15

Please click here for a brief summary of the ideas presented in this blog.

The cosmological constant problem or vacuum catastrophe is the disagreement between the observed value of the vacuum energy density or the small value of the cosmological constant and the theoretical large value of zero-point energy suggested by quantum field theory.

Depending on the Planck energy cutoff and other factors, the discrepancy is as high as 120 orders of magnitude.

In quantum physics, the vacuum or zero-point energy is the amount of energy in a point “volume” of space as prescribed by Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principal. Its existence is derived from that principle which tells us the mathematical point in space quantum mechanics uses to define particles have an inherent fuzziness. Therefore, it is assumed that it oscillates or fluctuate around that point.

One reason for the cosmological constant problem MAY be because Quantum Mechanics states that all fields, such as the electromagnetic one, must be quantized at each and every point in space. It also assumes the evolution of the oscillations associated with the uncertainty principle are defined by wavefunction. Therefore, according to theory, even a pure vacuum has a VERY, VERY, VERY large number of point oscillators each contributing to its energy.

However, this would be true if and ONLY if all fields including an electromagnetic one is quantized at each and every point in space.

BUT THIS MAY NOT BE THE CASE.

For example, Johannes Kepler was able mathematically define the laws of planetary motion in terms of a HYPOTHETICAL point called the center of gravity which defines the evolution of their orbits. This is because in physics, the center of mass is the unique point where the energy of the distributed mass sums to zero.

However, we know a planet has a volume bigger than the unique point which defines its center of gravity,

Similarly, the point in space that quantum mechanics uses to define the evolution of quantum system may ONLY be a HYPOTHETICAL one which defines the UNIQUE point where its energy distribution of that system sums to zero

This conclusion is supported by the fact the fact particles such as an electron can be diffracted because it is impossible to explain that if was a mathematical point that has no volume. Another observation is that particles are observed to collide in particle accelerators. This could not happen if they had no volume.

However, to understand zero-point energy and why the cosmological constant predicted by quantum mechanics is so high in terms of dynamics of space-time we must first establish a connection between evolution of the wave function which defines a quantum environment 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 just mentioned 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.

One can connect them because the science of wave mechanics and Relativity tells us an electromagnetic wave would move 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” confining the movement of both an electromagnetic wave and point defined by the wavefunction will result in it being reflected back on itself thereby resulting in the creation of a resonant or standing wave in three-dimensional space. Additionally, it tells us its energy can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency of that standing wave while at the same time. Additionally, it tells us the particle defined by the wave function would have an extended volume equal to the wavelength of its standing wave.

Putting it another way if an electromagnetic wave or the wave function is prevented from moving through space either by being observed or encountering an object it will be reduced or “Collapse” to a form a standing wave that would define the quantized energy quantum mechanics associates with a particle.

However, as was mentioned earlier the fact that a particle has an EXTENDED volume suggests the point the wave function defines as its position MAY ONLY be a HYPOTHETICAL one which defines where the energy distribution of a particle sums to zero. This would be analogous to how the point called the center of mass mentioned early is the unique point where the energy distribution of the mass of an object sums to zero.

As was mentioned earlier the discrepancy between the vacuum energy predicted by quantum mechanics and its observed value may be due to the fact that it applies the uncertainty principal to each and every mathematical point in space.

Therefore, to understand why this discrepancy occurs one must show how and why that would NOT define the vacuum energy in quantum system.

As was just shown Relativity and the science of wave mechanics tell us the energy of the standing wave would be distributed over a volume of space-time that corresponds to is wavelength. However, as was also shown earlier the mathematical point quantum mechanics uses to define a particle MAY only represent where energy of distribution of this standing wave sums to zero.

This means to accurately determine the vacuum energy in a quantum system one must FIRST define why one should NOT repeat NOT apply the uncertainty to the mathematical point defined by the wave function BUT TO energy “volume” of a system.

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

THIS IS BECAUSE IT DEFINES THE UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPAL AND WHY THE MEASUREMENT OF ANY ONE OF THE PROPERTIES OF A SYSTEM INCLUDING THE MOMENTUM OR POSITION WILL AFFECT THE OTHER.

As was mentioned before quantum mechanics defines both momentum 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 the center of 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 its other component.

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 means there will be 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.

However, the same would be true when measuring either the momentum or position of a particle in a relativistic system because its energy is also conserved. 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 momentum or position will affect 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.

