You're a crank who is as useful as your empirically falsified theory.
Sylwester's 'Everlasting theory'
- Thread starter Sylwester Kornowski
- Start date
You're a crank who is as useful as your empirically falsified theory.
There is the time distance between the fronts of the neutrino- and photon beams for the supernova SN 1987A. I claim that it is due to the superluminal neutrinos whereas others claim that it is due to the structure of the supernova. But such model leads to existence of a neutron star after the explosion. We do not observe such object. All these observational facts are consistent with my theory. On the other hand, I proved why the last experiments concerning the superluminal neutrinos are worthless.
Recapitulation
We should wait for more precise experiments. Today scientists do not know many properties of the neutrinos so they continue the investigations which concern the superluminality as well. Do you think that they are stupid because they still check whether the neutrinos can be superluminal? This means that today we cannot forejudge which model is correct.
Your post shows that you are person uninitiated in science because you repeatedly write the same nonsense.
I proved that AlphaNumeric is not right and all can see it besides you and a few other AlphaNumeric comrades.
Your posts show that you are trolling.
Most cranks I've come across are ideologues. Ideologues seldom acknowledge facts that don't support 'the ideology'. You're a strange one. You acknowledge the disconnect with theoretical predictions and empirical reality but not the disconnect with logic that AN detailed for you.
You said: "Your post shows that you are person uninitiated in science because you repeatedly write the same nonsense." Your opinion is as irrelevant as your pseudo-scientific ideology.
How about you writing down what I asked of you? Just don't copy the derivation from the Schwarzschild solution for Einstein's Field Equations.
I said I was quoting the original Witten and Jaffe paper. If you google for it you can find it. Complaining I didn't explicitly provide the link is pretty laughable. Is using Google too much for you? I gave you the author names and the subject is the mass gap problem from the Clay Institute. Obviously finding such information yourself is too difficult for you.
You admit you have predictions outside of experimental bounds. It was in this very thread! Are you claiming otherwise?
The fact you've just started repeating something I said to you shows you're clasping at straws. Can't think up your own insults?
You change the subject or just assert things. You regularly reply with "The everlasting theory says...." and then just spew more assertions, failing to respond to me. You have yet to retort my explanation of why denouncing QCD but claiming you can predict QCD's strong coupling constant is inconsistent. You have yet to understand it, it would seem.
Evidently not.
I pity people who had you as a teacher. As for swindling, I have explained all of my criticisms of your claims, repeatedly and at length. I repeat my offer to further elaborate should anyone else want me to be more specific.
On Wikipedia it specifically states the precession of Venus is well explained by experiment and then links to the paper I linked you to. If you cannot find it yourself it isn't my fault. Again, use Google and some sense.
The problem is that when I go through things step by step you just ignore it. This thread is evidence of that.
There is a difference between the flux tube interactions between quarks, which makes the force between them increase as they are pulled apart, and the relativistic relationship between energy and inverse distance. You've mixed the two up, originally talking about the former and now referring to the latter. Besides, I don't for a nanosecond think you have a working grasp of any of this, ie gauge theory or relativity. Instead you're just parroting back bits of Wikipedia you think you graps.
Unlike you I have demonstrated my understanding of that to professors. I've given presentations about asymptotic freedom and I have a published paper pertaining to the mass gap in gauge theories. A paper published in a reputable journal and with citations from other academics. That's considerably more than you've managed.
A flat out categorical lie. Well done on showing how dishonest and pathetic you are.
So you admit no under understands it entirely yet you assert things about QCD's confinement? You complain I asserted something but then go on to assert something also. That's why I called you a hypocrite, it's hypocritical!
Your inability to grasp things I say doesn't mean I don't understand what I say.
You can claim all you want. What you can demonstrate is the important thing.
More assertions without merit.
You just flat out lied about me. I don't think you're in any position to be complaining about trolling. You have 48 years of claiming you are capable of doing physics and you have 48 years of completely failing. You can do nothing but lie about people like myself, people who have demonstrable competency at science which you have tried and failed to do. In 10 years you'll be precisely where you are now, nowhere. That might sound somewhat spiteful but so be it, if it kicks you out of your delusions and makes you do something constructive with your existence. Just to be clear to you and others reading this, I don't feel any anger towards you, more a sense of pity that you can spend so long accomplishing so little.
Brucep, you still are trolling. You violate the Forum rules.
