For the past 25 years, the Standard Model of particle physics has given us a complete mathematical description of the particles and forces that shape our world. Its predictions have matched experimental data, decimal place for decimal place, with amazing precision.
But for all of its successes it still cannot be considered the ultimate theory of matter, energy and the “reality” of our universe because it fails to define what the particles it describes are made of even though it predicts they have an internal physical structure.
For example The Standard Model of Particle Physics assumes there are twelve kinds of matter particles: six quarks and six leptons which have no discernible internal structure because they are mathematically defined in terms of one dimensional point.
However they cannot be the basic components of matter because as the video to the right shows they all have a wave component. This means they have an internal structure.
Louis de Broglie realized this when he theorized that particles have a wave component. (His theories were confirmed by the discovery of electron diffraction by crystals in 1927 by Davisson and Germer.)Â
However this provides experimental verification that they cannot be the basic component of matter because even the smallest possible particle still has an observable internal wave component which have a spatial component that is large than a one dimensions point. In other words a particle cannot be the fundamental component of matter as is assumed by the Standard Model because observations tell us it has a substructure.
However the article “Why is mass and energy quantized?” Oct. 4, 2007 showed that one can derive the fundamental wave component of all particles including quarks and leptons by extrapolating the laws of classical resonant in a three-dimensional environment to a matter wave on a surface of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
(Einstein gave us the ability to do this when qualitatively and quantitatively convert the geometric properties of his space-time environment to an equivalent one consisting of only four *spatial* dimensions when he defined the geometric properties of a space-time universe and the dynamic balance between mass and energy in terms of the equation E=mc^2 and the constant velocity of light. This is because it allows one to redefine a unit of time he associated with energy in his space-time universe to unit of space we believe he would have associated with mass in a universe consisting of only four *spatial* dimensions.Â
In other words by defining the geometric properties of a space-time universe in terms of the equation E=mc^2 and the constant velocity of light he provided a qualitative and quantitative means of redefining his space-time universe in terms of the geometry of four *spatial* dimensions.)
Briefly that article showed the four conditions required for resonance to occur in a classical environment, an object, or substance with a natural frequency, a forcing function at the same frequency as the natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would occur in one of four *spatial* dimensions.
The existence of four *spatial* dimensions would give a matter wave the ability to oscillate spatially on a “surface” between a third and fourth *spatial* dimensions thereby fulfilling one of the requirements for classical resonance to occur.
These oscillations would be caused by an event such as the decay of a subatomic particle or the shifting of an electron in an atomic orbital. This would force the “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension to oscillate with the frequency associated with the energy of that event.
However, the oscillations caused by such an event would serve as forcing function allowing a resonant system or “structure” to be established four-dimensional space.Â
Classical mechanics tells us the energy of a resonant system or structure can only take on the discrete quantized values associated with its fundament or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency.
Therefore these resonant systems in four *spatial* dimension are responsible for the discrete energies of quantum systems.
Later in the article “The geometry of quarks†it will be shown that a geometric property of four *spatial* dimensions is responsible their internal structure, why they have fractional chargers and come in three different “colors”.
This demonstrate there is a “reality” beyond “The Standard Model of Particle Physics” assumption that particle do not have an internal structure because one can be derived by extrapolating the laws of classical mechanics in a three-dimensional environment to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
Louis de Broglie showed the benefits of looking beyond the “reality” of the quantum mechanical assumption made by Born, Bohr, and Heisenberg when he assumed that particles were made up of the continuous properties of a wave because that paved the way for the development of “wave mechanics” which transformed our knowledge of the phenomena of chemical bonding.
When Einstein sought a deeper understanding of our world by not accepting the “reality” of Newtonian space and time, he enabled humankind to unlock power contained in the nucleus.
We do not know what the outcome of looking beyond the “reality” defined by the Standard Model of Particle Physics will be but then again Einstein did not know the results of looking deeper into “reality” of Newtonian space and time would be.
However, this blog has and will show that a reanalyzing current and past observational data, unbiased by the preconceived assumption that all energy/mass is quantum mechanical, points to a new physics that can unify Einstein’s universe of the very large with the Standard Model’s world of the very small.
Latter Jeff
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2008