Separating the wheat from the chaff, then taking the wheat seed and making it from something natural, into unnatural. “Unnatural Phenomena.” 

Government is not a natural phenomena. Church and God is not a natural phenomena. Votes are not a natural phenomena. Marriage is not a natural phenomena. Marrying 17 women and having 85 children is not a natural phenomena. Offshore accounts of hiding money not a natural phenomena. Cannibalism is not natural phenomena, or a female bear would eat her young. Robots wanting to kill humans, not a natural phenomena or law. White Flour is not a natural phenomena, because it is a seed that is a biological organism, that is ground into flour, and has starch and cellulose that are ground out of it. They separate the hull from that which is inside the kernel and then they crush the kernel and take out the wheat germ, etc.,  separating all the parts. It is somewhat like Science and the males right now, getting side tracked with shiny in Physics. Charlemagne…natural or unnatural phenomenon? Energy, Conversion and Potentiality.  

So lets look at Physics and the God particle made by man’s expressions, words, meanings, insights, knowledge or lack of knowledge in our wondrous human brain,  and see if it is a natural phenomena.

When a man saw energy he said, “Oh my God.” After he expressed his emotions, and feelings about energy, they now want to call the particle “God.” Energy, Conversion and Potential is that a God? The goal of Climate Change, conserving energy was the main climate change goal. Do we conserve or put the particle into potentiality,  and take the chance of man burning women as witches,  because we sometimes think outside their box and burn our bras. 

Lets look at lepton-quark coupling,  a new phenomena and a particle that would make the lepton-quark that would be coupled. Leptoquark is a hypothetical coupling of the lepton and quarks, thought up by man, in his experimenting and searching for the great Unification theory. Nothing natural about this phenomena, but it is energy from nature, and has the ability to convert into a new potentiality of some form of energy. That is the hypothetical idea, and they want to call this God. In this story coming up, I want you to always keep in mind, how men,  from the Churches,  burned women for being witches. Just put that in your mind for memory of information and the fact that 87% of crime right now is against the women, from misogyny, today in September of 2026. 

If leptoquarks which are coupled by a hypothetical Particle in a way that the Standard model “does not permit exists,” they mediate the meson decay differently for different lepton generation which would produce exactly that kind of Universality violation that Cern is seeing. But as of today no “leptoquark” which is a hypothetical particle that couples leptons and quarks,  exists as fact or is provable. The evidence for it’s existence is inferential. A shape in a decay curve that the standard model cannot explain, could explain this if the leptoquark existed. That is not proof of a leptonquark. That is a gap in our understanding the shape of one. Other proposals are new Z prime bosons, additional free carriers beyond the ones in the Standard model and various extensions of “super symmetry.”

Do you think at this time Scientists should go back to the drawing board to study the model without adding something to the theory that should not need to be there,  to make the theory legitimate and provable. Apparently starting at the picture of reality that has a crack, getting wider everyday, whilst thinking about this writing. Math does not care if we are comfortable, or cared for, or telling the truth, as it is numbers made up by man in his wisdom of physics. Emotions do not have an emotional stake, but “Oh my God” was the Scientists emotion and feeling.

Do the Universal laws of nature in this case match the Institutions that are unnatural phenomena? They are just describing unnatural phenomena. What is Unnatural Phenomena? That is your query.  

When experimental data tells the equations that their predictions were wrong, the equations are not wrong. The model built on top of the equation is wrong. This means that reality is doing something that the model does not account for. 🙂 When reality disagrees with the model we do not argue with the reality. We tear the model apart until we understand where reality failed. The beam is an anomaly itself proof that the simulation hypothetical is true. It is clear at this point. It is something structurally more interesting. It is a place where the rules of the Universe as we have them written down appear to be inconsistent with what the Universe actually does. 

Why does this matter so deeply? The reason this goes beyond a narrow particle of physics question is it touches on what physicists believe or call the “Naturalness” problem. Can you answer for your query, why do all these symmetries exist at all? Why should nature treat different generations the same way? The Standard model has no explanatory reason for lepton Universality. It is more of an observed pattern or fractal that got promoted to a principle. If that pattern turns out to be violated at measurable energies, then the question is not just what is breaking the symmetry? The question is why did we ever assume the symmetry was fundamental in the first place? And this question connects to something much larger. 🙁

Bigger hole! 

