Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Our research on the directional product, from a directional product to Dirac energies, derives theenergies of hydrogen-like ions from one product, (1 − ε)(1 + ε) = β2 with β = αZ/n, and its ellipticorbits reproduce the fine structure. Its binding energy, B = mv2/(1 + ε), is the energy reading ofthe directional product, the reading that the rotation curves of disk galaxies select in our research onthe dark-mass ladder (λ = 1/(1 + ε) = 0.49–0.50), so that one reading describes bound orbits fromions to galaxies. The formula needs only a potential of the form 1/r and a dimensionless coupling, soit can be written for every force that has one. We write it for the four interactions with their couplingsα = 0.4925, αW = 0.0316, αs(mb) = 0.212 and αG = 5.906 · 10−39 (two protons), and wetest it against measurement. For electromagnetism it holds to 0.0427% up to Fe25+, the rest beingquantum electrodynamics. For gravity the same root that gives the fine structure gives a perihelionprecession of 7.16′′ per century for Mercury, exactly one sixth of the observed 42.98′′: the sixth of therelativistic mass, the other five being the curvature produced by the Sun. Below a0 = 1.144 × 10−10m s−2the product gives the ladder law of disk galaxies; with it the gravitational atom of two protonshas its first orbit at 56.1 km instead of 7.5 · 106light years, with radii linear in n, and the NewtonianBohr radius equals the transition radius exactly at the minimum quantum M∗ = (¯h4a0/G3)1/7. Thedark acceleration of the law makes the perihelia regress; the ephemeris of Saturn bounds the transitionconstant of the law to Kt ≤ 47 and predicts a supplementary precession of −0.812 to −1.27 mas percentury for Saturn. For the strong force the 1/r part alone, fitted to the Υ(2S)−Υ(1S) spacing, needsαs = 0.5369 and gives 89.3 MeV for Υ(3S) − Υ(2S) against 331.82 MeV measured; the confiningterm σr restores it (345.2 MeV), and a coupling that runs with the radius of the orbit produces thatterm: fitted to 1P − 1S, it predicts 1D − 1P = 228.2 MeV on the circular orbits of the model and250.8 MeV in the radial wave equation, against 263.8 MeV measured, with Λ = 0.2573 GeV, while arunning mass is excluded. Written as E = xy + n Cx, the form in which the potential energy of theelectron was derived, the same orbit gives for two light quarks M2 = 8σn, and the string tension ofbottomonium predicts the slope of the Regge trajectories of the light mesons within 11%. For the weakforce the Yukawa potential binds only above the threshold 2µαW /MW = 1.6798, and not at all below1 (Bargmann), while electrons give 2.01 · 10−7and top quarks 6.78 · 10−2: the formula never applies;the orbit of the model is stable only below the golden ratio, Mr < φ. One formula therefore links theforces in form; it unifies them only if it predicts their couplings. A pre-registered test shows that theeight offsets of the wheel, alone or on the drawn vectors at their angles, do not predict them: their hitsare no more frequent than those of random structures, and the couplings and their slopes never fall onthe same vectors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Msliki et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: