0.9k
1.1k
788
404
1kToday’s scientists can make extremely accurate quantitative predictions of most experimental observations based on two theories. The first or Quantum Mechanics makes extremely accurate predictions regarding the microscopic quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass while the second, the “General Theory of Relativity” makes extremely accurate predictions regarding the macroscopic properties of a gravitational field.
However, these two theories appear to be incompatible because when one tries to mathematically integrate quantum theories predictions that energy/mass are discontinuous or quantized into the continuous properties the General Theory of Relativity associates with gravity, infinities arise.
This is true even though many of the brightest minds in the scientific community have spent the last century trying to find a “The Theory of Everything” or a way to integrate them.
Their lack of success is somewhat puzzling when you stop and think about the board scope and sophistication of our experimental data, knowledge, and the ability of computers to help analyze data.
However, John Wheeler may have given us an answer when he pointed out in his book “At home in the universe” that most of the great advances made throughout history have been made by those who “Seek a Wider View”.
My farther put it another way, “Sometimes you cannot see the forest because of the trees.” In other words if you are looking for a forest you will never find it if you focus your attention only on one tree.
Most scientists have focused on integrating the observed properties of gravity into the presently accepted quantum mechanical theories to define a “Theory of Everything”. The reason may be because quantum theories can explain and predict a wider range of observations regarding properties of energy and mass than relativistic theories they feel it must define the fundamental causality for the laws of nature.
However, could our lack of success in finding a “Theory of Everything” be because scientists are so focus on interpreting observations based on a quantum mechanical “tree” that we cannot see the “forest” of observational evidence that suggest that the fundamental component of energy and mass may not be quantum mechanical.
For example in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?” Oct. 4, 2007 it will be shown that it is possible to explain and predict the quantum mechanical properties of Schrödinger’s wave function by extrapolating the laws of classical resonance to a matter wave in a continuous non quantized space-time environment
Briefly it will show 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 be meet by a matter wave in that continuous environment.
(Louis de Broglie was the first to theorize that all particles are made up of matter waves. His theories were later confirmed by the discovery of electron diffraction by crystals in 1927 by Davisson and Germer.)
A matter wave would cause the continuous properties of a space-time environment oscillate 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.
The oscillations caused by such an event would serve as forcing function allowing a resonant system or “structure” to be established in space-time
Classical mechanics tells us the energy of a resonant system can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its resonant or a harmonic of its resonant frequency.
Additionally it also tells us why in terms of the physical properties four dimensional space-time or four *spatial* dimensions an electron cannot fall into the nucleus is because, as was shown in that article all energy is contained in four dimensional resonant systems. In other words the energy released by an electron “falling” into it would have to manifest itself in terms of a resonate system. Since the fundamental or lowest frequency available for a stable resonate system in either four dimensional space-time or four spatial dimension corresponds to the energy of an electron it becomes one of the fundamental energy unit of the universe.
In other words one may be able to integrate relativity with quantum mechanics if instead of focusing on quantum properties of Schrödinger’s wave function turn ones attention to the wave properties of particles observed by Davisson and Germer as we have done above.
The focus of this blog will be to demonstrate how taking a wider view of our environment will allow us to get a better understanding of how our universe works.
We are not asking for your blind acceptance of our interpretations of observational data we have and will be giving here but we are asking you to consider the possibilities this new perspective presents to our understanding of our universe.
Later Jeff
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2007
0.9k1.1k7884041k
I adore your wp theme, where do you down load it from?
mm.. amazing.
One afternoon, I was in the backyard hanging the laundry when an old, tired-looking dog wandered into the yard. I could tell from his collar and well-fed belly that he had a home. But when I walked into the house, he followed me, sauntered down the hall and fell asleep in a corner. An hour later, he went to the door, and I let him out. The next day he was back. He resumed his position in the hallway and slept for an hour.
This continued for several weeks. Curious, I pinned a note to his collar: “Every afternoon your dog comes to my house for a nap. ”
The next day he arrived with a different note pinned to his collar: “He lives in a home with ten children – he’s trying to catch up on his sleep.”
I cried from laughter
Sorry, if not left a message on Rules.