[Updated: Aug. 24, 2025]
Abstract
A frequently asked question is, "How did binary mechanics (BM) derive the primary and secondary physical constants?" A true derivation of a "fundamental constant" value is based on first principles alone, without any use of other fundamental constants, which are really unexplained measurements. First, measured values of the so-called fundamental constants were reverse engineered to obtain values for the BM primary constants based on full quantization of energy, space and time, expressed in kg, meters and seconds respectively, which map directly to the SI units of measurement used in science. Second, the primary constant values, dubbed the Keene scale, were used to calculate the measured values of the previously unexplained secondary or "fundamental" constants.
Fig. 1: Physical Constant Derivation Highlights
Abstract and Introduction
The fundamental physical constants doctrine hides the failure of popular physical theories including legacy quantum mechanics and both special and general relativity. The so-called "fundamental constants" are in fact the greatest body of unexplained data in physics. The doctrine acts to obscure the now obvious fact that these unexplained observations comprise basic unsolved mysteries in physics. Instead of addressing these basic questions, the doctrine teaches that these observations are essentially a sort of "no-go zone" for theoretical physicists. First, these observations are typically confined to a short Appendix A in physics books, wrongly labelled "fundamental constants" (Fig. 1). Second, "natural units" in basic equations help hide the fact that the measured values of these "constants" remains unexplained although these values are used as "input parameters". Third, accepted interrelationships or dependencies among many of these constants indicate mathematically that they contain redundant information and could not be "fundamental". Finally, binary mechanics is thus far the only comprehensive physical theory to derive the values of the so-called fundamental constants from first principles [1].
Fig. 1: The Greatest Body Of Unexplained Data In Physics
Abstract and Introduction
Some consequences of defining the fine structure constant α as the probability of an electromagnetic interaction with a charged particle are explored using the Binary Mechanics Lab Simulator (BMLS) v2.8. An alpha α composite variable was introduced: (S + V) / M0, where S and V are scalar (electrostatic) and vector (magnetic) event counts respectively and M0 is the number of M-type quanta (1-state bits with charge attribute) prior to application of time-development bit operations and eligible to be "source quanta" in the S and V bit operations [1]. In brief, this α definition is simply the observed probability that a M quanta is accelerated by an electrostatic (S) or magnetic (V) potential. The α variable was not constant, but varied as a function of quanta density in the simulated volume (Fig. 1), suggesting that α may have appeared to be constant if previous measurements were conducted at a quanta density of approximately 0.237 of maximum possible density. Proton-electron mass ratio was also found to occur at about the same quanta density suggesting that this density range may approximate laboratory conditions close to "standard temperature and pressure".
Fig. 1: Fine Structure Constant α vs Quanta Density
Abstract and Introduction
Planck's constant h was derived for the first time from first principles, based on the intrinsic proton spin in the proton bit cycle, confirming the derivation based on the electron bit cycle (Fig. 1 from [1]) [2]. A new method to derive h and the intrinsic electron spin based on summation of 1-state bit motion components of the total angular momentum was applied to the proton bit cycle to sum its angular momentum components. Results confirm (1) binary mechanics (BM) [3] postulates including the physical interpretation of BM space [4] and the time-development bit operations underlying the fundamental forces [5] which create the proton and electron bit cycles themselves and (2) the victory of Binary Mechanics Lab (BML) in the century-long physics grand championship race to derive constants from first principles of a coherent, comprehensive physical theory (BM) [6].
Fig. 1: Proton and Electron Bit Cycles
Legend: Six 1-state bit positions in electron cycle (yellow). 42 1-state bit positions in proton cycle. Matter d quarks (dark red, green, blue); anti-matter d quarks (light red, green, blue). Positron positions (gray). Arrows (purple) indicate bit motion direction and results of the strong bit operation. The unconditional bit operation (black) accounts for all motion between color-coded spot types. XYZ positions shown without commas: e.g., 013 is {0,1,3}.
[Updated: June 19, 2020]
How is binary mechanics different from quantum mechanics (QM)?
Legacy QM and General Relativity (GR) utilize continuous space-time theory, while binary mechanics (BM) [1] quantizes both space and time leading to definition of fundamental length L and time T constants. Recall that Planck's constant is an energy-time product (Jsec), not energy quantization per se. BM quantized energy as a 1-state bit (energy quanta) in a size L bit locus cube, expressed as M in kg. In short, BM quantizes the three units of measurement (Fig. 1 from [2]) and defines the system state bit function as a spatial pattern of 1- and 0-state bits [3].
Further, with space-time-energy quantization, infinitesimal time-evolution operators in legacy QM -- e.g., Standard Model (SM) math -- are not applicable since only integer increments are allowed. Hence, four bit operations [4] were based on a pair of relativistic Dirac spinor equations of opposite handedness including electromagnetic field components (Fig. 3 from [5]). In sum, both system state and time-development in BM is full QM, while SM math is partial QM. BM is complete QM, while SM math is incomplete QM.
Fig. 1: Century-Long Race Finish: Derivation of Constants From First Principles
[Updated: Feb 3, 2019]
Abstract and Introduction
Breaking news: elementary charge e has been calculated for the first time from first principles of the leading comprehensive, fundamental quantum theory known as binary mechanics (BM) [1]. A quantized Coulomb force was defined (eq. 1). Based only on the time-development scalar bit operation [2] [3] and the three quantized units of measurement -- M, L and T (Fig. 1) [4], calculated electrostatic force (eq. 2) accounted for 97.6% of the quantized Coulomb force. Elementary charge e may be derived from three primary physics constants based on energy-space-time quantization (eqs. 3 and 4).
Fig. 1: Secondary Physics Constants Derived From Primary Constants
[Updated: Apr 12, 2018]
For the first time, the empirically measured value of Planck's constant h is calculated from first principles of a physical theory to the full precision allowed by CODATA values. Using the postulates of binary mechanics (BM) where both space and time are quantized [1], this report describes the key steps in this calculation and proposes values for the fundamental length d and time t constants.
(1) Bit velocity v was defined as greater than the speed of light in a vacuum c consistent with the BM constraint that v > c [2].
(2) A physical interpretation of BM space [3] suggested a proposed value for the fundamental BM length constant d as approximately 0.67 fm.
(3) d/v = t' = approximately 7.14E-25 s, the fundamental time constant in BM space-time.
(4) The fine structure constant α maps this quantized time unit t' from BM space to observational space with t = αt' = approximately 5.2124E-27 s.
(5) Intrinsic electron spin and hence the Planck constant h was calculated using only electron rest mass me and the proposed length d and time t constants.
(6) In addition to steps (3) and (4) above, another method was used to calculate quantized time t based only on me, h and quantized length d.
(7) Finally, eq. 9 calculates Planck constant h directly from the independently determined length constant d (step 2 above) and familiar physical constants.
