>>12006651I would make the distinction, however, that every LH neutrino is an RH neutrino in another Lorentz frame but a weak interaction involving conserved lepton number is always going to a weak interaction in any frame
>I'm more hesitant than you to claim that what we currently have is wrong.That makes sense since I'm deliberately naysaying something that works pretty well. Really my grievance against SM that it gets credit for answering everything when it doesn't even try to answer any of the fundamental questions. That leads to the importance of the passed over questions getting glossed over in the minds of certain parties.
>>12006654that paywall doesn't explain much. this says it's unsolved in pubic olain text:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton_radius_puzzle>The proton radius puzzle is an unanswered problem in physics relating to the size of the proton.Someone would have updated it if it was solved, likely one of the people who created it, IMO.
>>12006665>>12006679We could never say that the particle discovered in 2012 is the Higgs before we know what the particle's spin is. If that particle has spin not equal to zero, then we still don't know if the Higgs exists.
>>12006665>Spontaneous symmetry breaking is epistemologically questionable.This statement is not only based, but it is red-pilled as well. My spin-1 particle is one million times more like a thing in normal physics where spontaneity is not an ingredient. The particles or my model are the lattice vibrations, nothing fancy. It's completely mundane once the lattice is in place, and the lattice wasn't much of a leap to begin with.
