Cosmologists have not yet been able to determine if the universe will keep on expanding or enter a contraction phase but if it does it will generate a lot of heat. I wonder what effect that heat would have on a black hole. My intuition is that the smaller ones may just dissolve or return the ions they are made up of back to space but the larger ones MAY I repeat MAY exploded like a kernel of popcorn. The heat created by this expulsion would cascade to other black holes causing them to explode in rapid succession. The energy released by a single one would only result in a small increase in the rate of the universe expansion. However, the explosions of large numbers over a short period of time COULD result in a very rapid expansion that might approach that of the inflationary model based on the expansion of a singularity.

Some will probably say that is it crazy to assume that a black hole can explode however I think it is crazier to assume that the explosion of a single one-dimensional point called a singularity can result in the observables properties of our universe.

One advantage to basing an inflationary model on the explosions of black holes is that it defines a mechanism for the start of the inflationary period in terms of an observable properties of our universe. Additionally, one can, through observations estimate the total energy content of all of the black holes in universe AT THE TIME OF ITS COLLAPSE based on how many presently exist. This would allow one to estimate the rate of the universe’s inflationary expansion caused by a rapid release of their energy.

To determine if this IDEA is viable solution one would have to first determine if heat can cause a black hole to explode. If it can one could use their observable properties to mathematically quantify the temperature required for that to occur. We can also estimate the maximum temperature the complete collapse of the universe would attain. If that value is greater than the temperature required to cause a black hole to explode it would add creditability to the above IDEA. After that it should be possible to determine rate at which the energy of the explosion of a single black hole will ripple through rest and cause them to explode. Since, as was mentioned earlier because we can estimate, based on observations the total energy of all of the black holes in our observable universe AT THE TIME OF ITS COLLAPSE we mathematically determine rate at which energy is released and therefore the rate of the universe’s expansion at each point in its evolution.

In other words, it allows us to define an inflationary period in our universe’s evolution based on the mathematical analysis of the observable properties of our environment instead of the unobservable properties of a quantum singularity.

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan Jan. 2021

Dark matter is a form of matter which is thought to account for approximately 85% of the matter in the universe and about a quarter of its total mass–energy density or about 2.241×10?27 kg/m3. Its presence is implied in a variety of astrophysical observations, including the gravitational affects has on the obits of stars in galaxies which cannot be explained by accepted theories of gravity unless more matter is present than can be seen. The reason it is called dark because it does not appear to interact with the electromagnetic field, which means it does not absorb, reflect or emit electromagnetic radiation, and is therefore difficult to detect.

However, we disagree that it cannot be explained by accepted theories of gravity because Einstein defined it in terms of the “depth” of a gravity well or

distortion in the “surface” of space-time caused by the energy density of an environment and NOT on existence of visible of baryonic matter. This means the energy of electromagnetic fields and photons along with that associated with visible matter must be taken consideration when determining its energy density and therefore the depth of its gravity well in space.

In other words, according to Einstein the energy of all forms of energy including photons in the universe must contribute along with the visible matter to define its total gravitation potential.

This suggest the reason it does not appear to interact with the electromagnetic field is because it is an electromagnetic field.

Some might say if this were true its gradational affects would be observable because they would affect planetary orbits. In other words, because we do not observe their affects on the orbits of planets, they could not contribute to a solar systems gravitational potential. However, the direction of the gravitational potential of photons, magnetic fields and their rotation in a star is opposite to that of visible matter because it prevents it from collapsing or sinking to the bottom of its gravity well. This would be analogous to a jar of water and oil. One could say the water prevents oil from sinking to the bottom because it is more buoyant or its directional energy is opposite to that of the water. Therefore, it determines how deep the oil is below the top of the jar. However, the total depth of the water and oil is determined by adding their individual heights above the bottom of the jar.

Similarly, because the gravitational potential of photons and the other forms of energy mentioned earlier is oppositely directed from that of the visible matter in a solar system it prevents its energy from sinking to the bottom of its gravity well. However, the total depth of its gravity well would be determined by adding the height of the gravitational energy of the those other forms of energy to the visible matter. This tells us the depth of the gravity well of a solar system that affects the orbits of planets would be offset by the gravitational potential of that energy. In other words, the reasons why we do not observe their affects on planetary orbits is because the gravity well they occupy will have the same offset as their suns they are orbiting.

The reasons why gravitational affects of that energy can be observed in the orbits of individual stars in galaxies is because they are not gravitational bound to it they are interacting with the total gravitational energy of each solar system they encounter. This would be analogous to someone measuring the height of the water and oil from outside the jar verses in side it. One outside the jar would add the height to the oil to water to get its total height while one inside it would measure it from the oil water line. Similarly. if one views the gravity well of a solar system from outside one would have to measure the contribution provided by both the visible matter and photons or electrometric energy to determine its depth. However, if one was part of a solar system or inside the jar so to speak one would measure its gravity well from the level of the photons energy.