As was mentioned earlier quantum mechanics define the cosmological constant in terms of the summation of amount of energy in a point “volume” of space has as prescribed by Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principal

However as was also mentioned earlier the point in space that quantum mechanics uses to define a system may ONLY be a HYPOTHETICAL one used to define its evolution similar to how the center or gravity is used to define the evolution of objects in orbit.

This suggest to define the vacuum energy of a quantum system and the Cosmological Constant one would have to derive it NOT by applying Heisenberg’s uncertainty principal to all mathematical points in space but to the extended volume of space that point represents.

THERE ARE SEVERAL EXPERIMENTAL WAYS OF VERIFYING THIS CONCLUSION.

For example, we can determine the cross section and therefore the volume of a particle by the frequency of their collisions in particle accelerators. Then using that volume determine how many oscillators occupy a given volume and apply the uncertainty principal to them instead of every mathematical point to calculate the how much vacuum energy they would create. Then compare that value with the observed one.

Hopefully this may greatly reduce or eliminate the disagreement between the observed value of vacuum energy density and the one suggested by quantum field theory because it would reduce the number of oscillators in a given volume of space.

01

Please click here for a brief summary of the ideas presented in this blog.

All of our modern sciences take their names from ancient Greek. In the case of physics, that word is “physik” which translates to “knowledge of nature and is dedicated to understanding how and why “our world” behaves the way it does.

Proponents of this definition like Einstein focused on developing mathematical theories which not only quantified how gravity works in terms of a curvature in space-time but why it does terms of how objects in “our world” follow a curvature surface. Putting it another way they gave us the ability NOT ONLY to mathematical quantify “our world” but understand WHY and HOW one made up of space-time behaves the way it does.

However, there is another definition of physics that assumes it should ONLY have to quantify what we observe and therefore we should NOT attempt to understand how and why it exists

Proponents of this definition have developed a system of mathematics called quantum mechanics which ONLY quantifies what we observe. However, it DOES NOT follow the rules that define the behavior of “our world” because it assumes it exists in several superpositioned states at the same time which reduced to one when they are observed. Putting in another way they believe science should only be concerned with defining best way to quantifying observations and not about why or how they come about.

However, we believe the ancient Greeks would disagree because as was mentioned earlier they defined a physicist as someone who was dedicated to NOT only quantifying “our world” but understanding how and why it behaves the way it does. Therefore, they MAY not have felt comfortable in calling Quantum mechanics a valid theory of “our world” or its proponents physicists because they do not attempt to understand why it behave the way it does.

Even so there are some proponents of quantum mechanics who have suggested that because, to this date its system of math is only one that can accurately quantify the quantization of energy in “our world” it MUST be product of that mathematical structure

However, because most if not all of the constants in the equations used to define its mathematical structure are derived from “our world” it is difficult to determine if it is a product of its mathematical structure or if that structure is a product of it

But the math of quantum mechanics may not be the only one that can define how and why we observe what we do in “our world”

For example, one can use mathematics to determine why we observe 4 apples on a table by assuming that originally there were two on the it and two were added or there were six and two were taken away but only one of those equations define how and why they actually got there.

Putting it another way there are in most case many ways to quantify both the number of apples on a table and what we observe in “our world”.

This suggests there MAY be able to find another mathematical system other than the one provided for by quantum mechanics that can define why energy is quantize base on how it behaves in “our world”.

For example, in “our world” observations, the science of wave mechanics and Relativity 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.

Putting it another way when an electromagnetic wave is prevented from moving through space time either by being observed or encountering an object it is reduced or “Collapses” to a form a standing wave that would define the quantized energy quantum mechanics associates with a particle.

As was mentioned earlier there are in most cases many ways to mathematically quantify both the number of apples on a table and what we observe in “our world”. Therefore, we should not assume the solutions provided by quantum mechanics are the only ones that will make accurate predictions of its behavior.

What we as physicists and mathematicians MUST decide is should we allow math to define our existence or have existence define our math because it is possible a new system of math based on the behavior of “our world” could open doors to new technologies that will enable our civilization to advance beyond were one based on quantum mechanics can.

15

Please click here for a brief summary of the ideas presented in this blog.

Antimatter is a material composed of antiparticles and every particle we know of has an antimatter companion that is virtually identical to itself with opposite electric charge. Physics predicts that matter and antimatter must be created in almost equal quantities, and that this would have been the case during the Big Bang. What’s more, it is predicted that the laws of physics should be the same if a particle is interchanged with its antiparticle – a relationship known as CP symmetry. However, the universe we see doesn’t seem to obey these rules. It is almost entirely made of matter, so where did all the antimatter go? It is one of the biggest mysteries in physics to date.

