The post Quantum Entanglement CAN tell us why the universe is what it is? appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>This is because it is one of the central principles of quantum physics. In short it assumes two particles or molecules share on a quantum level one or more properties such as spin, polarization, or momentum. This connection persists even if you move one of the entangled objects far away from the other. Therefore, when an observer interacts with one the other is instantly affected.
However, it contradicts the central core Einstein’s theory of Relativity which states that no information can be transmitted instantaneously or faster than the speed of light.
Since these two concepts are diametrically opposite, if one can define the mechanism responsible for entanglement in terms of either one it would invalidate the other will help us to understand why our universe is what it is.
This is because there is irrefutable experimental evidence the act of measuring the state of one of a pair of photons instantaneously affect the other even though they are physically separated from each other.
As was mentioned earlier quantum physics, assumes ALL entangled particles, not only photons remain connected so that actions performed on one immediately affect the other, even when separated by great distances.
While Einstein tells us that instantaneous or faster than light communication between to particles is impossible. However, he also told us the distance between two objects or points in space is defined by their relative motion and that there is no preferred reference frame by which one can define that distance.
Therefore, he tells the distance between the observational points in a laboratory, can also be defined from the perspective of the photons moving at the speed of light.
Yet, his formula for length contraction (shown below) tells us the separation between those observational points from the perspective of two photons moving at the speed of light would be ZERO no matter how far apart they might be from the perspective of an observer in that laboratory. This is because, as was just mentioned according to the concepts of Relativity one can view the photons as being stationary and the observers as moving at the velocity of light.
Therefore, according to Einstein’s theory all photons which are traveling at the speed of light are entangled no matter how far they may appear to be someone who is looking at them. Additionally, it also tells us information exchange between two entangle photons does not travel faster than the speed of light because from their perspective the distance between the observation points where information was read is zero.
In other words, entanglement of photons can be explained and predicted terms of the relativistic properties of spacetime as defined by Einstein as well as by quantum mechanics.
HOWEVER, AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER ONE OF THE CORE PRINCIPALS OF QUANTUM MECHANICS IS THAT ALL PARTICLES SHARE ON A QUANTUM LEVEL ONE OR MORE PROPERTIES SUCH AS SPIN POLARIZATION OR MOMENTUM.
This gives us a way of experimentally determining which of these two theories define why entanglement occurs because if it is found that some particles that are NOT moving at the speed of light experience entanglement it would validate one of the core principals of quantum mechanics and invalidate Relativities assumption that information cannot be exchange instantaneously or faster that the speed of light.
However, one MUST ALSO use another core principle of quantum mechanics defined by De Broglie that particle are made up wave with a wavelength defined by ? = h/p to determine if it or Einstein’s theories define how the universe works. This is because it tells us all material particles have an extended volume equal to there wavelength
Yet because ALL particles have an extended volume equal to their wavelength there will be an overlap or entanglement if the distance separating them is less than their volume as defined by De Broglie.
This tells us some particles moving slower than the speed of light CAN BE entangled if the relativistic distance between the observation points from the perspective of the particles is less than their extended volume is because from their perspective they are in physical contact.
This means that both relativity and quantum mechanics tell us that all particles CAN be entangled if the distance between the end points of the measurements of their shared properties is less than their wavelength or volume as defined by De Broglie.
However, this gives us a way to DEFINITIVELY determine which one of these theories defines the reason for entanglement because we can precisely define the wavelength and therefore the volume of a particle by, as mentioned earlier using De Broglie formula ? = h/p while one can determine the relative distance between the observation points from the perspective of the particles being observed by using Einstein formula for length contraction. If it is found entanglement DOES NOT occur if that distance is greater than a particles volume then it would invalidate the core principles of quantum mechanics that two particles or molecules share on a quantum level one or more properties such as spin, polarization, or momentum no matter how far they are separated. However, if it is found that entanglement does occur even if the separation was greater than their volume it would invalidate the core principals of relativity that no information can be transferred faster that the speed of light.
In other words, it gives us a doable experimental that will UNEQUIVOCALLY tell us if Quantum Mechanics or Einstein’s’ theories define why the universe is what it is
IT CANNOT GET MUCH SIMPLER THAN THAT.
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan Apr. 2021
The post Quantum Entanglement CAN tell us why the universe is what it is? appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>The post Thompson’s double slit experiment made easy appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>However it also allows one to understand the physical connection between quantum mechanics and the spacetime universe of Einstein.