In other words, one would have to double the energy density and therefore the gravitational force of the visible matter if you were to measure it form a reference frame that was not gravitational bound to another object.

This suggest another major contributor to dark matter would be the rotational energy of the stars orbiting a galactic center because it also adds to the energy density of the space they occupy. It would be considered Dark Matter because similar to the energy mentioned above their rotational energy is balanced by the galaxies gravitational energy and therefore would cause its gravity well to be offset. In other words, not only do you have to double the energy density that is contributed by the visible matter in stars because, as was shown earlier it is offset by at least an equal amount of the energy mentioned above, you must also add the rotational energy of the visible matter and dark matter component in the stars to determine the dark matter content of galaxies because it also causes the gravity well associated with the galaxies to be offset with respect to another one that is not gravitational bound to to its center. The fact that galaxies are also contained in galactic clusters means you must also consider the energy density contributed by their rotation energy the to determine their dark matter content because it is also causes the gravity well associated with their visible matter to be offset with respect to other clusters.

It should be remember, Einstein defined the depth of a gravity well in space in terms of the absolute value of its energy density. Therefore, all forms of energy including visible mass, photons and orbital energy of all objects in the universe will contribute to it.

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan Dec. 2020

Please visit our Facebook group The Road to unification of Quantum and Relativistic theories if you would like to comment or contribute to our project

The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying |

There are two ways science attempts to explain and define the behavior of our universe. The first is Quantum mechanics or the branch of physics defines its evolution in terms of the probabilities associated with the wave function. The other is the deterministic universe of Einstein which defines its evolution in terms of a physical interaction between space and time Specifically, Einstein determines the position of particles in terms of where a distortion in space-time caused by increase in the energy density in the space where it is located.

While quantum mechanics uses the mathematical interpretation of the wave function to define the most probable position of a particle when observed.

Since we all live in the same world you would expect the probabilistic approach of quantum mechanics to be compatible with the deterministic one of Einstein. Unfortunately, they define two different worlds which appear to be incompatible. One defines existence in terms of the probabilities while the other defines it in terms of the deterministic of properties of space and time.

However, even though those probabilities appears to be incompatible with Relativity’s deterministic it can be explained in terms of a physical interaction between space and time. For example, when we role dice in a casino most of us realize the probability of a six appearing is related to or caused by its physical interaction with properties of the table in the casino where it is rolled. Putting it another way what defines the fact that six appears is NOT the probability of getting one but the interaction of the dice with the table and the casino it occupies.

Therefore, to integrate the probabilistic interpretation of the wave function in terms of the deterministic properties of space time one must show how and why an interaction between them is responsible for the position of a particle when observed .

One way of doing this is to use the fact that evolutions in both a quantum and space-time environments are controlled by a wave. 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. (Einstein provided a mechanism for the propagation an electromagnetic wave through space-time when he defined gravitational energy in terms of a curvature in it. This means we may be to derive the probabilistic environment of quantum mechanics to the deterministic one of Einstein if we can show how an physical interaction between space and time is responsible for those probabilities

This suggests the wave function that governs the evolution of a quantum environment may be a mathematical representation of an electromagnetic wave that governs evolution in the world of Relativity. This means we should be able to derive the probabilistic environment of quantum mechanics in terms of the deterministic properties of an electromagnetic wave in space time.

One can accomplish this by using the science of wave mechanics and the concepts of Einstein’s theories.

For example, the science of wave mechanics along with the fact Relatively tells us wave energy moves continuously through space-time unless it is prevented from doing so by someone observing or something interacting with it. This would result in its energy being confined to three-dimensional space. The science of wave mechanic 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 COLLAPSE and 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. However, the particle created when someone observes an electromagnetic wave 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 wave function but the the deterministic interaction of an electromagnetic wave with an observer.

However, the probabilistic interpretation of the wave function is necessary because it defines the position of a particle in terms of mathematical point in space which it randomly defines respect to a center of a particle. 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. This means 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 Relativity is deterministic is because those deviations are average out by the large number of particles in objects like the moon and planets. This shows it is possible to derive the probabilistic world of quantum mechanics in terms of the determinism of space-time by assuming the wavefunciton is a mathematical representation of an electromagnetic in it

The Big Bang Theory is the leading explanation about how the universe began. At its simplest, it says the universe as we know it started with a small singularity, then inflated over the next 13.8 billion years to the cosmos that we know today.

Because current instruments don’t allow astronomers to peer back at the universe’s birth, much of what we understand about the Big Bang Theory comes from mathematical formulas and models. Astronomers can, however, see the "echo" of the expansion through a phenomenon known as the cosmic microwave background.

The idea the universe was smaller in the beginning was supported by Edwin Hubble in 1929 it expanding.

Later, a few physicists led by George Gamow a proponent of the big bang model showed an expanding universe meant that it might have had its beginning in a very hot infinitely dense environment, which then expanded to generate the one we live in today.

