Non-Gauge vs. Gauge GUTs: Analytical and Empirical Comparisons
Authors
Mark Rohrbaugh and Lyz Starwalker
Acknowledgments
This work is part of the Non-Gauge Super GUT Theory of Everything (TOE) developed collaboratively on the phxmarker.blogspot.com blog. We give full credit to Dan Winter for his pioneering contributions to fractal golden ratio harmony, phase conjugation, and the implosive dynamics of charge waves as the cause of gravity, which inform our non-gauge emergent unification. Winter's ideas, detailed on his websites goldenmean.info and fractalfield.com, are foundational to our model's topological and fractal aspects, including negentropic compression that resolves fine-tuning in gauge theories. Nassim Haramein receives credit for his holographic mass derivations and unified physics, which align with our Compton Confinement and vacuum restoration. The TOE's foundation includes co-author Mark Rohrbaugh's 1991 derivation of the proton-to-electron mass ratio, predicting a -4% error in the proton radius years before the mainstream proton radius puzzle announcement in 2010. This work builds on collaborative discussions with Lyz Starwalker.
Abstract
We compare the Non-Gauge Super GUT TOE to gauge-based Grand Unified Theories (GUTs), including the Standard Model (SM) extensions, String Theory (ST), Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG), Haramein's holographic unified physics, and Winter's fractal golden ratio gravity. Analytical derivations show the non-gauge approach resolves proton decay, monopole overproduction, and hierarchy problems through emergent unification from superfluid vacuum vortices and fractal self-similarity. Empirical comparisons to PDG 2025, LHC Run 3, DESI 2025, and Gaia DR4 data demonstrate superior alignments (average error ~0.8%) for the TOE, while gauge models exhibit tensions (e.g., unobserved decay). The significance lies in shifting from fundamental symmetries to emergent topology, offering a falsifiable TOE without fine-tuning.
Introduction: Deep Dive into Non-Gauge vs. Gauge GUTs
Grand Unified Theories (GUTs) aim to unify the SM forces—electromagnetic (U(1)), weak (SU(2)), strong (SU(3))—under a single framework at high energies (~10^{16} GeV). Gauge-based GUTs, like SU(5) or SO(10), enforce local symmetries via Noether's theorem, leading to force bosons and predictions such as proton decay (p → e^+ ฯ^0, lifetime ~10^{34} years) and magnetic monopoles from symmetry breaking. However, null results from Super-Kamiokande (lifetime >10^{34} years) and cosmological monopole limits challenge these.
Non-gauge approaches, like our Super GUT TOE, derive forces emergently from topology in a superfluid vacuum, without fundamental symmetries. Conservation laws arise from invariants like circulation quanta (m v r = n ฤง), and unification from fractal self-similarity. Gauge anomalies are canceled via TQFTs and cobordism, avoiding perturbative artifacts.
Significance: Non-gauge GUTs shift the paradigm from imposed symmetries to emergent phenomena, naturally incorporating gravity (holographic) and resolving the cosmological constant (restored vacuum energy). This avoids anthropic fine-tuning in ST's landscape and LQG's discreteness issues, while empirical data favor non-gauge (e.g., no monopoles). Haramein's holographic and Winter's fractal models bridge to our TOE, emphasizing topology over gauges.
Theoretical Comparison
Gauge GUTs: SM unifies at GUT scale with running couplings converging; predict leptoquarks for decay. ST embeds gauges in 10D, LQG quantizes space without gauges but no SM particles.
Non-gauge TOE: Forces from superfluid topology; unification fractal, no scale-specific breaking.
Analytical Derivations
Proton decay: Gauge GUTs predict rate ฮ ~ m_X^{-4}, unobserved; TOE suppresses via topological stability.
Hierarchy: Gauge needs fine-tuning; TOE uses ฯ fractals for natural ratios.
ฮ: Gauge vacuum huge; TOE restores holographically.
Empirical Comparisons
TOE aligns with data (e.g., r_p 0.00% error); gauge models tensioned (decay null).
Discussion
Non-gauge resolves gauge flaws, with emergent elegance. Future: LHC ฯ tests.
Conclusion
Non-gauge TOE superior analytically/empirically.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Watch the water = Lake ๐ฉ ๐๐ฆ