Evgeniy Yakubovskiy

In the literature I have looked through, there are correction formulas to the basic idea of ​​calculating the mass of particles of the standard model, weak interaction. But they use corrections. They do not have a basic formula for the mass of particles. This is a drawback of the whole theory. If there is a general formula for mass, it will solve many problems. True, there is a problem with the angle, but it can be solved based on experiment.

I am the creator of the solution of the Navier-Stokes equations in the complex plane, describing turbulent processes. I also developed quantum mechanics in the complex plane. The imaginary part of the solution is the mean-quadratic deviation, and the real part of the solution is the mean value. The imaginary part satisfies the uncertainty relation. The mean real part can be determined.

You suggested me an approximate formula with an accuracy of 1%. But I did not receive this formula in dimensional form to make sure what the dimensional formula gives. It can give a better or worse result. Moreover, the formula in the SI system gives a different result - an error of 10% with the same Fermi constant. This raises suspicions about the correctness of the calculation in natural units. In general, I want to receive the formula in dimensional form and participate in the creation of new physics.

Dear scientists, how did it happen that with an accuracy of 1%, when calculating the mass of a vector boson, a result was obtained for the anomalous magnetic moment of a muon with 9 significant digits, and what should we think about this?

But I didn't get an answer to the main question, what is the formula in dimensional form, and then what is the value of G

In dimensional formulas, the dimensionless coefficient $4 \pi \alpha$ is determined.

But I repeat, to get the correct proportionality coefficient, it is necessary to use dimensional formulas, so multiplication by the value $4\pi\alpha$ is obtained from dimensional formulas. It turns out that a coefficient must be added to formulas in natural units, which creates problems when writing new formulas. This coefficient can only be determined from dimensional formulas. And still, the formula is valid with an accuracy of 1%, which leaves its mark on all weak interaction formulas.

Sorry, I wrote the formula down incorrectly. I calculated using the formula $m_w^2=\frac{4\pi \alpha}{2^{2.5}Gsin^2(\theta_w)}$. I just made a mistake in writing the formula.

Oh, you need to take the square root of $4\pi$, you get 74GeV, which means the standard model error is 10%

To use the natural system of units correctly, you need to know the proportionality coefficients for each formula, which requires a formula in the dimensional system of units. I was convinced of this using the standard model as an example.

You have tables common to all sciences, according to which you calculate all disciplines, or am I wrong, and you calculate different disciplines differently. Too many coefficients need to be entered to calculate different disciplines, and this will create confusion. And what about related sciences?

And what about the proportionality coefficients, or do you think that they are all equal to 1, including $2\pi$? You just don't want to think, but I can't do anything about it. Continue counting in natural units, and I just can't imagine what that will lead to.

When everyone calculates using the same formulas, everyone gets the same result, but this does not mean that this result is correct, I repeat, it is necessary to take into account the proportionality coefficient, which is different for different formulas. In the dimensional form, this is manifested.

Landau-Lifshitz books use natural units, but in complex cases they provide dimensional formulas. I have such a case, natural units lie on the proportionality coefficient, so I want to get formulas in dimensional units. This will be useful for you too, you will get rid of errors of natural units. The proportionality coefficient in physical formulas is not predictable, so the count in natural units can lie, it does not take into account, for example, the coefficient of the frequency $2*\pi$ and many other proportionality coefficients.

I am interested in the equations of the standard model not in natural units, but in the dimensional notation of the equations of the standard model. To begin with, I mean the dimensional relations of the weak interaction, but preferably also the strong interaction. I say in advance that the notation in natural units does not suit me. You can refer to the literature, but not in natural units.