They were able to show only radiation emitted approximately 300,000 years after the beginnings of the expansion should be visible today because before that time the universe was so hot that protons and electrons existed only as free ions making the universe opaque to radiation. This period is referred as the age of "recombination".

Additionally, they predicted this Cosmic Background Radiation or what was left over from the age of recombination would have cooled form several thousand degrees Kelvin back when it was generated to 2.7 today due to the expansion of the universe. Many thought its discovery 1965 by Penzias and Wilson provided its verification

However, there was a problem with assuming the universe begin as an expansion of in an infinitely dense hot environment because one would expect it and the Cosmic Background Radiation to be homogeneous because an infinitely dense environment must have been, by definition homogeneous. Therefore, if the universe was homogeneous when it began it should still be.

But the existence of galactic clusters and the variations in the intensity of the cosmic background radiation discovered by NASA’s WMAP satellite showed the universe is not and therefore, was not homogeneous either now or at the time when the Cosmic Background Radiation was emitted.

Many proponents of the big bang model assume that these "anisotropy" in the universe are caused by quantum fluctuations in the energy density of space. They define quantum fluctuations as a temporary change in the energy of space caused by the uncertainty principle.

**However, there is an error in the math used to predict both effects the expansion of singularity at its origin and quantum fluctuations in the energy density of space would have on the evolution of the universe.**

Einstein mathematics tell us time slows as the gravitational or energy density increases and will eventually stop if it becomes great enough. While observation of black holes provides verification of his math because it is observed that time does slow to a stop when it reaches a critical energy density at its event horizon. Additionally, Schwarzschild was able to use Einstein’s math to calculate the radius of a black hole were the energy density would be great enough to stop time.

**This means the math used by the proponents of the big bang is INCORRECT if they did not include the effect the energy density around a singularity or quantum fluctuation would have on its evolution.**

This is because observationally verified math of Schwarzschild tells us there is a minimum radius the total energy content of the universe can occupy for time to move forward.** Since ***evolution cannot occur in an environment where time has stopped that is *also MINIMUM RADIUS of the universe which could expand form which IS larger than a singularity.

In other words, if they had included the effect energy density has on time, they would have realized that the universe could not have originated from a singularity.

**Some may say that the energy density of expanding universe would not effect the rate at which time passes but they would be wrong because Einstein’s tells us it is only related to differential energy density. In other words, he tells us the rate at which time slows and where it would stop and prevent further expansion would be determined by the differential energy density between the center of its expansion and its outer edge. This point would define the minimum volume it would have to have before its expansion could take place.**

However, there is a similar error in the math behind the assumption that quantum fluctuations are responsible for "anisotropy" in Cosmic Background Radiation because energy could not expand from one because the energy density surrounding it would cause time to stop. Therefore, quantum fluctuation could not affect the evolution of the universe or be responsible for "anisotropy" in Cosmic Background Radiation because as was just mentioned evolution cannot occur in an environment where time has stopped.

Some might disagree because they say the energy in a singularity and that contained in a quantum fluctuation would be powerful enough to overcome the stopping of time predicted by Einstein mathematics. However, they would be wrong because the mathematics of Einstein tells that when the energy density reaches a certain level time will stop. It does not say that an increase beyond that point will allow time to move again.

As was mentioned earlier, current instruments don’t allow astronomers to peer back at the universe’s birth, much of what we understand about the Big Bang Theory comes from mathematical formulas and model

However, we may be able to define the origin of the present universe in terms of its observable properties.

We still have not been able to determine if the universe will continue to expand indefinitely or if it will eventually collapse in on itself. However, if one assumes it does, we could develop a mathematically model which would tell us when the heat generated by its collapse would be enough to cause it to re-expand. Additionally, one could determine if that heat occurred AFTER that required to free protons and electrons from each other thereby allowing another age of "recombination" when it started to re-expand.

This would also give mathematicians the ability to more precisely determine the age of universe because we can observe when age of "recombination" occurred and project back from that point in time to when the additional heat generated by its continued collapse was great enough to cause it to re-expand.

In others words we have the ability to **define the origin of the present universe and anisotropy" in **Cosmic Background Radiation in terms of a mathematical model based on real time observations of the present universe.

The science of Astrophysics is base almost exclusively on observations. Therefore, the question they must ask themselves is "If we have two models for the origin of the universe that predict the same outcome which one should we assume is correct?" The one that make is predictions based on the observable properties of our present universe or one that defines it origins in terms of the unobservable properties of a singularity.

Copyright Jeffery B O’Callaghan Nov. 2020

The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying |

Quantum electrodynamics (QED) is the relativistic quantum field theory of electrodynamics. In essence, it describes how light and matter interact and is the first theory where full agreement between quantum mechanics and special relativity is achieved. QED mathematically describes all phenomena involving electrically charged particles interacting by means of exchange of photons and represents the quantum counterpart of classical electromagnetism giving a complete account of matter and light interaction.

