.4 = 206.7032 approximate electron-muon mass

0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 approximate electron mass

More inversions associated with torus would seem to create a greater mass ergo adjusting to a higher set { frequency } of inversions { (><)(><) } to arrive the lesser Pi-value 0.00077 does not seem correct pathway.

What if the Pi-value and my adjusted Pi-value of 3.113 is somehow associated something else Ive not yet considered. Ex what if the adjusted Pi-value 3.113 is associated to some greater number of tori. Ex let the greater number of tori be 206.7032 or even higher.

Then we can have the adjusted Pi-value 0.0077 can be more likened to a lesser number of tori.

The question becomes what is the number of tori for a unit value of 1, relative to 0.0077?

The differrence between 1 and 0.0077 is 0.9923.

If 0.0077 is equal to 3 great tori, then multiply 3 by 0.9923 to find our base unity of tori. Yes?

I say three because that is correlates to my past years of associating the electron with the contracted cubo-octahedron as an octahedron ergo three great planes.

3{ tori } * 0.923 = 2.9769...H.mmm?

Tried something new in regards to the following operations, in trying to find how the 0.0077 would associate to three of my helix-based numerical tori of an octahedron.

3.14 = Pi

3.113 * 66.4 = 206.7032 approximate electron-muon mass ...{ this latter begin the value R Feynman says ever physicist has on his wall }......

0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 approximate electron mass is ok but does not associate rationally with even one whole numerical torus much less three, ergo I tried something new and got a surprise value.

8623.3 7 66 2 33 7 66 2 33 7 66 2 33 7 66 233766

So this operation of dividing 66.6 ---revolutions of helix around the tube of whole torus?--- gave me the above value. Not sure what to do with it, but I at least get a rational whole number set { 8632 } that may some how relate-able to helix based numerical torus.

Anyway that 862 and 3.3 7 66 2 33 7 66 would pop out takes me back to;

Pi^3 = 31.00 62 7 66 80

even tho there is no 33 in the latter value.

--> @SupaDudz

I love cosmic stuff and never had any outstanding teachers of science that said anything I can remmember. I recall one science teacher talking more about the next world war starting in the middle east and he was stating this in 1968.

What I'm considering in this thread is theoretical speculations in regards to sub-atomic physics and

**not molecular chemistry**i.e. interactions between atoms in molecular configurations.

86 23.3766 233766 233766 233766 2337 66

So we have 8000 and 600 before we get to the repeating 23.766.

So that is 86 hundred and perhaps we can add in 23 as some percentage of 8600.

What just occurred to me was any possible associations to the 87 great circles LINK combination of the;

25 primary great circle planes/polygons 4-fold cubo-octahedron and,

62 via 31 left and right set of icosahedrons primary set great circle planes/polygons.

So 87 * 100 = 8700.

**Minus 100**= 8600What percentage of 8623 is the value 23? H,mmm not sure where any this leads or of significance.

What percentage of 8623 is the value 23?

0.27% i.e. less than 1%

So 87 minus 100 arrives at 8600 with 027% being negligible{?}.

100 is 1.1627906976744% of 8600. So would such a 1.62790 be of any meaning in these lines of thought?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

86 23.3766 233766 233766 233766 2337 66

So we have 8000 and 600 before we get to the repeating 23.766.

So that is 86 hundred and perhaps we can add in 23 as some percentage of 8600.

What just occurred to me was any possible associations to the 87 great circles LINK combination of the;

25 primary great circle planes/polygons 4-fold cubo-octahedron and,

62 via 31 left and right set of icosahedrons primary set great circle planes/polygons.

So 87 * 100 = 8700.

**Minus 100**= 8600
31 days later

First, as always, a review of how we got here.

3.14 = Pi

3.113 * 66.4 =

**206.7032 approximate muon-electron mass**...{ this latter being the value R P. Feynman says ever physicist has on his wall }......0.0077 * 66.4 =

**0.511 28 approximate electron mass**is ok but does not associate rationally { whole number of tori } with even one whole numerical torus much less three, ergo I tried something new and got a surprise value.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

66.4 { revolutions within helical torus? } / 0.0077 = 86

**23.37**66 233766 233766 233766 233766Yes, it is an interesting number as far as the 86 being close to the primary set of 87 great circle planes LINK but what to do with it, if anything.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The difference between 1 and 0.0077 is 0.9923.