AlphaNumeric, you are trolling as well. You violate the Forum rules.
In your last post is none useful information and no scientific argument. You cannot write the links because you are bluffing. Only the ble, ble... Why some people are such dishonest?
In your last post is none useful information and no scientific argument. You cannot write the links because you are bluffing. Only the ble, ble... Why some people are such dishonest?
Last edited:
Sylwester Kornowski, explaining why what you contribute is neither science nor makes science better is not in violation of the forum rules (except in the Cesspool where any posting is in violation).
Posting complaints about posts to unspecified third parties about posts instead of engaging in conversation with the poster may be in violation of forum rules as this conduct seems somewhat "hateful" and seems unnecessary when there is a Report functionality.
Also, your profile seems to have an untrue claim in it, which diminishes any claim to physics authority you have. "Neutrino speed is 1.00005c > c" is not supported by experiment or any experimentally supported comprehensive theory of kinematics. Boldly asserting a claim in scientific language when it rests on no scientific foundation is an usurpation of the authority of science without cause or benefit to your readers. Why would you make such a statement is beyond me.
http://www.sciforums.com/misc.php?do=showrules
Posting complaints about posts to unspecified third parties about posts instead of engaging in conversation with the poster may be in violation of forum rules as this conduct seems somewhat "hateful" and seems unnecessary when there is a Report functionality.
Also, your profile seems to have an untrue claim in it, which diminishes any claim to physics authority you have. "Neutrino speed is 1.00005c > c" is not supported by experiment or any experimentally supported comprehensive theory of kinematics. Boldly asserting a claim in scientific language when it rests on no scientific foundation is an usurpation of the authority of science without cause or benefit to your readers. Why would you make such a statement is beyond me.
http://www.sciforums.com/misc.php?do=showrules
I was pretty sure you can't do it. Phoney baloney.
The entanglement and weak interactions are common in the ground state of the Einstein spacetime. These interactions and the internal helicity of the strong field which follows from the atom-like structure of baryons lead to the real origin of the "confinement". Outside the strong fields, the gluons behave as photons because the electromagnetic field has not an internal helicity.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/oct/25/physicists-entangle-100000-photons
In the above cited paper we can read as follows:
“Now Maria Chekhova and colleges at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Light and Moscow State University have created quantum states containing as many as 100,000 photons, which are all entangled with each other. “
The Everlasting Theory shows that due to the photon-gluon transition inside the strong fields, the same concerns the gluons. When distance between the entangled gluons is sufficiently short, there arise the mass gaps i.e. the massless fields acquire mass. Such mass is not due to a physical transformation of the massless energy. It is due to the local changes in mass density of the Einstein spacetime.
In the above cited paper we can read as follows:
“Now Maria Chekhova and colleges at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Light and Moscow State University have created quantum states containing as many as 100,000 photons, which are all entangled with each other. “
The Everlasting Theory shows that due to the photon-gluon transition inside the strong fields, the same concerns the gluons. When distance between the entangled gluons is sufficiently short, there arise the mass gaps i.e. the massless fields acquire mass. Such mass is not due to a physical transformation of the massless energy. It is due to the local changes in mass density of the Einstein spacetime.
Everlasting Theory is nothing more than 'contrived arithmetic trying to extend' classical Newtonian formulas to describe quantum phenomena. It makes unphysical [wrong] predictions that have been falsified empirically. You can't use this theory to derive the natural precession of orbits weak or strong field. The author has a serious disconnect with logic and the real universe. *plonk*.
Brucep, below you can find my answer to your remarks because in your last post I can see a respect which I have to all posters when they do not offend others. Just factual discussion is needed. Of course, each likes jokes but they should be of a high order.
As you have to know, one of unsolved problem in physics is the Yang-Mills theory in the non-perturbative regime. The QCD or QED are the perturbative theories and today we know that the perturbative QCD does not confines at low energy. This suggests that we need a non-perturbative theory to solve the big number of unsolved problems in the non-perturbative regime. This suggests also that there is something beyond the quantum phenomena when we are closer and closer to the Planck length. Is it possible that for such distances physics is AGAIN classical?! And my Everlasting Theory shows that the answer to the request is positive! Just the spacetime associated directly with the gravity is classical as it is in the GR. Just GR is the more fundamental theory than the Quantum Physics. But the GR leads to the Quantum Physics via the Kasner solution (1921) for the flat anisotropic model. I described it in my book. Just quantum phenomena appear on higher level of nature. We cannot solve many basic problems in particle physics because physicists, the same as you, assume that structure of spacetime, structure of neutrinos, core of baryons, confinement, weak interactions of spacetime components and so on, we cannot solve within the classical physics. And it is the big mistake. Quantum physics acts in some interval only.