However, as of yet no one has been able to integrate gravity into its theoretical structure.

Yet one can use the wave properties of a quantum field to explain how Einstein’s definition of gravity in his General Theory of Relativity can be used to accomplish that.

Einstein in his General Theory of Relativity explains gravity as a distortion of space-time caused by the presence of matter or energy while defining its magnitude in terms of the concentration of matter or energy in a given volume of space-time

Therefore, to incorporate Quantum field into Einstein General Theory of Relativity one must explain how the interaction of a photon with electrically charge particles causes a distortion in space-time associates with gravity.

As was mentioned earlier QED defines the interaction of charged particles in terms of the exchange of photons. However, it defines the exchange of photons in terms of the electromagnetic wave properties of a quantum field.

However, one can use the wave definition of that quantum field to define how it interacts with field properties of Einstein General Theory of Relativity to create the distortion in space-time that defines gravity.

For example, the photonic properties of an electromagnetic wave can be defined by extrapolating the laws of classical resonance in a three-dimensional environment to an electromagnetic wave on a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a time dimension.

This is because one can 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 its natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would occur in an environment consisting of four-dimensional space-time.

The existence of four-dimensional space-time would give an energy wave the ability to oscillate spatially on a "surface" the third spatial dimension with respect to the time dimension 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 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 space.

Therefore, these oscillations in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold would meet the requirements mentioned above for the formation of a resonant system or "structure" in four-dimensional space-time if one extrapolated them to that environment.

Classical wave mechanics tells us the energy of a resonant system can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency.

Hence, these resonant systems in four-dimensional space-time would be responsible for photonic properties of a quantum field.

Yet one can also define how and why an electromagnetic wave interacts with charge particles terms of the physical properties of space-time to create the resonant structure associated with photonic properties of a quantum field.

For example, in our three-dimensional world, a point on the two-dimensional surface of paper is confined to that surface. However, that surface can oscillate up or down with respect to three-dimensional space.

However, the edge of the paper provides a boundary that reflects those oscillation back on itself, thereby creating a resonant wave on the surface of the paper.

Similarly, an electromagnetic wave in three-dimensional space would be confined to it however, it could, similar to the surface of the paper oscillate “up” or “down” while moving through time.

However, if it is prevented from moving thought time by interacting with an electrically charged particle its wave energy will be reflected back on itself, thereby concentrating it in a resonant standing wave on the "surface" three-dimensional space with respect to the time dimension.

As was mentioned earlier, Einstein in his General Theory of Relativity explains gravity as a distortion of space-time caused by the presence of matter or energy. While defining its magnitude in terms of the concentration of matter or energy in a given volume of space-time.

In other words, one can integrate gravity with Quantum electrodynamics definition of how matter interact with light in terms of how that interaction results in increase the energy density in the volume of space-time where that interaction takes place.

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan Nov 2020

The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying |

12

Recently observations have suggested a force called Dark Energy is needed to account for the fact the expansion of the universe is accelerating. However. that may be an illusion created by the effect gravity has on time.

Einstein told us and it has been observed the rate at which time is perceived to move is slower in all environments where the gravitational potential is greater with respect where it is being observed. This means the further we look back in time, where universe gravitational potential of the more densely pack matter was greater the estimate of its rate of expansion would be less than it actually was if those effects were not taken into consideration. In other words, if one had not considered the Relativistic slowing of time caused by its gravitational potential that rate would be faster in the past than the present value suggests.

However, we also know the gravitational potential has a slowing effect on the universe’s expansion and because that potential decreases as its volume increase, its expansion rate also decreases. In other words, as the universe expands the slowing effect of gravity has on it decreases.

Putting it another way, the rate of universe’s expansion would to appear to occur more rapidly than it actually did from the perspective of present due to the effect gravity has on time while its actual rate would decline due to its gravitational potential as the universe expands.

Therefore, to determine its actual rate of expansion at each point in its history one must not only take into account the gravitational effect on time that would make it appear that it was slower that it actual was but one must also consider how gravity actually causes its expansion rate to decrease.

Yet, because of the non-linear effects between the slowing of time created by universe’s gravitational potential with respect to effects it has on its rate of expansion there will be a point in its history where one will APPEAR to overtake the other.

IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS POSSIBLE THE OBSERVATIONS SUGGESTING THE UNIVERSE EXPANSION IS ACCELERATING MAY BE THE RESULT OF THE FACT THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THE UNIVERSE CAUSES TIME TO APPEAR MOVE SLOWER IN THE PAST THAN IT ACTUALLY DID.

This gives us a way of validating if the gravitational potential and the slowing effect it has on time is what gives us the IMPRESSION the expansion of the universe is accelerating because it has been observed that about 4 billion years ago the universe’s expansion appears to have change from decelerating to an accelerated phase.

