Explaining the Ratios of Masses of all Three Generations of Leptons and Quarks and Predicting the Mass Eigenstates of Neutrinos

Question

Referee this paper: hal-04191213 by Nikola Perkovic

Please use comments to point to previous work in this direction, and reviews to referee the accuracy of the paper. Feel free to edit this submission to summarise the paper (just click on edit, your summary will then appear under the horizontal line)

(Is this your paper?)

---

In this paper we will provide a new equation that explains why there are three generations or families of leptons and quarks, respectively. We will also explain why all those particles have the known mass ratios amongst their three respective generations and flavors. We will also tackle the problem of Yukawa couplings being arbitrary parameters in the Standard Model Higgs mechanism, which is a long standing problem do to their formulaic dependence on the Higgs Vacuum Expectation Value (VEV). We will attempt to solve this problem and provide a strong argument through an equation for Yukawa couplings of all leptons and quarks via a new methodology that depends on the running of the fine-structure constant on the Q scale, quantum numbers and the Weinberg angle (also on the Q scale). We will also make predictions for all three left-chiral neutrino mass eigenstates and we will provide upper limits for the three right-chiral neutrino mass eigenstates.

Comments

Hi - I think it would help people understand your formulas, if you described the history of how you developed them. I assume you started with something simpler, and then added extra details as necessary? 

---

Hello, I developed the formula so I can't reference it with anything else. All the details of the formula are explained as are the solutions.

---

What I mean is that the formula is quite complicated - a ratio of powers times an integral, all raised to another power - and although the parameters depend on various physical properties, I don't see how you would end up considering that way of combining them. 

I'm thinking that either you started with something much simpler, and/or you had particular physical ideas guiding your choice of formula. Knowing the history and/or motivation behind the details of the formula, would help the reader understand it. 

---

I had an older paper but it wasn't much simpler than this equation. Thank you for your comments, I'll try to expand on my explanation of the equation.