Next problem is associated with the internal structure of bare particles. Physicists assume that they are the internally structureless point particles which can emit and absorb other particles. Only unthinking scientist can formulate such assumption. Such picture is valid in the perturbative quantum theories. Such theories can lead to many correct results but we can see that there are many unsolved problems and the Everlasting Theory shows that it is due to the groundless assumption that bare particles (for example, electrons, cores of baryons, sham quarks, gluons, photons) are structureless. Already Einstein assumed that photons must have some internal structure. But he could not solve this problem. The bare particles are the classical objects at least for time of spinning. It is the second reason why the non-perturbative Everlasting Theory leads to the beautiful results and is such simple. It is obvious that the classical structures must lead to the same results as the perturbative theories because the two different pictures, i.e. classical and quantum are parallel. But the perturbative theories are useless in the non-perturbative regime. In the non-perturbative regime we need the Everlasting Theory.
Now about the interactions in the Everlasting Theory
There are the classical structures of the bare particles. This means that from the classical definitions for the coupling constants we can calculate the all needed coupling constants for the classical structures and next the forces, intensities and so on. They are consistent or very close to the experimental data.
Behaviour and motions of the pions inside baryons we can describe mathematically much simpler than electrons inside atoms because due to the entanglement, they behave partially as the classical objects. Inside baryons acts an analog to the Titius-Bode law for planets! This leads to the atom-like structure of baryons.
The Everlasting Theory is even simpler than the Newtonian mechanics because in such way behaves the nature on its lower levels.
The other your sentences are untrue. There is lack of some examples. Once more, in my theory is at least 3 times less the parameters than in the SM. My Everlasting Theory includes the gravity as well. There are a few hundred theoretical results consistent or very close to experimental data. Everlasting Theory solves ALL unsolved BASIC problems which concern the particle physics and cosmology. It is the lacking part of ultimate theory. It leads to the postulates applied in the GR and QP as well. It shows which interpretations in the two mentioned mainstream theories are incorrect. The Everlasting Theory leads to the ultimate equation (formula (280)) which ties masses of sources of ALL interactions (i.e. the 6 if we will treat the electromagnetism as one type of interactions).
All, besides me, assumed that the nature on the lower and lower levels should be more and more complicated so there appeared the string/M theory. Of course, there are the closed and open strings but almost all initial conditions in the mainstream string/M theory are incorrect – see in my book how the reformulated string/M theory must look.
Recapitulation
On lowest levels of the nature physics is AGAIN classical. Classical description of structure of bare particles solves all basic unsolved problems in the mainstream theories. Physicists can not believe it because the quantum era in physics since 1948 (it started in 1900) untaught them the logic thinking.
PLONK!
Do you think people cannot read my posts? I explicitly explained where you can find such information.
For example, if you Google 'mass gap, Witten and Jaffe' the first hit is this pdf. It's the original document from the Clay Institute, written by Witten (a Fields medalist and the creator of M theory) and Jaffe, where they define the problem the Institute will give $1million for. On page 3 it explicitly states confinement and mass gaps are different phenomena. In Section 5 (page 6), having defined the mass gap problem they state (and I quote) "There are many natural extensions of the Millennium problem. Among other things, one would like to prove the existence of an isolated one-particle state (an upper gap, in addition to the mass gap), to prove confinement, to prove....". The people who defined the problem for the Institute, the people who have more published papers than you have IQ points, categorically state that confinement is not the same as having a mass gap. Check ****ing mate.
You needed only to actually do as I suggested and read. But instead you worked by the method of "I asked for a link. Since there's no link in that post I am not retorted". It's intellectual laziness and it typifies your mentality. You're a hack. You've been one for 48 years and you'll be on till the day you die it would seem. You can make claims about how people like me supposedly don't understand the physics but people like me have published papers in such domains, have contributed to scientific knowledge, have demonstrable practical results from our work and most of all, get paid to do something we love. You've shown you aren't interested in honest discussion. You claimed I agreed with you about confinement, a flat out lie. You didn't face up to me pointing that out. Yet more evidence of the sort of person you are. Dishonest, lazy and thick.