This because one can calculate its actual expansion rate by determining how much time would have appeared to move slower due to the differential gravitational potential between the past and present and use that value to determine its actual rate. If it was found that about 4 billion years ago the effect the slowing of time on our perception of its past expansion rate is less than slowing effect gravity would have on, it would appear as if that rate was accelerating even though it was still decelerating.

Some may say the slowing of time slowing would not affect the timing of the expansion because it is also expanding. However, Einstein define the time dilation only in terms of the affects a differential gravitational potential has on it therefore an expanding universe would not affect it. Some may also say that because the universe is expanding the gravitational potential is expanding and weakening at the same rate therefore when we look back the effects it will have on the timing of its expansion will cancel. However, Einstein tells us the timing of events that cause the universe to expand is locked in the past along with its gravitational potential at the time the expansion took place. Therefore, one must take into account the differential gravitational potential between the past and present universe when defining its expansion.

Some have also suggested Relativistic properties space have already been accounted for in the Friedman model that was used in part by scientist to define the accelerated expansion of the universe. However, that is NOT the case because when someone in the past measures the rate of change in the universe’s expansion rate he would NOT need to use it because his entire spatial slice of the universe would be at the same gravitational potential. However this would NOT be the case for someone looking at that spatial slice from the future. He would have to use it because due to the expansion of the universe a differential gravitational potential would have developed between the past and the present. But as the universe expands the rate of change of its expansion will slow because the gravitational density of the universe has decreased while at the same time the relativistic effects defined by Friedman model will also decreased because of the decrease in gravitation density between the past and present. Yet the relativistic properties of space tell us from the perspective of the present the rate of the universe’s expansion is moving faster than it actually is from the perspective of someone who is present at the time when that expansion was taking place. In other words, Friedman equation defines how the rate of the rate of universe’s expansion changes due to a differential gravitational density between a past and present but it does not define the actual rate of from the perspective of someone who was measuring it from his spatial slice. Therefore, to define the ACTUAL rate at which the expansion of the universe is changing from one point to the next one must determine how the change in gravitational densely effects it from the perspective of an observer at each point in its history and NOT with respect to observer who is looking back at it from the present as the Friedman equation does.

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan Nov. 2020

Please visit our Facebook group The Road to unification of Quantum and Relativistic theories if you would like to comment or contribute to our project

The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying |

01

Quantum mechanics states what the universe is made of while not giving an explanation of why it is that way while Relativity gives us an explanation of why it is what it is but does not tell us what is it made of. For example, the quantum world is defined by the mathematical properties of the wave function which define the evolution of wave-particle duality of existence while defining their interactions in terms the uncertainty principal which states one cannot precisely measure the properties of Conjugate pairs such as the momentum or position of a particle with complete accuracy. However, it does not give an explanation of what existence is or how it interacts with its environment to create the universe we live in.

On the other hand, Relativity explains the existence of the universe and the particles it contains in terms of an interaction between space and time without telling us what wave-particle duality of existence is or how it interacts with it to create the uncertainty principal.

Therefore, to understand the dynamics of the uncertainty principle in terms of space-time we must first establish a physical connection between the mathematical evolution of the wave function and the properties of the space-time. This can be accomplished because in Relativity the evolution of space-time is defined in terms of an electromagnetic wave while, as was mentioned earlier the wave function defines how a quantum environment evolves to the point where it is observed.

This commonality suggests the wave function could be a mathematical representation of an electromagnetic wave in space-time. This means to derive the uncertainty principle in terms of space-time one must physically connect it to an electromagnetic wave.

(Einstein defined the medium responsible for the propagation an electromagnetic wave through space-time when he derived gravitational energy in terms of a curvature in it. This is because it shows the alternating physical curvatures caused by peak and valleys of a wave through its geometry can support its movement.)

One can connect them because the science of wave mechanics and Relatively tells us an electromagnetic wave moves continuously through space-time unless it is prevented from moving through time by someone or something interacting with it. This would result in it 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 the energy of an electromagnetic wave 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 that the wave function associates with a particle.

As was mentioned earlier the mathematical properties of the wave functions defines the evolution of a quantum system in terms of its wave particle duality. However, as was shown above one can understand why if one assumes that it represents an electromagnetic wave in a space-time because similar to the wave function if it is prevented from evolving through space by an observation it presents itself as a particle.

Yet, it also tells us why, similar to the evolution of an electromagnetic wave if unobserved it will continue evolve through the mathematical universe defined by quantum mechanics.

In other words, it shows how one can understand the evolution of wave-particle duality of a quantum existence by comparing it to the evolution of an electromagnetic wave in space-time

Next, we must explain how quantum mechanics definition of a particle in terms of a one-dimensional point is responsible for the validity of the uncertainty principal.

Relativity and the science of wave mechanics tell us the energy of the standing wave which earlier defined a particle would be distributed over a volume of space-time that corresponds to is wavelength. However, to accurately determine its momentum or position one must be able to determine where those measurement are taken with respect to energy volume of the system it occupies.