The differrence between 1 and 0.511 is 0.489.

66.4 is an ultra{ extreme }-abstract resultant of Pi^4 - 31{ XYZ ergo 3D } automatically associate it with 66.4 revolutions ergo 66.4 inversions (>< ) of a single helically defined torus. Does that make 66.4 an absolute? A static absolute, that, we have to convert to a more dynamic { physical } and known{?} value

**ex**2nd powering of speed-of-radiation? Or whatever.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.0.0077 .....* 66.4 =

**0.51128 electron mass**.3.113.........* 66.4 =

**206.7032 approximate muon-electron mass**26.61 26 5 * 66.4 =

**1767.038 and approximate mass of tau-electron**?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

66.4 { revolutions within helical torus? } / 0.0077 = 86

**23.37**66 233766 233766 233766 2337668,6

**23.37**66 233766 233766 233766 2337668,623 - 2,000 = 6623

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

66.4 / 3.113 = 21.32 99 06 84 22 74 33344041117892708

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

66.4 / 26.6126 = 2.49 50 58 73 15782749524661250685765

I am fine with Honors Chem, but AP Chem is hard, and I got above average on the ACS exam.

Diameter of hydrogen is 1.06 * 10 to negative 10. i.e. 1.06 * 0.1 =

**0.106m**and that is the value I will begin with via the torus for diameter { <--D--> } of electron.This 0.106 is the value of the diameter of the larger circle of my numerical torus. So we want to use half of that value ---ergo 0.053--- to attain the radius { R--> } and then the resultant surface area of

**one torus**that may be involved with the hydrogen's, single electron, fuzzy cloud.0.053 * 12.56637061{ R--> }... = 0.66601764233

The calculation can be done differrent ways with differrent kinds of radii being used. I'm going with this following pathway since it does the math for me if I can properly assign their radii to my nunierlcal tori. I also like this method because it approximates what I believe the tubes radius to be, however,

**it does subtract the value of diameter of hydrogen atoms single proton**.I assume my numerical torus inside inner radius ---via the following link--- begins at the outside surface of diameter of the single hydrogen proton ergo I will have to double the value of the inner radius in the following link so as the inner circle of the diagram.

S = π2 * (R2 - r2) LINK to calculator that does the math for us.

R{ R--> } = 0.053

r{ r--> } = 0.0 minus radius of proton and we will

**exclude proton values**for following resultantsand the resultant

**surface area for my numerical torus is 0.02772372 ---and that value includes protons diameter---.**Next I need to establish a connection/asssociation to Pi-Time 66.4 ie. 66.4 revolutions { inversions } and subtract that from volume{?}?

And this may lead to most abstract --

**if not irrelevant**---, yet definitive Pi-Time of a single electronIntersecting tori of only one type of intersection between outer surface and nuclear centers ( <---)---->

66.4 { revolutions within helical torus? } / 0.0077 = 86

**23.37**66 233766 233766 233766 233766LINK for 87 great circle/polygonal planes

8,6

**23.37**66 233766 233766 233766 2337668,623 - 2,000 = 6623

So... what's the question

--> @WaterPhoenix

see #1 post if you want to better inform yourself, for starters.

.."Feynmans question to self, was, why does the mass of the electron repeat itself at approximately at 206.7572826?"....

Then read through the other posts if want to really follow the paths Ive been researching for some years now.

Correcting #16 post with the below

**NOT.**..."The calculation can be done differrent ways with differrent kinds of radii being used. I'm going with this following pathway since it does the math for me if I can properly assign their radii to my nunierlcal tori. I also like this method because it approximates what I believe the tubes radius to be, however,

**it does**."...__NOT__subtract the value of diameter of hydrogen atoms single protonand the resultant

**surface area for my numerical torus is 0.02772372 ---and that value**__includes__protons diameter---.
40 days later

**Mass vs Matter**

....."As we all know, “matter” is defined as “anything that occupies space and has mass,” and “mass” is defined as “something that represents the amount of matter in a particular space, particle or object.”

In terms of features,

**matter can be seen while mass cannot**. It is only quantifiable."..**Mind Over Matter { if not also mass }**

Well, we have scietific evidence for placebo effect occurring in some 10% of experiements.

Here is another set of experiements I never heard of.