AlphaNumeric, I should not discuss with you because you still prove that there is something wrong with you. You still do not understand what you are reading. I never wrote that confinement and mass gaps are the same phenomena but I wrote that confinement leads to mass gaps. Do you understand the difference?
So more precisely
It is obvious for me (not for you and others) that the two long-distance interactions (gravity and electromagnetism) lead to TWO PARALLEL OPEN SPACETIMES. In my theory confinement follows from the fact that the Einstein spacetime components suck in the components of the fundamental spacetime from distance shorter than about 10^-32 m (there are the exact calculations on pages 26 - 28). They are the weak interactions in the non-perturbative regime. We can see that very close to the Einstein spacetime components arises the negative pressure which changes the local mass density in the Einstein spacetime i.e. increases this density. Such phenomena are very unstable.
To create a mass gap ARE NEEDED ADDITIONAL PHENOMENA. For example, the structure of the core of baryons causes that the trajectories of the gluons cross the centre of baryons. The colliding carriers of gluons increase local mass density of the Einstein spacetime in centre of the baryons. There arises the ball responsible for the weak interactions of baryons in the non-perturbative regime. The ball is the black hole in respect of the weak interactions. Radius of the ball is 0.8710945•10^-17 m and the mass gap is 424.124493 MeV (see page 20).
Similarly, the mass of the sham Higgs boson (125 GeV) is the next mass gap associated with the weak and electromagnetic interactions in the non-perturbative regime and is associated with the internal structure of the core of baryons as well.
AlphaNumeric, do not try to write once more that you teach me the confinement and mass gaps. Just your remarks concerning these problems are useless and all can see it.
Dummy. Why would you think that GR is a quantum theory? It's domain of applicability doesn't include ".... the Einstein spacetime components suck in the components of the fundamental spacetime from distance shorter than about 10^-32 m..." You're scientifically illiterate. Your arithmetic theory is nonsense. You can't even derive the relativistic component of the orbits you claim to model correctly. Alphanumeric can say anything he wants about your disconnect with reality. Next you need to prove you read what Witten et all said. And then apologize to AN for being so obstinate.
Last edited:
Bruce, I imagine you have noticed that when Sylwester is presented with documents/explanations which illustrate the flaws in his work he ignores them and instead goes on a lengthy series of assertions about what his claims are, rather than addressing what anyone else has said to him. For example, he doesn't even address how he categorically lied about things I've said. Nor does he show he's even read the document I linked to, despite repeatedly complaining how I hadn't linked to such a document but he was too lazy to follow my instructions. It's a constant sequence of trying to change the subject with you Sylwester. Whenever you're pressed into a corner you make more assertions, hoping we'll start pointing out problems with those and more on from the problems we've already pointed out.
You can say things like "None of you understand!" but the fact remains you're stuck on forums complaining and being dishonest. Unlike you some of us actually get paid to do science. Come tomorrow morning (Monday) I'll be back at my desk (I've had a week off this week, first holiday in 6 months) and being paid to do quantum mechanics and other things. You'll be stuck here lying and asserting about things you don't understand
You can say things like "None of you understand!" but the fact remains you're stuck on forums complaining and being dishonest. Unlike you some of us actually get paid to do science. Come tomorrow morning (Monday) I'll be back at my desk (I've had a week off this week, first holiday in 6 months) and being paid to do quantum mechanics and other things. You'll be stuck here lying and asserting about things you don't understand
My arithmetic theory is the lacking part of the ultimate theory. In such arithmetic way behaves the nature on its lowest levels. I can see that you also have big problem to understand what you are reading. In the abstract of my book you can read as follows. “…the Kasner solution (GR) is the foundations of the Quantum Theory of Gravity and foundations of the Quantum Physics WITHOUT SINGULARITIES AND INFINITIES”. I never wrote that GR is a quantum theory!!!! Just I still write that GR is the classical theory. It is awful, incredible what you are writing.
For what I should apologize AlphaNumeric? My phenomena concerning the asymptotic freedom, confinement and mass gaps differ RADICALLY from the nonsense written by AlphaNumeric. He completely does not understand these phenomena. I did not write that confinement and mass gaps are the same phenomena. I, contrary to him, wrote that QCD does not confine at low energy and it is consistent with the article. He should admit that he was not right and should write that he, you as well, is a big liar.