Yet, to measure momentum of a particle in the quantum world one must determine time it takes to move between two points in the mathematical field with respect to the volume of system being measured. Therefore, they will be an inherent uncertainty if one cannot determine where with respect to it those points are.

The fact that both of these theories assume that energy or information of a system can nether be created or destroy provides the basis for the connecting the uncertainty principal to the space-time environment of relativity.

THIS IS BECAUSE THE FACT THE MEASUREMENT OF MONUMENT OR POSITION DOES NOT CHANGE THE TOTAL QUANTITY OF INFORMATION OR ENERGY IN A SYSTEM TELL US THE MEASUREMENT OF ONE WILL AFFECT THE OTHER.

Quantum mechanics defines both moment and position with respect to a one-dimensional point in the mathematical field of the wave function. However, the accuracy of the information as to where that point is in relation to its information volume is directly related to how much of it is taken from the system. This means the more accurate the measurement the more information regarding it must be removed from the system and the less is available to measure the other component of its Conjugate pair

For example, as was mentioned earlier because the information volume of a system remains constant the more of it is taken out regarding its momentum will result in there will being less to define its position. This makes the determination of its position more uncertain because there is less information left in its volume to define its position. While the more information taken out of it regarding its position will result in there being less to define its momentum. This makes this determination of its momentum more uncertain because less information left in that volume to define it. This would be true for all Conjugate pairs.

However, the same would be true in a relativistic system because its energy is must be conserved when its position or momentum is measured. Therefore because, the accuracy of a measurement is directly related to the amount to energy taken out of a system; the measurement of each component of a Conjugate pairs will effect the other. For example the added energy required to make a more accurate measurement of a systems momentum will result in there being less to define its position. This makes the determination of its position more uncertain because there is less energy in that system to define it. While the more additional energy required to make a more accurate measurement of its position will result in there being less to define its momentum. This makes this determination of its momentum more uncertain because less energy left in the system to define it.

This shows how one can understand and physically connect the uncertainty principal as defined by quantum mechanics to the space time environment define by Einstein.

The Road to unifying Relativistic and Quantum

Classical physics is causal; complete knowledge of the past allows for the computation of the future. Likewise, complete knowledge of the future allows precise computation of the past.

Not so in Quantum Physics. Objects are neither particles nor waves; they are a strange combination of both. Given complete knowledge of the past, we can make only probabilistic predictions of the future.

In other words, classical mechanics tells us that only one future exists while quantum mechanics tells us that due to its probabilistic interpretation of wave-particle duality of existence, many different ones simultaneously exist and which one become a reality is determined by observation. Additionally, it states that they are randomly disturbed throughout existence.

On the surface these probabilistic and causal definitions of the future appear to incompatible.

However, that may not be the case.

As mentioned earlier, one of the things that separate the future associated with classical physics from probabilistic one of quantum mechanical is one tell us all of the probable future outcomes of an observation exist while the other which based on causality tells us there in only one.

However, when we role dice in a casino most do not think there are six of them out there waiting for the dice to tell us which one we will occupy after the roll. This is because the probability of getting a six is related to its physical interaction with properties of the table in the casino where it is rolled. This means the probability of getting a six is determined by the physical properties of the dice and the casino it occupies. In other words, the probabilities associated with a roll of the dice does not define the future of the casino the casino defines the future of the dice.

Similarly, just because Quantum mechanics defines outcome of an observation in terms of probabilities would not mean all the of the predicted futures exist if the probability of a specific outcome is caused by a physical interaction of the wave-particle duality of existence with the universe it occupies. In other words, like the dice, it is possible the wave-particle duality of existence does not define the future of the universe the universe defines the future of its wave-particle component.

However, to understand how this is possible one would have to show the probability of a specific outcome of an observation is related to the interaction of the wave-particle duality of existence and the space it occupies.

For example, in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?” Oct. 4, 2007 it was shown the wave-particle duality of existence defined by quantum mechanics can be derived by extrapolating the laws of classical resonance in a three-dimensional environment to an energy wave on a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a time dimension.

Briefly it 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 its natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would occur in an environment consisting of four-dimensional space-time.

The existence of four-dimensional space-time would give an energy wave the ability to oscillate spatially on a "surface" the third spatial dimension with respect to the time dimension 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 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 space.

Therefore, these oscillations in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold would meet the requirements mentioned above for the formation of a resonant system or "structure" in four-dimensional space-time if one extrapolated them to that environment.

Classical mechanics tells us the energy of a resonant system can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency.

Hence, these resonant systems in four-dimensional space-time would be responsible for particle property of existence in the space-time environment of Einstein.

Yet one can also define the boundary conditions responsible for a creating the resonant system or "structure" that earlier defined a particle.

For example, in our three-dimensional world, a point on the two-dimensional surface of paper is confined to that surface. However, that surface can oscillate up or down with respect to three-dimensional space.

