# On the physical interpretation and the mathematical structure of the combinatorial hierarchy

## Abstract

The combinatorial hierarchy model for basic particle processes is based on elementary entities; any representation they may have is discrete and two-valued. We call them*Schnurs* to suggest their most fundamental aspect as concatenating strings. Consider a definite small number of them. Consider an elementary creation act as a result of which two different Schnurs generate a new Schnur which is again different. We speak of this process as a “discrimination.” By this process and by this process alone can the complexity of the universe be explored. By concatenations of this process we create more complex entities which are themselves Schnurs at a new level of complexity. Everything plays a dual role in which something comes in from the outside to interact, and also serves as a synopsis or concatenation of such a process. We thus incorporate the observation metaphysic at the start, rejecting Bohr's reduction to the haptic language of common sense and classical physics. Since discriminations occur sequentially, our model is consistent with a “fixed past-uncertain future” philosophy of physics. We demonstrate that this model generates four hierarchical levels of rapidly increasing complexity. Concrete interpretation of the four levels of the hierarchy (with cardinals 3,7,127,2^{127}-1≈10^{38}) associates the three levels which map up and down with the three absolute conservation laws (charge, baryon number, lepton number) and the spin dichotomy. The first level represents +, −, and ± unit charge. The second has the quantum numbers of a baryon-antibaryon pair and associated charged meson (e.g.,*n¯n,p¯n,p¯p,n¯p,π*^{ + },*π*^{0},*π*^{ − }). The third level associates this pair, now including four spin states as well as four charge states, with a neutral lepton-antilepton pair (*e¯e* or*v¯v*), each pair in four spin states (total, 64 states)—three charged spinless, three charged spin-1, and a neutral spin-1 mesons (15 states), and a neutral vector boson associated with the leptons; this gives 3+15+3×15=63 possible boson states, so a total correct count of 63+64=127 states. Something like*SU*_{2}×*SU*_{3} and other indications of quark quantum numbers can occur as substructures at the fourth (unstable) level. Breaking into the (Bose) hierarchy by structures with the quantum numbers of a fermion, if this is an electron, allows us to understand Parker-Rhodes' calculation of*m*_{ p }*/m*_{ e }=1836.1515 in terms of our interpretation of the hierarchy. A slight extension gives us the usual static approximation to the binding energy of the hydrogen atom,*α*^{ 2 }*m*_{ e }*c*^{ 2 }. We also show that the cosmological implications of the theory are in accord with current experience. We conclude that we have made a promising beginning in the physical interpretation of a theory which could eventually encompass all branches of physics.

## Keywords

Lepton Number Cosmological Implication Boson State Correct Count Neutral Vector## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- Amson, J. (1976). “Discrimination Systems,” 20 pp. (unpublished).Google Scholar
- Barasch-Schmidt, N. et al. (1978). “Particle Properties Data Booklet April 1978,” p. 2, from
*Physics Letters*,**75B**, 1–250.Google Scholar - Bastin, T. (1966). “On the Origin of the Scale Constants of Physics,”
*Studia Philosophica Gandensia*,**4**, 77–101.Google Scholar - Bastin, T. (1976a). “A Combinatorial Model for Scattering,” Report to the Science Research Council (U.K.), 57 pp. (unpublished).Google Scholar
- Bastin, T. (1976b). “An Operational Model for Particle Scattering Using a Discrete Approach,” Report to the Conference on “Quantum Theory and the Structures of Time and Space 2,” Tutzing, 6 pp. (unpublished).Google Scholar
- Dyson, F. J. (1952). “Divergence of Perturbation Theory in Quantum Electrodynamics,”
*Physical Review*,**85**, 631–632.Google Scholar - Finkelstein, D. (1979). “Holistic Methods,” submitted to
*International Journal of Theoretical Physics*.Google Scholar - Kilmister, C. W. (1978). private communication.Google Scholar
- Laplace, P. S. (1795).
*Exposition du Monde*, Vol. II, p. 305, Paris.Google Scholar - Noyes, H. P. (1957). “The Physical Description of Elementary Particles,”
*American Scientist*, Vol.**45**, 431–448.Google Scholar - Noyes, H. P. (1974). “Non-Locality in Particle Physics,” 55 pp., SLAC-PUB-1405.Google Scholar
- Noyes, H. P. (1975). “Fixed Past and Uncertain Future: A Single-time Covariant Quantum Particle Mechanics,”
*Foundations of Physics*,**5**, 37–43 (Erratum**6**, 125, 1976).Google Scholar - Noyes, H. P. (1976). “A Democritean Phenomenology for Quantum Scattering Theory,”
*Foundations of Physics*,**6**, 83–100.Google Scholar - Noyes, H. P. (1976). “A Democritean Approach to Elementary Particle Physics,” from Proceedings of the Summer Institute on Particle Physics, Martha Zipf, ed., pp. 239–259, SLAC Report No. 198 (issued as a separate document as SLAC-PUB-1956, 1977).Google Scholar
- Noyes, H. P. (1978). Private communication.Google Scholar
- Noyes, H. P. (1979). “The Lowest Level of the Combinatorial Hierarchy as a Particle Antiparticle Quantum Bootstrap,” SLAC-PUB-2277.Google Scholar
- Parker-Rhodes, A. F. (1978). “The Theory of Indistinguishables,” 208 pp., (unpublished).Google Scholar
- Weizsäcker, C. F. von. (1978). “Temporal Logic and a Reconstruction of Quantum Theory,” 88 pp., presented at the Conference on “Quantum Theory and the Structures of Time and Space 3,” Tutzing (unpublished).Google Scholar
- Wheeler, J. A., and Patton, C. M. (1977). “Is Physics Legislated by Cosmogony?” pp. 19–35, in
*The Encyclopedia of Ignorance*, R. Duncan and M. Weston-Smith, eds., Pergamon, Oxford.Google Scholar - Whiteman, J. H. M. (1971). “The Phenomenology of Observations and Explanation in Quantum Theory,” in
*Quantum Theory and Beyond*, T. Bastin, ed., pp. 71–84, Cambridge.Google Scholar