Please click here if you would like to read a summary of the ideas presented in this blog

Quantum mechanics defines a photon as basic unit of an electromagnetic radiation and therefore, they assume it is massless because if it wasn’t Einstein tells us it could not move at the speed of light. But if it has no mass, it also has no energy because his equation E=mc^2 tells us energy is equivalent to mass. Some have used a mathematical argument the equation E=mc^2 is a special case of the more general equation: E2 = p2c2 + m2c4 which for a particle with no mass (m = 0), reduces down to E = pc. Therefore, because photons (particles of light) have no mass, they must obey E = pc and they get all of their energy from their momentum. However, the “p” in the equation NOT ONLY represents the momentum of a photon it also represents the energy associated with its motion. Thus, according to E=mc^2 that energy MUST also be considered mass. Putting it another way it does NOT MATER how we define the energy of a photon the fact that it has energy means it also has mass and therefore, SHOULD NOT be able move at the speed of light.

Therefore, if it were true electromagnetic energy was propagated by a photon Einstein Theory of Relativity would be invalidated, because it is impossible to use it to define how a particle could propagate energy at that speed.

However, if one assumes electromagnetic radiation is propagated by a energy wave in space-time one can use the science of wave mechanics to explain how and why it MUST be propagated at the speed of light and why it observed to have the properties of the particle called a photon.

This is because the science of wave mechanics tells us waves move energy from one location to another without transporting the material they are moving on. For example a water molecule does not actually travel with the waves but does transmit that movement associated with the wave to the next unit of water. Putting it another way the molecules that make up the wave remain stationary with respect to the back ground of the water. Additionally, it will continue to do so unless it is obstructed by encountering an object or beach.

Similarly, an electromagnetic wave in space-time COULD move at the speed of light because it does not move the energy associated with its peaks and valleys it creates in space-time but would transmit them to the next unit of space-time. Putting it another way then units of space time that make up an electromagnetic wave WOULD remain stationary with respect to the background of space time.

Additionally the velocity of a wave is dependent on the properties of the medium it is moving one. Therefore, the velocity of a electromagnetic wave would be and MUST dependent on the properties of the space-time environment it is moving through.

However, one can also use the science of wave mechanics to understand why an electromagnetic wave ALWAYS takes on the form of a particle called a photon if it is prevented from moving through space by an interaction with someone or something.

The science of wave mechanics along with the fact that Relatively tells us an electromagnetic wave moves continuously through space-time unless it is prevented from doing so by someone observing or interacting with it. This would result in its energy being confined to three-dimensional space. It also tells us the three-dimensional “walls” of this confinement will result in its energy being reflected back on itself thereby creating a resonant or standing wave in three-dimensional space. This would cause its wave energy to be concentrated at the point in space were a particle would be found. Additionally, wave mechanics also tells us the energy of a resonant system, such as a standing wave can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency. This explains how and why an electromagnetic wave becomes the particle called a photon when it is prevented from moving through space time by interacting someone of something.

This mechanism for the creation of a photon from an electromagnetic wave is consistent with the quantum mechanical observation that the wave properties of energy or the wave function as they like to call it only reduces or COLLAPSES to a photon or quantized unit of energy when it is observed or interacts with something.

This shows if one assumes that electromagnetic energy is propagated BY a wave NOT by a particle one can not only understand how energy can be propagated though space at the speed of light and why when it interacts with the external world of an observer it APPEARS as a photon in a manner that is consistent with the assumptions of BOTH Quantum Mechanics and Einstein Theory of Relativity.

Please click here if you would like to read or save to an HTML file a summary the ideas presented in this blog.

Physics is an observational science whose purpose is not only to explain what we observe but what it is and why we can observe it. For example, for almost 2000 years the geocentric model of the universe was able to successfully predict planetary orbits. Its downfall was caused in part by the observation that the moons of Jupiter did not revolve around the earth and the fact Johannes Kepler was able mathematically define the laws of planetary motion that agreed with observation in terms of them orbiting the sun. However, those laws only define how a planet moves in terms a mathematical point called the center of gravity but does not define what it is.