However, the edge of the paper provides a boundary that reflects those oscillation back on itself, thereby creating a resonant wave on the surface of the paper.

Similarly, an energy wave of three-dimensional space would be confined to it however, it could, similar to the surface of the paper oscillate “up” or “down” while moving through time.

However, when it is prevented from moving thought time either by being observed or encountering an object or particle that wave energy will be reflected back on itself, thereby creating a resonant wave on the "surface" three-dimensional space,

In other words, if the wave component of quantum existence is prevented from moving unhindered through time either by an observation or by an interaction with a particle or object it will create a resonant system or structure that defined the quantum properties of existence in the article "Why is energy/mass quantized?".

This shows how, one can derive the wave-particle duality of quantum existence in terms of an interaction of space with time.

The final step in answering the question of why the future is what it is requires one to show how the quantum mechanical wave-particle duality of existence interacts with space to create the future in terms of probabilities.

One can use the analogy of energy of a vibrating or oscillating ball on a rubber diaphragm and how the magnitude of those vibrations would would be greatest at the focal point of those vibrations and decrease as one move away from them.

Similarly, if the assumption that wave properties of a quantum existence represents vibrations or oscillations in a "surface" of three-dimensional space, is correct the magnitude of those oscillations would be greatest at the focal point of and decreases as one moves away from it.

However, as the article, mentioned earlier “Why is energy/mass quantized?” showed the particle property of existence is a result of a resonant structure formed on the "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold by its interaction with the time dimension.

Yet the science of Wave Mechanics tells us resonance would most probably occur on the surface of the rubber sheet were the magnitude of the vibrations is greatest and would diminish as one move away from that point.

Similarly, the resonant structure that article associated with a particle property of existence would most probably be found were the magnitude of the vibrations in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold is greatest and would diminish as one move away from that point.

In other words, one can define the future of the quantum mechanical wave-particle duality of existence in terms a causal interaction between it and the universe it occupies.

Additionally, this shows why defining the outcome of an observation of the wave-particle duality of existence as quantum mechanics does in terms of probabilities does not mean all the of those predicted futures exist. This is because similar to the dice mentioned earlier the probability of a specific future is caused by a physical interaction of it with the universe it occupies.

In other words, the reason why the future is what it is is because the wave-particle duality of existence does not define the future of the universe the universe defines the future of its wave-particle component.

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2020

The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying |

25

As the Scientific American article “Is Gravity Quantum?” tell us quantum mechanics suggests everything is made of quanta, or packets of energy, that can behave like both a particle and a wave as define in terms of the mathematics of the the wave function. For instance, quanta of light are called photons. Detecting gravitons, the hypothetical quanta of gravity, would prove gravity is quantum. The problem is that gravity is extraordinarily weak and therefore detecting them is extremely difficult.

Einstein, on the other hand defines gravity terms of the a curvature in space-time caused by its energy density while using light or the properties of electromagnetic waves in the equation E=mc^2 to define the mass equivalent of the energy.

Therefore, to derive quantum gravity in terms of space-time one must first establish a physical connection between the mathematical evolution of the wave function and the properties of the space-time. This can be accomplished because in Relativity the evolution of space-time is defined in terms of an electromagnetic wave while, as was mentioned earlier the wave function is what defines the evolution of gravitons.

This commonality suggests the wave function could be a mathematical representation of an electromagnetic wave in space-time. This means to derive quantum gravity in terms of space-time one must physically connect it to an electromagnetic wave.

(Einstein defined the medium responsible for the propagation an electromagnetic wave through space-time when he derived gravitational energy in terms of a curvature in it. This is because it shows the alternating physical curvatures caused by peak and valleys of a wave through its geometry can support its movement.)

One can accomplish this by using the science of wave mechanics and the concepts of Einstein’s theories to define both the energy density of space responsible of gravity and the particle properties of mass and the graviton as defined by quantum mechanics in terms of an electromagnetic in space time.

For example, the science of wave mechanics along with the fact Relatively tells us the energy of an electromagnetic wave moves continuously through space-time unless it is prevented from doing so by someone observing or something interacting with it. This would result in its energy being confined to three-dimensional space. The science of wave mechanic 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 COLLAPSE thereby increasing the energy density at the point where that collapse occurred. 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. Therefore any changes in that energy density must also be quantized.

This shows if one assumes the wave function is a mathematical representation of an electromagnetic wave in space-time one can explain quantum gravity and why its is made of gravitons or quanta of energy in terms of physical properties of space time. This is because, as was show above if an electromagnetic wave is prevented from moving through it either by being observed or interacting with something its energy collapses to what quantum mechanics calls graviton. This would make a quantum increase in the energy density of space where the collapse occurred and therefore would make a quantum increase the curvature in space-time that relativity defines as the gravity. Additionally it tells us the curvature in space time which Relativity defines as being the causality of gravity is not continuous but quantized because the energy density that creates its can only be increased or decreased in the quantized units defined by the mathematics of the wave function.

