Finishing Einstein Point by Point: The unification of quantum and relativity (original) (raw)

Abstract

It might seem that the unification of physics within a single paradigm has been the primary goal in science for only the past few decades, but this would not be true. Unification was the original goal of Einstein and a few other physicists from the 1920s to the 1960s, during a period of time when quantum theorists were ironing out their own unique problems. Their original notion of unification was based on relativity theory rather than the quantum. Unification in the guise of the quantum paradigm only emerged during the 1970s and has since overshadowed all other attempts to unify physics. Quantum theorists believe their work is more accurate, fundamental and even more practical than relativity even though there is little or no evidence to support that belief. For all intents and purposes, the two theories seem mutually incompatible, so the unification of physics has recently proceeded along the lines of an either/or strategy: Either the quantum theory is correct and relativity is wrong, or relativity is correct and the quantum theory wrong. In fact, quantum theorists have been very aggressively trying to replace the space-time curvature of general relativity with gravitons, quantum gravity, other mythical particles and equally speculative gimmicks for several decades and all of their attempts have been futile. In reality, both approaches are basically flawed because both theories are incomplete as they are now understood. Had either side of the controversy just simplified their worldview and sought commonality between the two instead of concentrating on false made-up differences, unification could have been accomplished long ago. The point is, literally, that the discrete quantum, continuous relativity, basic physical geometry and classical physics all share one common characteristic – a paradoxical duality between a dimensionless point and an extended length in any dimension – and if the problem of unification is approached from an attempt to understand how this problem relates to each paradigm all of physics could be unified within a single new theoretical model. Unfortunately, there has traditionally been no method by which a three-dimensional space can be generated from dimensionless points, raising the question – how can dimensionless point particles be extended to account for the three-dimensional space in which the physical interactions they describe occur? This very question is basic to both the quantum theory and relativity, but neither has attempted to answer it although Einstein and others’ attempts to develop classical unified field theories have come closest to the answer. The unification of physics is impossible until this question is answered, but once it is answered the unification follows naturally and easily.

Figures (16)

One would think that a mathematical method of generating an extended space or time from dimensionless points should have already been developed since the inverse logical argument is a necessary requirement for mathematical rigor in both geome- try and arithmetic (calculus). But such a method has never been developed.

One would think that a mathematical method of generating an extended space or time from dimensionless points should have already been developed since the inverse logical argument is a necessary requirement for mathematical rigor in both geome- try and arithmetic (calculus). But such a method has never been developed.

This method thus requires the minimum of a two-dimensionally curved one-dimensional line in a further embedding space (man- ifold) to distinguish reality. Once the extended lines in the em- bedding direction have moved at least as far as the infinitesimal distance between them they would meet. The extension in the fourth direction would then turn back to the other side of the three-dimensional space and return to the points from which they originated, maintaining continuity of the dimensionless points in three-dimensional space and closure in the embedding dimension.

This method thus requires the minimum of a two-dimensionally curved one-dimensional line in a further embedding space (man- ifold) to distinguish reality. Once the extended lines in the em- bedding direction have moved at least as far as the infinitesimal distance between them they would meet. The extension in the fourth direction would then turn back to the other side of the three-dimensional space and return to the points from which they originated, maintaining continuity of the dimensionless points in three-dimensional space and closure in the embedding dimension.

The resulting one-dimensional line would then form a closed double-polar circular space (surface) that would be both infinite and bounded as well as embedded in a closed single-polar circu- lar manifold. This configuration could just as well represent a circular magnetic field B generated around a charged particle moving along an axis perpendicular to the circular field as well as a wave spreading across a two-dimensional surface from a central point. In other words, this particular structure is common to our normal three-dimensional physical space and perhaps even explains why waves and fields spread either circularly or spherically around their sources in three-dimensional space. Now take another point, C, at the same infinitesimal distance from A, but in the opposite direction in three-dimensional space and repeat the procedure. C and A would coincide at one point in the embedding direction that is at least equal to or greater than the infinitesimal distance between them in three-dimensional space. In fact, A, B and C will all come together at the same point in the embedding direction, but that common point is now fur- ther away in the embedding dimension from the one- dimensional line containing A, B and C. Two more points to ei- ther side of B and C - designated as D and E - would follow the same procedure and coincide at the same point in the fourth di- rection as A, B and C. Eventually an infinite number of points to either side of B and C would converge and form a closed circular surface (space) in two of the three-dimensions of three- dimensional space.

The resulting one-dimensional line would then form a closed double-polar circular space (surface) that would be both infinite and bounded as well as embedded in a closed single-polar circu- lar manifold. This configuration could just as well represent a circular magnetic field B generated around a charged particle moving along an axis perpendicular to the circular field as well as a wave spreading across a two-dimensional surface from a central point. In other words, this particular structure is common to our normal three-dimensional physical space and perhaps even explains why waves and fields spread either circularly or spherically around their sources in three-dimensional space. Now take another point, C, at the same infinitesimal distance from A, but in the opposite direction in three-dimensional space and repeat the procedure. C and A would coincide at one point in the embedding direction that is at least equal to or greater than the infinitesimal distance between them in three-dimensional space. In fact, A, B and C will all come together at the same point in the embedding direction, but that common point is now fur- ther away in the embedding dimension from the one- dimensional line containing A, B and C. Two more points to ei- ther side of B and C - designated as D and E - would follow the same procedure and coincide at the same point in the fourth di- rection as A, B and C. Eventually an infinite number of points to either side of B and C would converge and form a closed circular surface (space) in two of the three-dimensions of three- dimensional space.