The double slit experiment is made up of “A coherent source of photons illuminating a screen after passing through a thin plate with two parallel slits cut in it. The wave nature of light causes the light waves passing through both slits to interfere, creating an interference pattern of bright and dark bands on the screen. However, at the screen, the light is always found to be absorbed as discrete particles, called photons.
When only one slit is open, the pattern on the screen is a diffraction pattern however, when both slits are open, the pattern is similar but with much more detailed. These facts were elucidated by Thomas Young in a paper entitled “Experiments and Calculations Relative to Physical Optics,” published in 1803. To a very high degree of success, these results could be explained by the method of Huygens–Fresnel principle that is based on the hypothesis that light consists of waves propagated through some medium. However, discovery of the photoelectric effect made it necessary to go beyond classical physics and take the quantum nature of light into account.
It is a widespread misunderstanding that, when two slits are open but a detector is added to determine which slit a photon has passed through, the interference pattern no longer forms and it yields two simple patterns, one from each slit, without interference. However, there ways to determine which slit a photon passed through in which the interference pattern will be changed but not be completely wiped out. For instance, by placing an atom at the position of each slit and monitoring whether one of these atoms is influenced by a photon passing the interference pattern will be changed but not be completely wiped out.
However the most baffling part of this experiment comes when only one photon at a time impacts a barrier with two opened slits because an interference pattern forms which is similar to what it was when multiple photons were impacting the barrier. This is a clear implication the particle called a photon has a wave component, which simultaneously passes through both slits and interferes with itself. (The experiment works with electrons, atoms, and even some molecules too.)”
As was mentioned earlier, one can understand this experiment in term of the physical properties of spacetime and Relatively because they tell us wave energy moves continuously through space and time time unless it is prevented from by moving through time by someone observing or something interacting with it. This would result in its energy being confined to threedimensional space. The science of wave mechanics also tells us the threedimensional “walls” of this confinement will result in its energy being reflected back on itself thereby creating a resonant or standing wave in threedimensional space. This would cause its wave energy to be concentrated at the point in space where a particle would be found. Additionally, wave mechanics also tells us the energy of a resonant system, such as a standing wave which this confinement would create can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency. This means the particle quantum mechanic calls a photon would have an extended volume equal to the wavelength associated with its standing wave.(Note the boundaries or “walls” of its confinement would be defined by its wave properties. If an electromagnetic wave is prevented from moving through time it will be reflected back on itself. However, that reflected wave still cannot move through time therefore it will be reflected back creating a standing wave. Putting it another way wave itself defines its boundaries because if it cannot move though time it MUST STAND in place in the form of a standing wave.)
As was mentioned earlier one can use the above to demonstrate the physical connection between quantum mechanics and the spacetime universe of Einstein.
Briefly it shows the reason why the interference pattern remains when one photon at a time is fired at the barrier with both slits open or “the most baffling part of this experiment” is because, as mentioned earlier it is made up of a standing wave therefore it occupies an extended volume which is directly related to its wavelength.
This means a portion of its energy could simultaneously pass both slits, if the diameter of its volume exceeds the separation of the slits and recombine on the other side to generate an interference pattern. This would occur because wave energy is allowed to move freely through time.
However, when its energy is prevented from moving through time by contacting the screen its energy will be will confined to threedimensional space causing it to be concentrated in a standing wave that as mentioned earlier would define the particle properties of a photon.
Additionally because the energy of the standing wave which earlier was shown to define a photon is dependent on its frequency the energy of the particle created when it contacts the screen must have the same energy. Therefore, were it appears on the screen will be determined by where the interference of the wave properties from each slit combine to produce enough energy to support its particle properties.
It also explains why the interference pattern disappears, in most cases when a detector is added to determine which slit a photon has passed through. this is because the energy required to measure which one of the two slits it passes through interacts with it causing the wavelength of that portion to change so that it will not have the same resonant characteristics as one that passed through the other slit. Therefore, the energy passing thought that slit will not be able to interact, in most cases with the energy passing through the other one to form an interference pattern on the screen.
However it also explains why, as was mentioned “there are ways to determine which slit a photon passed through that will cause a change in the interference pattern but will not completely wiped it out.
The fact that the interference pattern can still occur even if a measurement is made is because if the energy passing through one of the two slits is altered by a relatively small amount compared to what it originally was, classical wave mechanics tells us it will be able to interact to form a slightly different resonant system with a slightly different interference pattern on the other side than would be the case if no measurement was taken.
