One prediction the Γ Framework makes is in the area of muon decay. In the Standard Model, a muon decays into an electron, a muon neutrino, and an electron neutrino. This relies on the existence of undetectable neutrinos to account for the missing energy. The Γ Framework, by contrast, eliminates the need for neutrinos altogether.
In the Γ Framework, a muon (43Γ) decays directly into two electrons (2 x 20Γ) and three 1Γ gluons, which then decay into six gamma-ray photons. The entire energy balance (105 MeV) is accounted for via photon-photon interactions. This divergence highlights a fundamental shift: whereas the Standard Model introduces undetectable particles to conserve energy, the Γ Framework explains particle decay entirely through photon-based interactions.
This prediction could be tested by revisiting high-precision experiments on muon decay, looking for potential discrepancies in missing energy or gamma-ray emissions (“halo data”) where the Standard Model currently predicts neutrinos.
Another area of divergence is the interpretation of proton-proton fusion. In the Standard Model, proton fusion releases energy partly through neutrinos. The Γ Framework, however, posits that this energy is carried entirely by photon-photon interactions and the emission of gamma rays, offering a cleaner explanation without the need for neutrinos.
In both cases, the Standard Model falls short in providing a direct observable explanation for neutrino-based processes, while the Γ Framework predicts energy outcomes that could be more empirically testable with future advancements.
Your model of muon decay doesn’t conserve charge—you start with −1e , then have −2e and finally have zero. Also, the second electron is never observed.
First, the Γ Framework doesn’t use charge. I know that so radical, right!?! Instead, it uses the oscillatory resonances of coupled photons (1Γ gluons) to form, stabilize and polarize particles.
In addition, like lepton numbers, charge is a construct—a useful tool but not necessarily the endgame in physics.
Also, keep in mind the volumes of interactors. Until there’s a way to actually count both muons and electrons, then all we can honestly say is x muons decay into y electrons (and, possibly, unconfined gluons that disintegrate into photons). We don’t know the actual ratio because, currently, there’s no way to know.
Besides, there’s another model that addresses the dynamics from a level below the SM that suggests it’s not the ground floor. :)
Models evolve. Like any fleeting zeitgeist, consensuses change.
Thank you for the question.
One prediction the Γ Framework makes is in the area of muon decay. In the Standard Model, a muon decays into an electron, a muon neutrino, and an electron neutrino. This relies on the existence of undetectable neutrinos to account for the missing energy. The Γ Framework, by contrast, eliminates the need for neutrinos altogether.
In the Γ Framework, a muon (43Γ) decays directly into two electrons (2 x 20Γ) and three 1Γ gluons, which then decay into six gamma-ray photons. The entire energy balance (105 MeV) is accounted for via photon-photon interactions. This divergence highlights a fundamental shift: whereas the Standard Model introduces undetectable particles to conserve energy, the Γ Framework explains particle decay entirely through photon-based interactions.
This prediction could be tested by revisiting high-precision experiments on muon decay, looking for potential discrepancies in missing energy or gamma-ray emissions (“halo data”) where the Standard Model currently predicts neutrinos.
Another area of divergence is the interpretation of proton-proton fusion. In the Standard Model, proton fusion releases energy partly through neutrinos. The Γ Framework, however, posits that this energy is carried entirely by photon-photon interactions and the emission of gamma rays, offering a cleaner explanation without the need for neutrinos.
In both cases, the Standard Model falls short in providing a direct observable explanation for neutrino-based processes, while the Γ Framework predicts energy outcomes that could be more empirically testable with future advancements.
Your model of muon decay doesn’t conserve charge—you start with −1e , then have −2e and finally have zero. Also, the second electron is never observed.
You made a couple of interesting points.
First, the Γ Framework doesn’t use charge. I know that so radical, right!?! Instead, it uses the oscillatory resonances of coupled photons (1Γ gluons) to form, stabilize and polarize particles.
In addition, like lepton numbers, charge is a construct—a useful tool but not necessarily the endgame in physics.
Also, keep in mind the volumes of interactors. Until there’s a way to actually count both muons and electrons, then all we can honestly say is x muons decay into y electrons (and, possibly, unconfined gluons that disintegrate into photons). We don’t know the actual ratio because, currently, there’s no way to know.
Besides, there’s another model that addresses the dynamics from a level below the SM that suggests it’s not the ground floor. :)
Models evolve. Like any fleeting zeitgeist, consensuses change.