For example, the observation that we can move on the surface of the earth tells us it has volume bigger than the point which defines its center of gravity. Putting it another way it requires at least two pieces of information to fully describe a particle, object, planet or universe. The first is its position which can be defined in terms of a mathematical point in space and the second is information about how it interacts with its environment such as a person walking on it. This tells what is it.

Quantum Mechanics has been very successful at describing the position of particles in terms of a mathematical point. However, that does NOT mean it defines what they are.

The fact particles such as an electron can be diffracted supports that conclusion because it is impossible to explain that in terms of a point particle that has no volume. Another observation is that particles are observed to collide in particle accelerators. This could not happen if they no volume.

However, there are many who feel the mathematics of the wave function that defines that point also gives us a complete description of what a particle is. However, if true they __MUST__ be able use a mathematical property of it to explain how that point it defines as a particle can collide with others in particle accelerators or create diffraction patterns. If they cannot, they MUST repeat MUST accept the DOWNFALL of the idea that the wave function gives a complete definition of a particle and accept the that it can only define its position.

As was mentioned earlier it requires at least two pieces of information to fully describe a particle, its position and how in interacts with its environment.

Quantum Mechanics provide one, the position of a particle but as was just shown it cannot not tell what it is or how it interacts with its environment.

However, another core principle of Quantum Mechanics is that a particle’s position can ONLY be define only in terms of probabilities. This means one can understand what a particle is in terms of its core principle if one can define how interacts with its environment to create those probabilities.

One way of doing this would be to use the fact the interactions in both quantum and space-time environments are defined or controlled by waves. For example, Relativity defines evolution of space-time in terms of the energy propagated by electromagnetic wave while Quantum Mechanics defines it in terms of the mathematical evolution of the wave function.

This suggests the wave function that governs the probabilistic evolution of the point defining a particle’s particle position may be a mathematical representation of an electromagnetic wave that governs evolution in space time. If true one should be able to derive it those probabilities in terms of the interaction of that point with space-time.

One can accomplish this by using the science of wave mechanics and the observable properties of space-time.

For example, the science of wave mechanics along with the fact that Relatively tells us wave energy moves continuously through space-time unless it is prevented from doing so by someone or something interacting with it. This would result in its energy being confined to three-dimensional space. The science of wave mechanics also tells us the three-dimensional “walls” of this confinement will result in its energy being reflected back on itself thereby creating a resonant or standing wave in three-dimensional space. This would cause its wave energy to be concentrated at the point in space were a particle would be found. Additionally, wave mechanics also tells us the energy of a resonant system, such as a standing wave can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency. This defines how and why Quantum Mechanics define energy in terms of quantized units of space time.

However, it also tells us a particle would occupy an extended volume of space defined by the wavelength of its standing wave. Putting it another way what defines the fact that a particle appears where it does is NOT determined by probabilities associated with the point Quantum Mechanics define as its position but an interaction of an electromagnetic wave with the physical properties of space-time.

However, IT ALSO tells us the reason particles collide in particle accelerators or create diffraction patterns is because they have and extended volume in terms of mathematical properties of the wave function.

Not only that, it shows the probabilities Quantum Mechanics associates with the position of a particle is the result of the fact it defines them in terms of a mathematical point in space which would be randomly distributed with respect to a center of the standing wave which earlier defined a one. Therefore, the randomness of where that point is with respect to a particle’s center will result in its position, when observed to be randomly distributed in space. Pitting it another way one must define where it appears in terms of probabilities to average the deviations that are caused by the random placement of that point.

The reason why it is not necessary to use probabilities in Relativity is because those deviations are average out by the large number of particles in objects like the moon and planets.

As was mentioned earlier it requires at least two pieces of information to fully define a particle, object planet or our universe. The first is its position the second what it is or how it interacts with its environment.