There is no one realty because each individual creates one that is unique to him or her in an attempt to organize the physical or classical world through information gathered by the senses. However, physicists have been given the task of defining a universal explanation of it obtained through, in a large part instrumentation and mathematics. One could say one say "The Physics of Reality" is the science that attempts to define a universal reality or one that most can agree on by integrating the information provided by instrumentation and mathematics to that provided by the senses.

For example, cosmologists use telescopes to determine how our universe came to be because it allows them to observe an environment that is too far away to stimulate our sense of sight. They then attempt, in most cases to use mathematics to organized and provide an explanation of how both, the one that directly available to the sense and the one seen through telescopes appear the way they do. The reasons mathematics is the primary tool use by physicists is because many feel it is the only tool that can accurately describe the physical steps involved in defining what we see through both the senses and telescopes.

H*owever, even though mathematics can be used to provide an explanation for the physical reality of the universe it can never replace the reality is it defining. This is because, as was mentioned earlier each person defines his or her reality in terms of the information he or she receive about physical world through the senses. However, all mathematics is abstract in nature, therefore, it does not have a presence in the physical world and because of that it cannot be part of the one that interacts with the senses.*

Some may disagree and try to tell you that the mathematics is the reality because they feel it is the only way to describe what the senses tell them about how the world is organized. This belief is widely held by the proponents of quantum mechanics because they believe that it is the only way to describe the observations of a quantum environment

For example, many feel the entanglement of some particles which the mathematics of quantum mechanics predicts and observations have confirmed is at the heart of the disparity between classical reality and the quantum one because it is one of the features that is lacking in a classical world.

In the classical environment the one that encompass our senses we only observe objects interacting when they make physical contact. However, quantum mechanics predicts that particles which are entanglement can interact with each other regardless of how far apart they are.

Yet, the fact that many experiments have verified that two particles that are not in physical contact can interact with each other have led some to say that we must replace the classical reality of our senses with the mathematical one of quantum mechanics because they both cannot be right. However, because entanglement has been observed the mathematics of quantum mechanics many bel should replace the physical reality of our sensory environment.

However, Einstein provided an alternative by giving a us explanation in terms his Special Theory Relativity for the how and why two particles become entangled that is also supported by the classical or physical world of the senses.

As was mentioned earlier many experiments have verified, most using polarized photons that entanglement does occur. However, Einstein showed us that this is not because some mathematical equation defines its properties but because his theories tell us that photons which are moving at the speed of light can never be separated with respect to an external observer no matter how far apart he or she perceives them to be.

This is because he tells that that there are no preferred reference frames by which one can measure distance. Therefore, one must not only view the separation of a photon with respect to an observer who was external to them but must also look at that separation from a photon’s perspective.

Yet, his theory also tells the distance between the two objects A and B would be defined by their relative speed with respect to an observer.

Specifically, he told us that it would be defined by

However, because according to the concepts of relativity, one can view the photons as being stationary and the observers as moving at the velocity of light the distance or length between the two points use to take the measurement confirm entanglement from the perspective of photons moving at the speed of will be zero in the observer’s reference frame. Therefore, according to Einstein’s theory the entanglement of photon’s is not due to the mathematics of quantum mechanics but due to the relativistic properties of the classical world of the senses. In other words, from the perspective of two entangle photons they are still are still connected even though they appear to an observer to be physical separated.

However, coming to that conclusion does not require us to deny the existence of the physicality of the reality encompassed by our sense.

As was mentioned earlier, each individual creates his or her own reality based on the information he or she receive from physical world through the senses. Therefore, because the information regarding the relationship between velocity and length is readily available to the senses is would be integral part of their reality. However, the abreact properties of the equations of quantum mechanics that predict entanglement are not and therefore are not part of the reality available to the senses.

For example, the effect velocity has on time and length has been confirmed by atomic clocks placed in airplanes as well as orbiting satellites by comparing them to those on the ground. Therefore, the explanation given above of the causality of entanglement in terms of Einstein theories is observable part of the physical world that the senses use to define reality.

Therefore, one could say difference between the reality defined by the mathematics of Einstein and those of quantum mechanics is that his theories gives each individual a way of integrating his explanation of entanglement with their sensory information obtained through the use of atomic clocks in airplanes whereas the purely abstract mathematical explanation of it that quantum mechanics does not.

As was mentioned earlier "The Physics of Reality" is the science that attempts to define a universal explanation of it or one that most can agree on by integrating the information provided instrumentation and mathematics to that provided by the senses. Therefore, because Einstein’s mathematics provides an explanation of entanglement in part by using the senses to directly observe instruments such as an atomic clock along with the mathematics of his theory shouldn’t we consider his explanation more creditable or real that the one provided by quantum mechanics.

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2020

The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying | The Road to Unifying |