So once more I will explain origin of the asymptotic freedom, confinement and mass gaps.
Necessary object we need to describe the asymptotic freedom and mass gap is the core of baryons described in my Everlasting Theory. The core consists of the torus composed of the Einstein spacetime components. It is stable because of the entanglement of the components. The mass is 318.3 MeV and the torus defines the charge and has half-integral spin. In centre of the torus is the mass-gap/ball 424.1 MeV. The ball consists of the Einstein spacetime components as well and is stable due to the weak interactions (in the non-perturbative regime) and because the mass-gap/ball is the black hole in respect of the weak interactions. The ball is the ZERO-energy gluon field. The Einstein spacetime components are the carriers of gluons and photons.
Asymptotic freedom in the Everlasting Theory
The components of the pions arise due to the entanglement inside the torus of the core of baryons as a closed loop composed of the Einstein spacetime components. The Einstein spacetime components are moving with the speed of light c. During acceleration of a baryon, due to the constancy of the c, the spin speed of the closed loop decreases i.e. their lifetime, defined by the spin speed, increases. On the other hand, from the Uncertainty Principle follows that when lifetime increases then energy of the closed loop decreases i.e. during acceleration of the baryon, energy of carriers of the strong interactions decreases i.e. value of the running coupling for the strong interactions decreases as well. We can see that the carriers of the STRONG INTERACTIONS behave out of accord with the Einstein formula for the relativistic mass. Such behaviour follows from the structure of the core of baryons and the Uncertainty Principle. There appears the asymptote for the alpha_strong 0.1139.
Confinement in the Everlasting Theory
To explain the confinement we need two parallel spacetimes. It is in my theory only. The Einstein spacetime components suck in the components of the more fundamental spacetime. There arises the negative pressure in the more fundamental spacetime around the Einstein spacetime components. This means that in the non-perturbative regime, there appears the attraction between the Einstein spacetime components when they are sufficiently close one to another. But such states are very unstable. My confinement is possible in each place of the two parallel spacetimes and concerns the ZERO-energy photon- and gluon-fields as well.
Mass gaps in the Everlasting Theory
To describe the mass gaps we need additional phenomena which STABILIZE the confinement. For example, we need the phenomena characteristic for the core of baryons. There is not increase in mass of the Einstein spacetime components. There increases a little the mass density of the local spacetime i.e. the mass gaps are associated with the density, not with the individual components. The components are the binary systems of neutrinos. I explained many times why we cannot detect them. Just the Lagrangian of the ground state of the Einstein spacetime is TODAY always constant.
It is obvious that to describe the mass gaps at first we must understand the confinement. And it is in my theory. So once more: Mass gaps follow from confinement but there are needed processes which stabilize the confinement.
Outside the strong fields, the gluons behave as photons. It is because the carriers of gluons and photons, i.e. the Einstein spacetime components, and the strong fields have internal helicity whereas the electromagnetic field has not.
For what I should apologize AlphaNumeric? My phenomena concerning the asymptotic freedom, confinement and mass gaps differ RADICALLY from the nonsense written by AlphaNumeric. He completely does not understand these phenomena. I did not write that confinement and mass gaps are the same phenomena. I, contrary to him, wrote that QCD does not confine at low energy and it is consistent with the article. He should admit that he was not right and should write that he, you as well, is a big liar.
So once more I will explain origin of the asymptotic freedom, confinement and mass gaps.
Necessary object we need to describe the asymptotic freedom and mass gap is the core of baryons described in my Everlasting Theory. The core consists of the torus composed of the Einstein spacetime components. It is stable because of the entanglement of the components. The mass is 318.3 MeV and the torus defines the charge and has half-integral spin. In centre of the torus is the mass-gap/ball 424.1 MeV. The ball consists of the Einstein spacetime components as well and is stable due to the weak interactions (in the non-perturbative regime) and because the mass-gap/ball is the black hole in respect of the weak interactions. The ball is the ZERO-energy gluon field. The Einstein spacetime components are the carriers of gluons and photons.
