From: goldenfieldquaternions@gmail.com   
      
   On Saturday, August 19, 2017 at 2:42:17 AM UTC-5, ben...@hotmail.com wrote:   
   > On Thursday, August 17, 2017 at 6:35:27 AM UTC+1, Lawrence Crowell wrote:   
   > >  ....   The connection with gravitons is interesting ....   
   > > QCD is a very strong interaction and so this entanglement   
   > > of gluons, or equivalently a bound state, is not stable. However   
   > > an S-dual or in general an STU dual of this di-gluon with a very   
   > > weak dual color QCD-like force could be a graviton.   
   >   
   > Somewhere I read that any elementary particle with spin 2 must be   
   > a graviton.   
   > If you take that spin 2 particle and add QCD colour-anticolour,   
   > that is colour-anticolour as for a gluon, would the QCD quality   
   > automatically make the new particle a strong and short-range   
   > force carrier or could the spin 2 quality determine it as a   
   > long-range force carrier?  If the former, then a new weak   
   > colour force would be required (if a graviton did indeed exist   
   > and have a weak colour element) but if the latter then QCD colour   
   > could fit the bill?  There could be two kinds of graviton, with   
   > and without colour with different force properties.   
   >   
   > Likewise, would a higgsball or graviball or darkball (all with   
   > colour-anticolour properties) stretching out >galaxy-wide   
   > have to have an inherently weak colour force?  One of my naive   
   > models for a dark particle has no properties except QCD colour.   
   > It could form a darkball/graviball where only QCD colour is   
   > exchanged at interactions.   
      
   There is a difference between a glueball and a graviton. A spin 2   
   particle has projections of its spin along its momentum as (-2, -1,   
   0, 1, 2). This means the -2 and 2 spin projections are along the   
   momentum, but with -1, 0 and 1 there is some frame where the   
   projection of the spin is reduced, and most importantly in the case   
   0 it means there is a rest frame for the particle. In the case of   
   the di-gluon, two gluons in a net colorless state, it means it has   
   a mass. This is bad for the graviton for the graviton is massless.   
      
   Glueballs have masses, they can be looked up. Their mass comes about   
   from the self-binding of the QCD force. This is a mass-gap, and   
   there is an outstanding mathematical Claymath prize in understanding   
   the mass-gap problem. Suppose however there is a QCD Lagrangian of   
   the form   
      
   L = 1/4F^{ab}F_{ab} + K@F^{ab}*F_{ab}   
      
   where @ "theta" is the Peccei-Quinn angle and *F means a form of   
   dual operator similar to the Hodge star operator. K is a constant.   
   The actual formula is a bit more complicated but this has the   
   essential parts. The coupling constant for this dual gauge field   
   to QCD is very weak, which is found by the tiny value of @. This   
   angle also defines a particle with a small mass called the axion   
   particle. We may then have a Lagrangian term *F^{ab}*F_{ab} ~ R,   
   the Ricci curvature and a weak field, and where the tiny mass gap   
   for this much weaker field is taken away by this axion particle.   
   Therefore we can have a theory with a massless graviton. We in   
   effect take the mass-gap term, which BTW is a symmetry breaking   
   effect, and transfer it to this massive (tiny mass however) particle   
   called the axion. The symmetry that is broken is CP symmetry, and   
   the axion was originally proposed as a way of connecting QCD to CP   
   violations.   
      
   A part of making this type of theory work is to have a better   
   understanding of the mass-gap problem, which is a very hard problem.   
   It might be simplified in this case where the dual field is very   
   weak so the mass-gap is small.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)