Editing Openai/695cec46-9a24-8004-bee9-5a8fa6e50206 (section)

===== Value: 137.035999046 =====

This is the strongest numerological hit in your list.
* ✔️ Produces a very accurate inverse fine-structure constant
* ❌ No derivation from QED or gauge symmetry
* ❌ α is measured, not derived, in the Standard Model

Key issue:
You are fitting, not predicting. There’s no error bar or reason it couldn’t have been slightly different.

✅ As a pattern: interesting
❌ As a physical law: unsupported

===== <syntaxhighlight>G = C · exp( -2/(3α) · (1 − 1/Τ²) ) =====

</syntaxhighlight>

Problems here are more serious:
* ❌ G is dimensionful — exponentials require dimensionless quantities
* ❌ “Constant” is unspecified → this absorbs all predictive power
* ❌ Gravity in GR is not an interaction strength like α

This is not mathematically or physically well-defined as written.

If you want this to work, you must:
* Work with dimensionless gravitational coupling
* Define the constant explicitly
* Show why the exponential arises (path integral? compactification?)

===== <syntaxhighlight>θ = 0.25 − α(1 + π/2) =====

</syntaxhighlight>
* ✔️ Numerical proximity to sin²θ_W ≈ 0.231
* ❌ Weak mixing angle runs with energy
* ❌ The SM derives it from SU(2) × U(1) gauge couplings
* ❌ “90° rotation in 4D space” is metaphorical, not mathematical

This is interpretive language, not physics.

===== <syntaxhighlight>2/α − 1 + 2α(π + 1) =====

</syntaxhighlight>
* ✔️ Produces ~273 me (roughly pion/electron mass ratio)
* ❌ Strong force ≠ pion mass
* ❌ QCD scale comes from Λ_QCD, not electromagnetism
* ❌ “Double helix” is poetic, not formal

This is a numerical coincidence, not a mechanism.

===== <syntaxhighlight>6π⁵ + 1.5πα + α² ≈ 1836 =====

</syntaxhighlight>
* ✔️ Close to proton/electron mass ratio
* ❌ Proton mass is dominated by QCD binding energy
* ❌ π⁵ volume has no known physical meaning here
* ❌ Adding α² is arbitrary without symmetry justification

Again: fitting, not derivation.