As was shown above NEITHER Relativity or Quantum Mechanics CAN do both on their own. However, we can we can define both the position of a particle and what it is if we combine their core principles to create Theory of Everything.

Please click here if you would like to read a summary of the ideas presented in this blog

Quantum mechanics defines a photon as basic unit of an electromagnetic radiation and therefore, they assume it is massless because if it wasn’t Einstein tells us it could not move at the speed of light. But if it has no mass, it also has no energy because his equation E=mc^2 tells us energy is equivalent to mass. Some have used a mathematical argument the equation E=mc^2 is a special case of the more general equation: E2 = p2c2 + m2c4 which for a particle with no mass (m = 0), reduces down to E = pc. Therefore, because photons (particles of light) have no mass, they must obey E = pc and they get all of their energy from their momentum. However, the “p” in the equation NOT ONLY represents the momentum of a photon it also represents the energy associated with its motion. Thus, according to E=mc^2 that energy MUST also be considered mass. Putting it another way it does NOT MATER how we define the energy of a photon the fact that it has energy means it also has mass and therefore, SHOULD NOT be able move at the speed of light.

(Some have suggested that “E” is the total relativistic energy. which consists of rest mass energy (mc^2), kinetic energy (pc), and potential energy. It is fundamentally wrong to say that anything with energy has mass because E = mc^2 is the measure of the rest mass energy of a particle. Therefore a photon with momentum can have zero mass. However, even though Einstein may have defined Relativistic energy in terms of its components such as kinetic energy (pc), and potential energy (pc) he did not make the same distinction regarding there energy. Therefore. because Einstein defined gravity and therefore mass in terms of a curvature in space-time caused by the energy density of space we MUST assume the increase in its energy density caused by the momentum of photon will do the same. Since his equation E=mc^2 defines the energy contained in the curvature in space-time he associated with mass we must assume the energy associated with a photon’s momentum will cause it to have mass. Therefore it is NOT as some have suggested fundamentally wrong to say that anything with momentum including a photon does have mass”)

Therefore, if it were true electromagnetic energy was propagated by a photon Einstein Theory of Relativity would be invalidated, because it is impossible to use it to define how a particle could propagate energy at that speed.

However, if one assumes electromagnetic radiation is propagated by a energy wave in space-time one can use the science of wave mechanics to explain how and why it MUST be propagated at the speed of light and why it observed to have the properties of the particle called a photon.

This is because the science of wave mechanics tells us waves move energy from one location to another without transporting the material they are moving on. For example a water molecule does not actually travel with the waves but does transmit that movement associated with the wave to the next unit of water. Putting it another way the molecules that make up the wave remain stationary with respect to the back ground of the water. Additionally, it will continue to do so unless it is obstructed by encountering an object or beach.

Similarly, an electromagnetic wave in space-time COULD move at the speed of light because it does not move the energy associated with its peaks and valleys it creates in space-time but would transmit them to the next unit of space-time. Putting it another way then units of space time that make up an electromagnetic wave WOULD remain stationary with respect to the background of space time.

Additionally the velocity of a wave is dependent on the properties of the medium it is moving one. Therefore, the velocity of a electromagnetic wave would be and MUST dependent on the properties of the space-time environment it is moving through.

However, one can also use the science of wave mechanics to understand why an electromagnetic wave ALWAYS takes on the form of a particle called a photon if it is prevented from moving through space by an interaction with someone or something.

The science of wave mechanics along with the fact that Relatively tells us an electromagnetic wave moves continuously through space-time unless it is prevented from doing so by someone observing or interacting with it. This would result in its energy being confined to three-dimensional space. It also tells us the three-dimensional “walls” of this confinement will result in its energy being reflected back on itself thereby creating a resonant or standing wave in three-dimensional space. This would cause its wave energy to be concentrated at the point in space were a particle would be found. Additionally, wave mechanics also tells us the energy of a resonant system, such as a standing wave can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency. This explains how and why an electromagnetic wave becomes the particle called a photon when it is prevented from moving through space time by interacting someone of something.

