Symmetry: C, P, T?

A symmetry is a transformation which leaves an object unchanged. Let’s discuss symmetry in the context of a Euclidean void populated with point potentials. First, let’s examine a high-level definition from CoPilot. Remember that these definitions are in the context of the standard model of particle physics, in which a particle is an assembly of unit point potentials.

In the context of standard model particle physics, C, P, and T are three fundamental symmetries:

C (Charge Conjugation): This involves changing all particles to particles of opposite charge.

P (Parity): This involves flipping the orientation of the directions of space.

T (Time Reversal): This involves flipping the direction in which time evolves.

You can also do these transformations together. For instance, you can also consider CT, PT, or CPT.

The CPT theorem is a fundamental symmetry of physical laws under the simultaneous transformations of charge conjugation (C), parity transformation (P), and time reversal (T). CPT is the only combination of C, P, and T that is observed to be an exact symmetry of nature at the fundamental level for all physical phenomena.

CoPilot

The elephant in the room with regards to the concept of C,P,T symmetries and their combinations is that they all refer to characteristics of standard model particles which unbeknownst to physics are actually assemblies of point potentials. As I have said before, many of the interpretations of the quantum era of particle physics are nonsense uninformed by the true foundations of nature. What does it mean to talk about the symmetry of a particle assembly composed of a dozen or more point potentials whirling around in a geometry defined by an architecture with various sub-assemblies?

Let’s start by simply considering a system with a few point potentials flying around a Euclidean void in time and space. Is it possible to have symmetry in this system? No, absolutely not. Why?

1. Each point potential is immutable. Point potentials cannot be created nor destroyed. Point potentials have provenance. We can simulate and track every individual point potential in a particle assembly or in a reaction between particle assemblies. We could assign each point potential a unique ID. In that sense, there is not even a concept of changing a point potential or exchanging two point potentials.
2. A point potential is constantly emitting a sphere stream of potential that expands from the point of emission on the point potential path and continues forever. Again, it is a non-sequitur to even consider interchanging point potentials in this paradigm. Are we to interchange the point potential and its path and its sphere stream? That is non-sensical, and of course it would not be a symmetric transformation.
3. To hammer this point home, what if a point potential has exceeded field speed along its path? Now the other point potentials could interact with multiple sphere streams from the emitter. Exchanging point potentials alone cannot capture this behaviour.

Hence, there is no symmetry at the fundamental basis of nature.

Now, what about assemblies of point potentials? Can we put enough qualifications and restrictions on the scenario to discuss C, P, and T symmetry? We can, but to what purpose? With NPQG we can simulate any assembly or assemblies we desire as long as we can compute for a reasonable cost in a reasonable time. In such a case, these abstracted symmetries are interesting in development of a taxonomy of assemblies. Let’s assume we could consider each assembly in an ideal isolated environment of empty Euclidean time and space, i.e., no other point potentials, including those that make the assemblies that implement Einstein’s spacetime.

The core of every standard model particle assembly is a triply nested binary sub-assembly called a Noether core. The binaries are at vastly different scales in energy, radius, and orbital velocity. If you consider the three angular momentum vectors, we could label them H, M, and L for high, medium, and low. Now, place yourself in the positive octant of an x-y-z frame and look towards the origin. Now start with the axis labeled H and proceed clockwise and read out the labels. It’s either HML or HLM. Those are two different orderings and there is no translation, rotation, flip or anonymous exchange of point potentials, that will turn a pro Noether core into an anti Noether core or vice versa. Thus, Noether cores do not exhibit C nor P symmetry, and by the existing theorems that means they do not exhibit T symmetry either.

There are pro and anti Noether cores, and can each spin left or right. Each of these configurations produces a different superposition of potential sphere streams (wave equations). These different configurations impact the types of particle assemblies each Noether core can support and remain stable if not perturbed to the point of decay.

• Each point potential has provenance.
  • Each point potential exists with no known genesis and no known demise.
  • There is no annihilation or pair production of point potentials.
• Each point potential has path history.
  • Each point potential follows a continuous path through Euclidean space and time.
• Each point potential may have had a velocity that exceeded the speed of potential.
• Therefore, it is nonsense to consider that we could interchange point potentials.
  • What would it mean to do a charge transformation to point potentials?
  • What would it mean to do a parity transformation to point potentials?
  • What would it mean to do a time transformation to point potentials?
  • None of those are even possible, so it is nonsense at the fundamental level.

In conclusion, at the fundamental level of nature there is no symmetry of point potentials.

J Mark Morris : Lynn : Massachusetts