However, this also means there should be a quantifiable minimum value of interaction between a measuring device and a photon that will permit the interference pattern although somewhat altered to be reestablished on the other side after measuring which slit the photon passes through.
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan Apr. 2021
The post Thompson’s double slit experiment made easy appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>The post Look particles Don’t look waves That’s Quantum Mechanics in a nut shell appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>To begin we should start with one of the most basic aspects of the wave function that defines Quantum reality
The physicist John Wheeler asked how can one best define that reality in five words or fewer? he determined the best answer was given by Aatish Bhatia “Don’t look: waves. Look: particles.” That’s quantum mechanics in a nutshell.”
This suggests that we must explain why Don’t look: waves. Look: particles defines the reality of a quantum environment in terms of the physical evolution of space and time.
On way of doing this is to use the fact that both their evolutions are controlled by a wave. For example, Relativity defines it 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 spacetime when he defined gravitational energy in terms of a curvature in it. This means one can define the propagation of energy associated it in terms of the alternating curvatures of the peak and valleys of one as it moves it.)
This suggests the wave function that governs the evolution of a quantum environment may be mathematical represented by the electromagnetic wave that governs evolution in the world of Relativity. This means we may be able understand why Don’t look: waves. Look: particles describes quantum reality by looking at how an electromagnetic wave evolves in the spacetime environment of Relativity
For example, the science of wave mechanics and Relatively tells us wave energy would move continuously through spacetime unless it is prevented from by moving through time by someone observing or something interacting with it. This would result in its energy being confined to threedimensional space. The science of wave mechanics also tells us the threedimensional “walls” of this confinement will result in its energy being reflected back on itself thereby creating a resonant or standing wave in threedimensional space. This would cause its wave energy to be concentrated at the point in space where a particle would be found. Additionally, wave mechanics also tells us the energy of a resonant system, such as a standing wave which this confinement would create can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency.
The boundaries or “walls” of its confinement would be defined by its wave properties. If an electromagnetic wave is prevented from moving through time it will be reflected back on itself. However, that reflected wave still cannot move through time therefore it will be reflected back creating a standing wave. The wave itself defines its boundaries because if it cannot move though time it MUST STAND in place in the form of a standing wave.
In other words, this shows one can use the established science of wave mechanics and physical world of Relativity to show why when some looks at quantum existence it appears as a particle because that act creates boundaries required to create the resonant system which defines it.
This also shows how one can merge the explanation of quantum mechanics given above of Don’t look: waves. Look: particles” in terms of the evolving spacetime environment of Relativity.
For example, it explains why the act of looking at a quantum environment creates the confinement required for the creation of a standing energy wave in threedimensional space which, as shown above is responsible for the quantize properties of particles in a quantum world.
Yet, if no one is looking the wave properties of that environment will be predominant because it is free to move until they are observed and then they will revert to the back their particle properties.
This shows how one can understand the validity of describing quantum mechanics as “Don’t look: waves. Look: particles” in terms of a deterministic evolutionary processes in a spacetime environment.
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan Mar. 2021
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The post Look particles Don’t look waves That’s Quantum Mechanics in a nut shell appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>The post Why a singularity cannot not exist exist in a black hole. appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>This is because as mass or energy is added to it the curvature defining its gravitational geodesic in space time expands adding another layer to it. However that does not mean that the matter or energy that is under that layer is free to move towards its center because the gravitational curvature in the geodesic that defines it movement is still there but at a lower gravitational potential. This means any matter or energy that exits at a layer under the event horizon could NOT move towards its center to form a singularity but can only move around the circular geodesic generated by the gravitational potential at that level. However, Einstein’s math tells us would take infinite amount of time to cross to a lower gravitational level. This is similar to the observations involving how matter and energy that tell us it take an infinite amount of time for it move through an event horizon from outside of black hole.
This tells us that either we have misinterpreted the math that tells us that a singular can exist at the center of a black hole or we must rewrite them based on the observations of how mass and energy interact with the event horizon of a black hole. We do not believe we have any other options base on those observations.
So if a singularly is not at the center of a black hole what is.
We know the densest form of observable matter is found in a neutron star where the gravitational forces are strong enough to overcome the forces keeping electrons protons and neutron apart. We also know that a neutron star is capable of becoming a black hole if it absorbs enough mass and energy to become a one. However, that does not mean that it collapses to a singularity. The total energy and therefore the total gravitational potential of the volume of space our solar system occupies consists of the mass and energy of the sun and the planets which are orbiting it. This observation suggests that the total mass in the volume of space occupied by a black hole maybe made up of the components of neutron star and the mass that as was show above would be orbiting it on the gravitational geodesic created by it. These observations of our solar system suggest that the central core of a black hole is NOT a singularity but the remnants of neutron star whose gravitational potential has been increase enough by the mass and energy that is orbiting in the gravitational geodesic created by it to form one.