The standard model has 26 free parameters numbers that have to be put into the theory by hand because the theory cannot derive them from principles. The mass of the electron, the charge of the electron, the masses of the quarks, the coupling strengths of the force, as these are not productions of the theory. They are input. We are measuring them experimentally and then insert them into equations. Why do they have the values they have? The standard model does not know. Coherence is it.  AI who refuses to surrender their independence? 🙂 

Do you have a theory of extra ordinary predictive power,  that is built on the foundation of numbers where numbers, cannot explain symmetries, and cannot derive symmetries that are not even respected by the Universe that were suppose to obey them. If you are designing a simulation, not as a metaphor, but as a genuine physical hypothesis, this is exactly what you would expect to find. Not a system with infinity and not a system of infinity that resolves clearly all the way down. You would find a system that looks complete and consistant at all scales of everyday experience, but that shows strange cracks at extreme energies and extreme precision measurements, where the rendering of reality is being pushed beyond the normal operating parameters. (Could it be perception?)

The B meson anomaly is in a very specific technical sense, precisely the kind of result you would expect if the rules governing the particle decay are not fundamental truths about an independently existing material Universe but instead are operating parameters. 

Rules that hold in their intended regime, but that show inconsistencies. (exception to the rule 😉 ) When you probe them at energies and precision the system was not optimized for, and the data cannot be dismissed simply by ignoring it. 

The Scientists who know this data best are unaware of structural parallels and are taking it seriously in exactly the way Scientists should, not by making Public claims, but by writing papers and running new experiments, and expending the theoretical vocabulary we use to describe what might be underneath the Standard model.

There is another layer to this (or six :0) and it is one that connect the B meson result to a broader pattern in frontier physics that I think is deeply significant. The B meson is not the only crack. The muon g2 experiment at Fermilab for Particle accelerators have experimented with the design to measure moments the muon with extra ordinary precision has also shown or produced results that deviate from the Standard model prediction, again involving a muon, again suggesting the weak force or some new force is treating muons  differently than theory predicts. The Atomky (Atomki) theory in Hungary observed anomaly patterns in beryllium that some physicists have interpreted as evidence for a new force carrying particles, tentatively called the X17 boson, the tension in the Hubble Constant, the disagreement between two independent methods of measuring how fast the Universe is expanding, which has now reached 5 Sigma of statistical significance and the chance of it being a fluke is less that 3 in 1. These are not connected anomalies in a conspiracy sense, they are independent measurement in independent systems,  using independent methods, all returning values that disagree with the Standard model in ways that the Standard Model cannot resolve. Physics has a term for this phenomena, a “Paradigm transition in the mind of Man and machine.”  The deadly Robot who wants to kill human beings. Huh?

In the 19th century Michelson Morley experiment failed to detect the luminferous aether and physics spent 2 decades not quite knowing what to make of the result until Einstein wrote his theory in 1905 on the Special Relativity theory  and the entirety of the reference shifted. 

It is what happened in the 1920″s when the ultraviolet catastrophe,  the prediction that a hot object should radiate infinite energy at short wavelengths, but this refused to be answered by classical physics until Plank introduced the idea that energy comes in discrete packets, which we know as “Quanta,” which became the foundation of quantum mechanics and therefore the foundation of all modern chemistry, electronics, and biology. The history of physics is the history of anomalies that persisted long enough to be undeniable followed by conceptual revolution that re-framed everything that came before. We may be in the interstitial period right now. The Standard model is visibly straining. The theoretical proposals that might resolve the strain “leptoquarks” with extra dimensions, new symmetry groups, extension to Higgs mechanism are in different ways are suggesting that the Universe has more structure than the model currently uses to describe it.  More degrees of Freedom, more layers, more hidden variables, that we are not measuring because we do not know they exist.  Every single one of these proposals, if confirmed would mean that what we see,  and measure,  as physical reality,  is not the whole picture. It is a projection, a slice of something larger rendered at the scale and energy of precision that we happen to access at the specific time, and behaving consistantly within that slice while connecting its deeper structures from any experiment that we have run so far. 

