F(750), We Miss You, as Bound State of 6 Top and 6 Anti top

We collect and estimate support for our long speculated "multiple point principle" saying that there should be several vacua all having (compared to the scales of high energy physics) very low energy densities. In pure Standard Model we suggest there being three by "multiple point principle" low energy density vacua, "present", "condensate" and "high field" vacuum. We fit the mass of the in our picture since long speculated bound state of six top and six anti top quarks in three quite {\em independent ways} and get remarkably within our crude accuracy the {\em same} mass in all three fits! The new point of the present article is to estimate the bound state mass in what we could call a bag model estimation. The two other fits, which we review, obtain the mass of the bound state by fitting to the multiple point principle prediction of degenerate vacua. Our remarkable agreement of our three mass-fits can be interpreted to mean, that we have calculated at the end the energy densities of the two extra speculated vacua and found that they are indeed very small!. Unfortunately the recently much discussed statistical fluctuation peak F(750) has now been revealed to be just a fluctuation, very accidentally matches our fitted mass of the bound state remarkably well with the mass of this fluctuation 750 GeV.Comment: minor corrections in calculation and commas and a few references added. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1607.07907, adding few citation

Formulation of Complex Action Theory

We formulate a complex action theory which includes operators of coordinate and momentum $\hat{q}$ and $\hat{p}$ being replaced with non-hermitian operators $\hat{q}_{new}$ and $\hat{p}_{new}$, and their eigenstates ${}_m <_{new} q |$ and ${}_m <_{new} p |$ with complex eigenvalues $q$ and $p$. Introducing a philosophy of keeping the analyticity in path integration variables, we define a modified set of complex conjugate, real and imaginary parts, hermitian conjugates and bras, and explicitly construct $\hat{q}_{new}$, $\hat{p}_{new}$, ${}_m <_{new} q |$ and ${}_m <_{new} p |$ by formally squeezing coherent states. We also pose a theorem on the relation between functions on the phase space and the corresponding operators. Only in our formalism can we describe a complex action theory or a real action theory with complex saddle points in the tunneling effect etc. in terms of bras and kets in the functional integral. Furthermore, in a system with a non-hermitian diagonalizable bounded Hamiltonian, we show that the mechanism to obtain a hermitian Hamiltonian after a long time development proposed in our letter works also in the complex coordinate formalism. If the hermitian Hamiltonian is given in a local form, a conserved probability current density can be constructed with two kinds of wave functions.Comment: 29 pages, 2 figures, references added, presentation improved, typos corrected. (v5)The definition of $\hat{q}_{new}$ and $\hat{p}_{new}$ are corrected by replacing them with their hermitian conjugates. The errors and typos mentioned in the errata of PTP are corrected. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1009.044

Seeking a Game in which the standard model Group shall Win

It is attempted to construct a group-dependent quantity that could be used to single out the Standard Model group S(U(2) x U(3)) as being the "winner" by this quantity being the biggest possible for just the Standard Model group. The suggested quantity is first of all based on the inverse quadratic Cassimir for the fundamental or better smallest faithful representation in a notation in which the adjoint representation quadratic Cassimir is normalized to unity. Then a further correction is added to help the wanted Standard Model group to win and the rule comes even to involve the Abelian group U(1) to be multiplied into the group to get this correction be allowed. The scheme is suggestively explained to have some physical interpretation(s). By some appropriate proceedure for extending the group dependent quantity to groups that are not simple we find a way to make the Standard Model Group the absolute "winner". Thus we provide an indication for what could be the reason for the Standard Model Group having been chosen to be the realized one by Nature.Comment: already publiched in 2011 in Bled Conference proceedings "What comes beyond the Stadard Models

The Cheshire Cat Principle from Holography

The Cheshire cat principle states that hadronic observables at low energy do not distinguish between hard (quark) or soft (meson) constituents. As a result, the delineation between hard/soft (bag radius) is like the Cheshire cat smile in Alice in wonderland. This principle reemerges from current holographic descriptions of chiral baryons whereby the smile appears in the holographic direction. We illustrate this point for the baryonic form factor.Comment: 11 pages, 2 figure

Momentum and Hamiltonian in Complex Action Theory

In the complex action theory (CAT) we explicitly examine how the momentum and Hamiltonian are defined from the Feynman path integral (FPI) point of view based on the complex coordinate formalism of our foregoing paper. After reviewing the formalism briefly, we describe in FPI with a Lagrangian the time development of a $\xi$-parametrized wave function, which is a solution to an eigenvalue problem of a momentum operator. Solving this eigenvalue problem, we derive the momentum, Hamiltonian, and Schr\"{o}dinger equation. Oppositely, starting from the Hamiltonian we derive the Lagrangian in FPI, and we are led to the momentum relation again via the saddle point for $p$. This study confirms that the momentum and Hamiltonian in the CAT have the same forms as those in the real action theory. We also show the third derivation of the momentum relation via the saddle point for $q$.Comment: Latex 42 pages, 2 figures, references added, typo corrected, the final version to appear in IJMPA. (v5)The errors and typos mentioned in the erratum of IJMPA are correcte

Complex action suggests future-included theory

In quantum theory its action is usually taken to be real, but we can consider another theory whose action is complex. In addition, in the Feynman path integral, the time integration is usually performed over the period between the initial time $T_A$ and some specific time, say, the present time $t$. Besides such a future-not-included theory, we can consider the future-included theory, in which not only the past state $| A(T_A) \rangle$ at the initial time $T_A$ but also the future state $| B(T_B) \rangle$ at the final time $T_B$ is given at first, and the time integration is performed over the whole period from the past to the future. Thus quantum theory can be classified into four types, according to whether its action is real or not, and whether the future is included or not. We argue that, if a theory is described with a complex action, then such a theory is suggested to be the future-included theory, rather than the future-not-included theory. Otherwise persons living at different times would see different histories of the universe.Comment: Latex 12 pages, 3 figures, typo corrected, presentation improved, the final version to appear in Prog.Theor.Exp.Phy