Asymptotic freedom in the Everlasting Theory
The components of the pions arise due to the entanglement inside the torus of the core of baryons as a closed loop composed of the Einstein spacetime components. The Einstein spacetime components are moving with the speed of light c. During acceleration of a baryon, due to the constancy of the c, the spin speed of the closed loop decreases i.e. their lifetime, defined by the spin speed, increases. On the other hand, from the Uncertainty Principle follows that when lifetime increases then energy of the closed loop decreases i.e. during acceleration of the baryon, energy of carriers of the strong interactions decreases i.e. value of the running coupling for the strong interactions decreases as well. We can see that the carriers of the STRONG INTERACTIONS behave out of accord with the Einstein formula for the relativistic mass. Such behaviour follows from the structure of the core of baryons and the Uncertainty Principle. There appears the asymptote for the alpha_strong 0.1139.
Confinement in the Everlasting Theory
To explain the confinement we need two parallel spacetimes. It is in my theory only. The Einstein spacetime components suck in the components of the more fundamental spacetime. There arises the negative pressure in the more fundamental spacetime around the Einstein spacetime components. This means that in the non-perturbative regime, there appears the attraction between the Einstein spacetime components when they are sufficiently close one to another. But such states are very unstable. My confinement is possible in each place of the two parallel spacetimes and concerns the ZERO-energy photon- and gluon-fields as well.
Mass gaps in the Everlasting Theory
To describe the mass gaps we need additional phenomena which STABILIZE the confinement. For example, we need the phenomena characteristic for the core of baryons. There is not increase in mass of the Einstein spacetime components. There increases a little the mass density of the local spacetime i.e. the mass gaps are associated with the density, not with the individual components. The components are the binary systems of neutrinos. I explained many times why we cannot detect them. Just the Lagrangian of the ground state of the Einstein spacetime is TODAY always constant.
It is obvious that to describe the mass gaps at first we must understand the confinement. And it is in my theory. So once more: Mass gaps follow from confinement but there are needed processes which stabilize the confinement.
Outside the strong fields, the gluons behave as photons. It is because the carriers of gluons and photons, i.e. the Einstein spacetime components, and the strong fields have internal helicity whereas the electromagnetic field has not.
Bruce, I imagine you have noticed that when Sylwester is presented with documents/explanations which illustrate the flaws in his work he ignores them and instead goes on a lengthy series of assertions about what his claims are, rather than addressing what anyone else has said to him. For example, he doesn't even address how he categorically lied about things I've said. Nor does he show he's even read the document I linked to, despite repeatedly complaining how I hadn't linked to such a document but he was too lazy to follow my instructions. It's a constant sequence of trying to change the subject with you Sylwester. Whenever you're pressed into a corner you make more assertions, hoping we'll start pointing out problems with those and more on from the problems we've already pointed out.
You can say things like "None of you understand!" but the fact remains you're stuck on forums complaining and being dishonest. Unlike you some of us actually get paid to do science. Come tomorrow morning (Monday) I'll be back at my desk (I've had a week off this week, first holiday in 6 months) and being paid to do quantum mechanics and other things. You'll be stuck here lying and asserting about things you don't understand
As you said he did it 14 minutes after your post. He's married to his theory for better or for worse. If he exercised intellectual honesty regarding the status of his theory he would have to get a divorce. He's not very receptive to all the help you've tried to give him. If he was he'd have to get a divorce.
You do not understand the problem and you proved that you still do not understand what you are reading, brucep as well.
On the main page of the Clay Mathematics Institute we can read as follows. The title is “Yang-Mills AND Mass Gap” and we can read “Progress in establishing the EXISTENCE of the Yang-Mills theory AND a mass gap….
On the main page is the link to the article titled “Report on the Status of the Yang-Mills Millennium Prize Problem”. See
http://www.claymath.org/millennium/Yang-Mills_Theory/
We can read as follows: “Yang-Mills EXISTENCE AND Mass Gap: Prove that for any compact simple gauge group G, quantum Yang-Mills theory of R^4 exists and has a mass gap delta>0.”
In the original paper cited by you written by Witten and Jaffe we can read as follows (page 6): “Yang-Mills EXISTENCE AND Mass Gap. EXISTENCE includes establishing axiomatic properties at least as strong as those cited in [45, 35]”.
Can you see that there are two problems?
1.
The EXISTENCE of the Yang-Mills i.e. you as well must prove that the QCD confines at low energy!
2.
…AND Mass Gap.
You wrote something about my IQ. Now all can see that your IQ is much, much lower, the IQ of brucep as well. AlphaNumeric, at first you did not write the link because the articles prove that you are not right. Just you were bluffing writing about the Millennium Prize Problem. The Mass Gap Problem is not sufficient.