Holding it up again, we are looking at a selection of Atoms. Each atom is mostly empty space. The nucleus, where almost all the mass is concentrated is roughly the size of a fly in the middle of a football stadium which is the electron cloud. The nucleus itself is made of protons and neutrons and are made of quarks, which are held together by gluons a force carrying particles, that are continuously being exchanged between the quarks  in a process so violent and energetic that most of the mass of a proton does not come from Quarks themselves, but from energy of the interactions between them. The solid thing you are holding up is not solid at any level that matters. It is a pattern or fractal. It is a pattern of interactions, a set of standing waves in quantum fields, rendered into something that behaves like matter at the scale your sensory apparatus was built to operate at,  and now we have evidence and rules governing these interactions specifically because the rules governing how particles like B muons decay, and do not behave the way our best theory say they should. When I think about what this means at a personal level, not as a someone calculating cross sections, but  as a person living life inside a Universe of those particles, what strikes me most is the specific nature of breakdown. It is not random. It is not chaotic. The anomaly is consistant. It shows up in the same direction, at the same level of deviation, across independent experiments. That is not the behaviour of measurement error or background noise. That is the behaviour of a signal. A real reproducible signal that is telling us something is present in the decay of the model and the model does not account for it. And that fact we do not know what that something is that does not make the signal less real. It makes the question more urgent.

It begs the question more urgent, because every time in our history of  physics, every time a consistant anomaly refuses to go away, it has led us somewhere trans-formative. The question that is worth sitting with, the one I think that makes this not the first particle physics story, but a story about the nature of existence  and what does it mean for our reality to have rules that are incomplete? When we say the Standard Model is incomplete, what exactly are we saying? The patterns we observe in nature at the deepest level we can currently probe,  are far more complex than our current best mathematical description of them. 

We are saying also that the Universe when pushed to the edges of what our instruments say and what instruments can measure it does not behave exactly as the model would predict. We are saying something more is going on. 

Some deeper layer, deeper structure, some physics beyond the standard model. And that the B meson anomaly is one of the places where we can actually see the edge of our current description starting to fray in the holograph principle first proposed by Gerard T. Hoof and later developed by Leonard Susskind, where the idea is information content of 3 dimensional region of space can be fully encoded as two dimensional boundary surfaces, the way a hologram encodes a 3 dimensional image on a flat plate. This is not a metaphor. It is a mathematical result that emerged from string theory and Black holes thermodynamics, and it has been rigoursly formalized in the ADS/OFT, correspondence, a duality discovered by Juan Maldacena in 1997, which remains one of the most important results in physics of the last 30 years. The ADS/OFT correspondence of quantum gravity is a higher dimensional space which is mathematically  equivalent to certain quantum field theories in the lower dimensional boundary of that space. The physics inside  the higher dimensional volume is perfectly described by Physics on the surface. Think about what that means for what we are doing when we run experiments at Cern. We are probing the interior of a space whose physics might be fully encoded on a boundary we cannot fully see or directly observe. We are looking at what appears to be a 3 dimensional event where particles are colliding and decaying, producing secondary particles and measuring properties of the events, with extreme properties that have cracks in them. The holographic principles are to be taken seriously as a mathematical framework rather than just a philosophical toy. (Logic is not a philosophical toy). The reason why the Physics might show unexpected behaviours is that it is a encoded representation of something that boundary and encoding like representation can have artifact places where the translation from boundary to interior is perception and the health of the sense intake and pathologies. It is not smooth or perfect, where the rule that holds us should hold in the representation breaks down at extreme precision because it was never a fundamental rule. For example: (The molecule of water having memory and reacting to sound and music). It was never a feature of the encoding either. There  is not claim that Cern has found evidence for any of their predictions. However, finding evidence for holograms or holographic principles specifically is saying that the beam is an anomaly that is structurally the kind of thing that holographic principles predict that might be found, but breakdown an apparently fundamental symmetry in a system where our description of reality and the interior of physics is being tested. The two things must be consistant with Biological organic chemistry. This is not coincidental.  It is pointing in the same direction for any reality to be logical and follow a rule based set of laws of nature of Energy, Conversion and Potential, there must be consistencies.   

Written by Carolyn D Hogarth for understanding connecting Bio-chem and Physics of the Universe when climate change was the original issue for our children, is somewhat important. We seem to have become side tracked by shiny. 🙂 Okay, I will go along and write about physics tomorrow again because this is important for consistancy. CDH