This mechanism for the creation of a photon from an electromagnetic wave is consistent with the quantum mechanical observation that the wave properties of energy or the wave function as they like to call it only reduces or COLLAPSES to a photon or quantized unit of energy when it is observed or interacts with something.

This shows if one assumes that electromagnetic energy is propagated BY a wave NOT by a particle one can not only understand how energy can be propagated though space at the speed of light and why when it interacts with the external world of an observer it APPEARS as a photon in a manner that is consistent with the assumptions of BOTH Quantum Mechanics and Einstein Theory of Relativity.

Please click here if you would like to read a summary of the ideas presented in this blog

Presently, there is disconnect between our understanding of one of the most mysterious facets of quantum mechanics, that of quantum entanglement and the classical one of separation.

Entanglement occurs when two particles are linked together no matter their separation from one another. Quantum mechanics assumes even though these entangled particles are not physically connected, they still are able to interact or share information with each other instantaneously.

Many believe this means the universe does not live by the law’s classical laws of separation or those derived by Einstein which state that no information can be transmitted faster than the speed of light.

However, we must be careful not to jump to conclusions because Einstein gave us the definitive answer as to how and why some particles, such as photons are entangled in terms of the physical properties of space-time.

Quantum mechanics assumes that entanglement occurs when two particles or molecules share on a quantum level one or more properties such as spin, polarization, or momentum. This connection persists even if you move one of the entangled objects far away from the other. Therefore, when an observer interacts with one the other is instantly affected.

There is irrefutable experimental evidence the act of measuring the state of one of a pair of particles can instantaneously affect another even though they are physically separated from each other.

However, before we come to the conclusion it is a result of their quantum mechanical properties, we should first examine the experimental setup and any variables that may allow us to come to a different conclusion.

(This description was obtained from the Live Science web site) One of the experiments many assume verifies that entanglement is a quantum phenomenon uses a laser beam fired through a certain type of crystal which causes individual photons to be split into pairs of entangled photons. The photons can be separated by a large distance, hundreds of miles or even more. When observed, Photon A takes on an up-spin state. Entangled Photon B, though now far away, takes up a state relative to that of Photon A (in this case, a down-spin state). The transfer of state (or information) between Photon A and Photon B takes place at a speed of at least 10,000 times the speed of light, possibly even instantaneously, regardless of distance. Scientists have successfully demonstrated quantum entanglement with photos, electrons, molecules of various sizes, and even very small diamonds.

However, Einstein told us there are no preferred reference frames by which one can measure distance.

Therefore, he tells the distance between the observational points in a laboratory, can also be defined from the perspective of the photons in the above experiment.

However, his Theory of Special Relativity tells us objects moving at relativistic speeds would cause the distance separating the end points of an observation to contract along the direction of motion. Yet, it also tells us that the separation between those two points would be zero form the perspective of an object moving at the speed of light.

This means according Einstein the separation between the observation points in a laboratory from the perspective of two photons moving at the speed of light would be ZERO no matter how far apart they might be from the perspective of an observer in that laboratory. This is because, as was just mentioned according to the concepts of Relativity one can view the photons as being stationary and the observers as moving at the velocity of light.

Therefore, according to Einstein’s theory all photons which are traveling at the speed of light are entangled no matter how far they may appear to be from the perspective of an observer who is looking at them.

In other words, entanglement of photons can be explained and predicted terms of the relativistic properties of space-time as defined by Einstein as well as by Quantum Mechanics.

One way of verifying if this is correct would be to determine if particles which were NOT moving at the speed of light experience entanglement over the same distances as photons which are.

This is because, the degree of relativistic shortening between the end points of the observations of two particle is dependent on their velocity with respect to the laboratory where they are being observed.

However, he also tells us that distance will be greater than zero for particles moving slower than the speed of light; how much more would depend on their speed relative to the observer.