Therefore, to define ALL the properties of antimatter in terms of the field properties of space-time one must first define how it evolves to produce both particles and antiparticles and then explain why our universe is made ALMOST ENTIRELY OF MATTER.

Einstein defined the evolution of a space-time environment in terms of an electromagnetic wave moving through its field properties and derived a particle and its mass in terms of a curvature caused by local increase in its energy density. This means to define antiparticles one must first explain how electromagnetic energy evolves in a space-time environment to create a local increase in its energy density and why it is responsible for particle creation.

One can accomplish that by using 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 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 energy to be concentrated at the point in space were a particle would be found. Putting it another way this defines how electromagnetic energy evolves in a space-time environment to create a local increase in its energy density and why it is responsible for the creation of particles.

The next step in defining the properties of antimatter is to show why every particle we know of has an antimatter companion that is virtually identical to itself.

One can understand this by using an analogy of how water reacts when an object is either added to or removed from it.

For example, if one depresses an empty cup in water its surface will become elevated to exactly make up for the quantity of water displaced while if some removes a cup of water its surface will become depressed enough to make up for the water that was removed.

Similar to water if a particle causes a portion of “surface” of space-time to become depressed it will result in a portion of it to become elevated enough to exactly make up for that depression. While if a portion of the “surface’ of space-time elevated by an antiparticle it will result in a portion of it to become depressed enough to exactly make up for that elevation.

As was mentioned earlier Einstein defined a particles mass in terms of a curvature cause by increase in its energy density

Putting it another way this defines why every matter particle has an antimatter companion that is virtually identical to itself and why it must be created in almost equal quantities because it shows why the curvatures associated with their energy density are interdependent and oppositely directed each other.

However, it also provides a solution to one of the BIGGEST mysteries in physics or why the universe is made up almost entirely of matter, even though both observation and prediction suggest that matter and antimatter must be created in almost equal quantities.

This is because it takes a little more energy to lift or elevate cup of water above its surface than it does to depress it below it in part because gravity opposes it being lifting while favoring it being depressed

Similarly, it would take a little more energy to elevate or lift the “surface” of three-dimensional space than it would to depress it due in part to the fact the gravitational component of matter below that “surface” would oppose the lifting associated with antimatter while favoring the depression associated with matter.

Therefore, some energy associated with matter will be left over after all of the antimatter has been eliminated.

One can also understand why their electrical charge is opposite by comparing it to the energy stored in elastic bands.

For example, if one takes two elastic bands side by side and depress down on one and up on the other a force will be developed that will cause them to be attracted to each other

Similarly classical physics tells us an attractive force will be developed by the differential energy density that exists between a matter and its antimatter counterpart that will result in a force to be developed that will cause them to be attracted to each other.

This explains why matter and antimatter particle have opposite electric charges or are attracted to each other is because of the effects their energy densities have on the fabric of space-time

Additionally, one can understand why the spin properties of neutral particles such as a neutron and an antineutron are opposite directed by comparing them to spin properties of high-and-low-pressure areas in our atmosphere. For example, in a high-pressure area air rotates clockwise while in a low one it does so in a opposite direction or counter clockwise.

For the same reason the energy in high energy volume of space-time that defines a neutral particle would rotate in an opposite direction from the low energy volume that defines its antiparticle.

This shows how one can defining the properties of antimatter in terms of the field properties of space-time and why our universe almost entirely made of matter.

Please click here for a brief summary of 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 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. That 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 had 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 the 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, either it its position or momentum 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, a 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 can define energy in terms of quantized units of space time.

Putting it another way if an electromagnetic wave is prevented from moving through time either by being observed or encountering an object it is reduced or “Collapses” to a form a standing wave that would define the quantized energy quantum mechanics associates with a particle.

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 defined by the 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, if we combine them, we can create Theory of Everything which will explain BOTH the quantum properties of particle and the relativistic properties of our universe.

Please click here for a brief 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), and momentum and 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 their energy. What he DID do was define gravity and therefore mass in terms of a curvature in space-time caused by the energy density of space. This means that we should NOT assume the increase in its energy density caused by the momentum of photon will NOT 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 added energy density associated with a photon’s momentum will cause it to have mass. Therefore it is as some have suggested FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG to say that with momentum including a photon can have ZERO 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 an energy wave in space-time one can use the science of wave mechanics to explain how and why it is 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 it 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 the units of space time that make up an electromagnetic wave WOULD remain stationary with respect to the background of space time.

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 the external.

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.