Re: [Phys-l] Baryon Mass Values

[Faraday321@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/15/2007 1:07:13 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
jerry.f@temple.edu writes:

On Feb  15, 2007, at 9:06 AM, Faraday321@aol.com wrote:
> > I have noticed a  relationship involving the baryon mass values  and the
> >  difference between pion and muon mass values which is interesting.  It  
> > MAY point to a deeper underlying symmetry but beyond this I can't  say.
> > The relationship is
> >
> >     M_baryon= approx  N* ( M-pion-  M_muon)
> >   Where N is an integer. Check it out.
Bob  Zannelli

It is a remarkable coincidence that on the same day I saw this  emaii, the 
arXiv
included the following abstract:
Paper:  hep-ph/0702140
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 05:40:15 GMT    (174kb)
 
No Coincidence I read this paper. This was were I noticed it. 
 
Bob Zannelli 



Title: Pion and muon mass difference: a determining factor in  elementary
particle mass distribution
Authors: G. N. Shah and T.  A. Mir
Categories: hep-ph
Comments: 10 pages, 1 figure, 10  tables
\\
The most fundamental to the elementary particles is the  mass they posses and
it would be of importance to explore a possible  relationship amongst their
masses. Here, an attempt is made to investigate  this important aspect
irrespective of their nature or scheme of  classification. We show that there
exists a striking tendency for  successive mass differences between elementary
particles to be close  integral/half integral multiple of the mass difference
between a neutral  pion and a muon. Thus indicating discreteness in the nature
of the mass  occurring at elementary particle level. Further, this mass
difference of  29.318 MeV is found to be common to the mass spectra of leptons
and  baryons, implying thereby existence of a basic mechanism linking  
elementary
particles responding to different interactions.
\\ (  http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0702140 ,  174kb)

The paper includes  many references to earlier such suggestions.  As with 
much of
physics,  the earliest paper on this subject was by Nambu.  
I have noticed that  the idea is revived with about a ten year period.  Some
years ago, a  Physics Today article demonstrated that there are so many  
possible
numerology schemes that it is not unlikely that one or two would  work
"surprisingly" well.  You know, most people who win the power  ball can give a
good reason why they picked the right numbers.  The  pion and the muon are so
unrelated in their structures that they are an  unlikely pairing for a
numerological basis.  I think Balmer is what  keeps such schemes coming.  I 
find
it interesting that the unlikely  cooincidence of two communications with the
same idea in one day is an  illustration of how numerology sometimes seems to 
work.