Therefore, if it was found that only photons experience entanglement when the observation points were separated by large distances it would support the idea that it is caused by the relativistic properties of space defined by Einstein.

However, one must remember the wave particle duality of existence as defined by Quantum mechanics tell us that before a particle is observed it has an extended length due to its wavelength. Therefore, all particles will be entangled if the reduction in length between the endpoints of the observations when adjusted for their relative velocity is less their wave length as defined by quantum mechanics.

A more conclusive argument could be made for the idea that entanglement is a result of the relativistic properties of space if it was found that entanglement ceased if the relativistic distance between the end points of observation when viewed from the perspective of particle moving slower than the speed of light was greater than its wavelength as defined by quantum mechanics.

Some have suggested that “There are inertial frames for every speed less than light but there is none for light speed itself. Any attempt to generate one actually generates a degenerate frame which can cover only an infinitesimal fraction of space-time.”

However, that argument is invalid, because the conceptual foundations and Einstein’s formulas for length contractions associated with relative motion ARE SOLVABLE for the speed of light. That tells, us since there is a valid solution for the speed of light which is zero the distance between the endpoints of all observations made in a lab CAN be zero for all photons. Putting it another way even though it may define reference frame of zero length does it does NOT mean it is degenerate because as was mentioned earlier it is a valid solution of Einstein’s equations.

copyright Jeffery O’Callaghan 2021

01

Please click here if you would like to read a summary of the ideas presented in this blog

Quantum mechanics assumes the quantization of energy is what prevents electrons from falling into the nucleus of atoms. However, Classical Wave Mechanics provides another explanation base the observation that a system which is oscillating at is natural resonant frequency is one the most efficient ways to store and transfer energy between different storage modes.

This combined with one of the most test and accepted laws of physics that energy can neither be created or destroyed suggests the reason why electrons do not fall into the nucleus MAY BE because their energy is stored in resonate systems.

Both quantum mechanics and the FACT that electron diffraction has been observed tell us that it has properties of waves. Therefore, to verify the above assumption one must show what keeps it from falling into the nucleus is a resonate system created in the space around the nucleus by its wave properties.

The first step is to show how a resonant system can be created around a nucleus.

Science of wave mechanics tells us the wave energy associated with an electron would move continuously through the space around the nucleus because it is bound to it. This would create a resonant or standing wave in it that would define its energy level. Additionally, wave mechanics also tells us the energy of a resonant system, such as a standing wave can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency. Putting it another way it defines why the energy levels in atoms are quantized.

As was mentioned earlier one of the most test and accepted laws of physics is that energy can neither be created or destroyed. However, since energy can neither be crated or destroyed an electrons energy could NEVER repeat NEVER disappear by falling in the nucleus and therefore it MUST repeat MUST be stored someplace.

Yet as was also mentioned earlier classical wave mechanics tells us the most efficient way to store energy is in resonant system such as the standing wave which earlier define the quantum properties of the orbital energy levels in an atom. Therefore, it tells us the energy in each level would most likely be stored in a resonant system or standing wave that has the energy associated with that level.

However, wave mechanics also tells us the energy of a standing wave can only take on the discrete or quantized value associated with its fundamental frequency. This define in terms of the classical properties of wave mechanics the reason all atomic orbital are quantized is because their energy is stored in a system which is oscillating at the natural resonant frequency associated with its energy.

Both quantum mechanics and as was shown above classical wave mechanics gives valid reasons why electrons do not fall in the nucleus based on their theoretical foundations. Quantum mechanics assumes they do not because their energy is quantized based on the unobservable mathematical of the wave function. However, as was show above Classical wave mechanics give a reason which are just as valid in terms of the observable properties standing waves and the fact that energy can neither be created or destroyed.

However physics is a science based on observation. Therefore if one can show that both yield the same quantitative results for the energy of the energy level in atoms one would have admit the one describe above is more credible because it is based on observations of our physical environment.