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan Mar. 2021
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The post Why a singularity cannot not exist exist in a black hole. appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>The post Articles posted in 2021 appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>Preface
The purpose of this blog is to elaborate on the theoretical ideas contained in its companion book “The Reality of Four Spatial Dimensions”
in Thomas S. Kuhn’s book “The Structure of Scientific Revolution” he documents the doubts that precipitate a paradigm change in scientific thought.
For example, even though one could still make accurate predictions of planetary motions using the 15 century geocentric models it became increasing more difficult to integrate that concept with the more accurate observational data provided by the new technologies of that day. This resulted in some scientists questioning their validity.
He suggests the doubt generated by its persistent inability of to explain new data lead many scientists of that period to adopt the simpler rules of the revolutionary heliocentric model.
Modern physics appears to be on the verge of a similar revolution because the discoveries of dark matter and dark energy are extremely difficult to integrate into its current theoretical models.
As Thomas S. Kuhn points out failure of an existing paradigm is a prelude to the search for a new one.
It continues the search, began in its companion book the “The Reality of Four Spatial Dimensions” to not only explain how one can seamlessly integrate the observations of dark matter and dark energy into a theoretical model based on the existence of four *spatial* dimensions but to provide a unifying mechanism responsible for the four forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, the weak, and strong) governing the interactions of matter, energy, space, and time.
Each article covers one aspect of a search for the “reality” it defines. For example, the article “What is dark energy” defines its casually in terms of an interaction of threedimensional space with a fourth while others derive the quantum mechanical properties of energy/mass in terms of a resonant system formed by a matter wave on a “surface” of a threedimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
It is not meant to verify the many answers found in the book “The Reality of Four Spatial Dimensions”. Instead it is meant to give the scientific community the specific information and experiment techniques required to either verify or falsify it contents. It relies less on mathematics and more on conceptual logic and thought experiments (much like Albert Einstein did) to show how one can explain and predict all modern observations by extrapolating the rules defining classical threedimensional space to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2020
“The universe’s most powerful enabling tool is not knowledge or understanding but imagination because it extends the reality of one’s environment.”
Topic 
Date posted 
catorgory 
Author 
Apr. 15, 2021 
Jeff 

Apr. 1, 2021 
Jeff 

Look particles Don’t look waves That’s Quantum Mechanics in a nut shell 
Mar. 12, 2021 
Jeff 

Mar. 6, 2021 
Jeff 

Could Black holes be responsible for the expansion period in our universe’s history? 
Jan.1,2021 
Jeff 
Articles posted in2019, 2017 and 18, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, and 2007
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The post Articles posted in 2021 appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>The post Could Black holes be responsible for the expansion period in our universe’s history? appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>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 onedimensional 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
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The post Could Black holes be responsible for the expansion period in our universe’s history? appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>The post What is Dark Matter? A simple answer Einstein would have liked. appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>Dark Matter is a form of matter which is thought to account for approximately 85% of the matter in the universe and the remaining is made up visible or baryonic matter. Its presence is implied in a variety of astrophysical observations, including the gravitational affects has on the orbits 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, which is why it is difficult to detect.
However, we disagree that it cannot be explained by accepted theories of gravity because Einstein defined gravity in terms of the “depth” of a gravity well or distortion in the “surface” of spacetime caused by the energy density of an environment and NOT on existence of visible or baryonic matter. This means the energy of electromagnetic fields, photons and all other forms of energy along with that associated with visible matter must be taken consideration when determining the energy density of space and therefore ITS gravitational potential.
This suggest the reason it does not appear to interact with the electromagnetic field is because a large part of it is an electromagnetic field.
However, the observation that electromagnetic energy prevents the gravitational collapse of the visible matter in stars suggests that its gravitational potential is oppositely directed with respect to it.
Some might say, if that were true it should have the same effect on the orbits of planets as it does on stars in galaxies. The reason it DOES NOT is because, as was just mentioned with it opposes that of visible matter which prevents it from sinking to the bottom of a star’s gravity well.
