Could no new particles at the LHC be exactly what physics needs?
Ethan Siegel

Amen! …it might be a dream come true.

{Yes, failure is part of science — it’s frustrating, but not worrisome. What worries me much more is our failure to learn from those failures. Rather than trying something new, we’ve been trying the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.} Amen, again.

(When I look at the data what I see is that our reliance on gauge-symmetry and the attempt at unification, the use of naturalness as guidance, and the trust in beauty and simplicity aren’t working. … It failed again. And yet we haven’t drawn any consequences from this: Particle physicists are still playing today by the same rules as in 1973. … I’ve been laughed at when I explained that I don’t buy into naturalness because it’s a philosophical criterion, not a scientific one. But on that matter I got the last laugh: nature, it turns out, doesn’t like to be told what’s presumably natural. … nightmare scenario” for the LHC: The Higgs and nothing else. Many particle physicists are afraid of this scenario because, if it comes true, it will leave them without guidance,…) Amen, again, again.

Here is the new physics with three parts.

Part one: Hitting the bull’s eye

One, Alpha calculation

Beta = 1/alpha = 64 ( 1 + first order mixing + sum of the higher order mixing)

= 64 (1 + 1/Cos A(2) + .00065737 + …)

= 137.0359 …

A(2) is the Weinberg angle, A(2) = 28.743 degrees

The sum of the higher order mixing = 2(1/48)[(1/64) + (1/2)(1/64)^2 + …+(1/n)(1/64)^n +…]

= .00065737 + …

Two, Planck CMB data Calculation, see

Three, Cosmology Constant Calculation, see

Part two: open predictions

Prediction one, In the Planck CMB data calculation, it PREDICTS a ‘Dark Radiation (W)’, and W = 9%: that is, the universe expansion rate (UER) will be faster Now than before with the following equation.

UER (now)/UER (CMB period) = 1.09


Prediction two, there should be a ‘vacuum boson (VB)’, and its mass is calculated with the following equation.

VB (mass) = (vacuum energy / 2) + (vacuum fluctuation = vacuum energy x 1%)

If vacuum energy = 246 Gev.,

VB (mass) = (246 / 2) + (246 x 1%) = 125.46 Gev

Prediction three, there should be excited vacuum states (not particles) with the following equation.

Vev (n) = (2 n +1) vev (0)

So, Vev (1) = 3 vev (0) = 3 x 246 = 738 (+/- 15) Gev.

Prediction four, if vev (1) is reached by proton/proton collision, the VB production rate will be reduced.


Part three: the G-string physics

One, the first principle: {The essence of THIS universe is ‘NOTHINGNESS’, and it must remain to be nothingness}.

Two, definition of ‘nothingness’: {timelessness and immutability}.

Three, manifestation of timelessness: at every t, it must be ‘timelessness’ in essence.


Four, the equation of this ‘timelessness’:

{Delta S = (i^n1, i^n2, i^n3) x C x Delta T} … Equation zero

S, space; T, time (real); C, light speed. (n1, n2, n3) take the value of {0, 1, 2, or 3}

Five, Equation zero generates 48 SM fermions, see

Six, the manifestation of ‘immutability’: via Ghost-rascal, see . Again, it generates 48 SM fermions.

Seven, the manifestation as force(s):

F (unified) = K*ħ/ (delta S*delta T), K is a coefficient constant … Equation one

This force (gravity) moves the entire universe from {[here (now), now] to [here (next), next]}


Consequence one: universe expands with acceleration. See,

Consequence two: uncertainty principle is the emergent of Equation one.

Consequence three: calculation of Alpha

Consequence four: calculation of Planck CMB data

Consequence five: calculation of Cosmology constant

Thus far, there are three gravity theories:

One, Newtonian gravity: attractive force among masses

Two, the curvature of space-time caused by mass

Three, the force which moves the entire universe from {(here, now) to (here, next)}

For Final TOE (theory of everything), see


For naturalness: instead of abandoning their bullcrap theories, how dare a species of this NATURE to denounce that nature is not nature. See, , .

Note added on August 6, 2016 (after the new LHC 2016 data was released):

My Protégé Dr. Li xiaojian (Professor of North China University of Technology, Beijing, 100144, China) discussed my predictions and my “The Final Total TOE” with Dr. David Gross (Nobel laureate) on August 5, 2016; see photos below.

My “The Final Total TOE” was presented at {Strings 2016 conference ( )} held at Tsinghua University, Beijing China (from August 1 to 5, 2016), by Dr. Li xiaojian too. The key points of this presentation is available at .

About “The Final Total TOE”: see,
About the new LHC 2016 data: see, and
About the physics epistemology: see,
About the Higgs: see,