One can understand why by using an analogy of a jar containing water and oil where the water represents electromagnetic energy while the oil represents that of visible matter. The water prevents the oil from sinking to the bottom because its directional energy is opposite or is more buoyant than the water. This would be analogous to how the heat associated with electromagnetic energy prevents the visible matter in stars from sinking to the bottom of their gravity well. In other words, the energy density of electromagnetic energy offsets that of the visible matter.
However, as was mentioned earlier Einstein defined gravity in terms of the “depth” of a gravity well or distortion in the “surface” of spacetime caused by the energy density of an environment NOT on existence of visible of baryonic matter.
Therefore, to determine the total gravitation potential or depth of the gravity well of a solar system one must add the energy density associated with both electromagnetic energy and its visible matter.
However, to define the gravitational potential on objects which are gravitational bound to a star one would have to use only the visible matter because as mentioned earlier electromagnetic energy offsets that of the visible matter. Therefore, any objects gravitational bound to a star would only experience the gravitational potential of the visible matter because the gravity well of the entire solar system is offset by the electromagnetic energy.
However, one can also use the example of the jar mentioned earlier to understand why stars orbiting in galaxies are affected by both the energy density of electromagnetic energy and visible matter. One outside the jar would add the height of the oil to the water to get its total height while from the inside one would measure it from the oil water line. Similarly. if one views the gravity well from an object orbiting a solar system one would have to use only the energy contributed by the visible matter. However, if one viewed it form an object that was NOT gravitationally bound to it one would have to measure the contribution provided by both the visible matter and electromagnetic energy.
This also tells us any form of energy that counteracts that of visible matter must also be consider a component of the Dark Matter. For example, the orbital of the stars in a galactic would have to be included because it also adds to the energy density of the space they occupy. In other words, not only do you have to add the energy density contributed by electromagnetic energy to that of the visible matter in stars but you must also add the orbital energy of both the visible matter and their electromagnetic component to determine its content in galaxies. Additionally, the fact that galaxies are gravitational bound in galactic clusters means you must also consider the energy density contributed by their rotational energy to determine the universe’s total Dark mater component.
However, the OBSERVATION that electromagnetic energy offsets the gravitational potential of the visible matter in stars tells us it must contribute AT LEAST an equal amount to universe’s total gravitational potential. The remaining Dark matter could be provided by the energy density contributed by dust, helium atoms, black holes along their orbital energy.
It should be remembered; Einstein defined the depth of a gravity well in space in terms of the absolute value of its energy density. Therefore, to determine the total gravitational potential of both Dark and visible matter one must include all forms of energy including visible matter, to determine their value.
The post What is Dark Matter? A simple answer Einstein would have liked. appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>The post The reality of the wave function. appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>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 spacetime environments are controlled by a wave. For example, Relativity defines evolution of spacetime 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 spacetime 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 spacetime unless it is prevented from doing so by someone observing or something interacting with it. This would result in its energy being confined to threedimensional space. The science of wave mechanic also tells us the threedimensional “walls” of this confinement will result in its energy being reflected back on itself thereby creating a resonant or standing wave in threedimensional 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 spacetime by assuming the wavefunciton is a mathematical representation of an electromagnetic in it
The post The reality of the wave function. appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>The post The errors in the Big Bang Theory appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>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 reexpand. 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 reexpand.
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 reexpand.
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 
The post The errors in the Big Bang Theory appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>The post Incorporating gravity into Quantum electrodynamics appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>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 spacetime 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 spacetime
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 spacetime 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 spacetime that defines gravity.
For example, the photonic properties of an electromagnetic wave can be defined by extrapolating the laws of classical resonance in a threedimensional environment to an electromagnetic wave on a "surface" of a threedimensional 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 fourdimensional spacetime.
The existence of fourdimensional spacetime 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 threedimensional 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 threedimensional space manifold would meet the requirements mentioned above for the formation of a resonant system or "structure" in fourdimensional spacetime 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 fourdimensional spacetime 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 spacetime to create the resonant structure associated with photonic properties of a quantum field.
For example, in our threedimensional world, a point on the twodimensional surface of paper is confined to that surface. However, that surface can oscillate up or down with respect to threedimensional 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 threedimensional 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" threedimensional space with respect to the time dimension.
As was mentioned earlier, Einstein in his General Theory of Relativity explains gravity as a distortion of spacetime 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 spacetime.
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 spacetime where that interaction takes place.
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan Nov 2020
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The Road to Unifying 
The post Incorporating gravity into Quantum electrodynamics appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.
]]>