These conditions, together called the cylindrical condition, were necessary for Kaluza to develop the mathematical model that he did, but the cylindrical condition also limited the five- dimensional model to only replicating the Maxwell electromag- netic equations at best without providing any new physics or predictions by which the theoretical model could be tested.

These conditions, together called the cylindrical condition, were necessary for Kaluza to develop the mathematical model that he did, but the cylindrical condition also limited the five- dimensional model to only replicating the Maxwell electromag- netic equations at best without providing any new physics or predictions by which the theoretical model could be tested.

The world-line of an event in the light cone of 4-D space-time is an infinitesimally miniscule cylinder in the 5th-D of space-time

The world-line of an event in the light cone of 4-D space-time is an infinitesimally miniscule cylinder in the 5th-D of space-time

Yet the resulting models were fundamentally equivalent, so the final Einstein-Schrédinger non-symmetric theory can be viewed as the heir to and culmination of all the previous intrinsic curva- ture theories.

Yet the resulting models were fundamentally equivalent, so the final Einstein-Schrédinger non-symmetric theory can be viewed as the heir to and culmination of all the previous intrinsic curva- ture theories.

From a three-dimensional perspective, fundamental particles are merely quantum sized and quantum restricted bits of three- dimensional symmetrical curvature of the continuum (single field density maximum ‘sheet’) extending in the fourth direction of space. The center of mass point in particles cannot be a singu- larity as previously thought because the higher embedding di- mension is closed and therefore no infinity can occur in the fourth direction. A neutron is merely an electron stacked on top of a proton in the embedding or fourth direction of space. Outside of a nucleus, the free neutron structure is not stable and quickly decays into a pro- ton, electron and neutrino because it is no longer forced by its immediate higher-dimensional (stacked) connection to other par- ticles in the nucleus to conform to the quantum and geometrical standards and conditions of the universe. In a strict mathematical sense, all points in three-dimensional space are directly connect- ed to each other and co-exist with one another since all points in three-dimensional space pass through a single point, the single pole in the higher dimension. This simple fact alone is sufficient to explain quantum entanglement and how it manifests in our world.

From a three-dimensional perspective, fundamental particles are merely quantum sized and quantum restricted bits of three- dimensional symmetrical curvature of the continuum (single field density maximum ‘sheet’) extending in the fourth direction of space. The center of mass point in particles cannot be a singu- larity as previously thought because the higher embedding di- mension is closed and therefore no infinity can occur in the fourth direction. A neutron is merely an electron stacked on top of a proton in the embedding or fourth direction of space. Outside of a nucleus, the free neutron structure is not stable and quickly decays into a pro- ton, electron and neutrino because it is no longer forced by its immediate higher-dimensional (stacked) connection to other par- ticles in the nucleus to conform to the quantum and geometrical standards and conditions of the universe. In a strict mathematical sense, all points in three-dimensional space are directly connect- ed to each other and co-exist with one another since all points in three-dimensional space pass through a single point, the single pole in the higher dimension. This simple fact alone is sufficient to explain quantum entanglement and how it manifests in our world.

A true unified field theory should (and does) reflect the anti- symmetry in the fifth dimension embedding space which reduces to the non-symmetry in the normal four-dimensional space-time that we observe and experience as well as real potential vectors with torsion extended in the higher embedding dimension from individual points with Clifford-like twist in normal space-time.

A true unified field theory should (and does) reflect the anti- symmetry in the fifth dimension embedding space which reduces to the non-symmetry in the normal four-dimensional space-time that we observe and experience as well as real potential vectors with torsion extended in the higher embedding dimension from individual points with Clifford-like twist in normal space-time.

During a quantum experiment of observation, the wave func- tion collapses into material reality within space-time. This col- lapse could be represented as a specific area on the space-time diagram that is defined by an ellipse (or sphere) with the diame- ters of AE and Ap along its axes. The ‘sphere’ of reality that results from the collapse of the wave function could be called the fundamental ‘unit of change’, the quantity that for any given physical restrictions, conditions or limitations is the smallest possible measurement that yields reali- ty. For example, the width of a proton as determined during a high energy collision experiment. The central point (axes origin) would correspond to a discrete quantum point ‘event’ which occurs at a particular location in three-dimensional space relative to the experimenter/observer rather than the ‘event’ itself. In other words, the central point at the origin of the space-time axes is where all of the quantum theory, the standard model, quantum loops, superstring theory, Newtonian physics, the Newtonian concepts of absolute and relative space and time, tensor theories, gauge theories, special relativity and general relativity all come together as one theory.

During a quantum experiment of observation, the wave func- tion collapses into material reality within space-time. This col- lapse could be represented as a specific area on the space-time diagram that is defined by an ellipse (or sphere) with the diame- ters of AE and Ap along its axes. The ‘sphere’ of reality that results from the collapse of the wave function could be called the fundamental ‘unit of change’, the quantity that for any given physical restrictions, conditions or limitations is the smallest possible measurement that yields reali- ty. For example, the width of a proton as determined during a high energy collision experiment. The central point (axes origin) would correspond to a discrete quantum point ‘event’ which occurs at a particular location in three-dimensional space relative to the experimenter/observer rather than the ‘event’ itself. In other words, the central point at the origin of the space-time axes is where all of the quantum theory, the standard model, quantum loops, superstring theory, Newtonian physics, the Newtonian concepts of absolute and relative space and time, tensor theories, gauge theories, special relativity and general relativity all come together as one theory.

This alignment of time and then spatial axes of the event to the universal standard is really what occurs when the wave packet collapses to create ‘reality’ within the normal space-time continuum. In this case, it is easier to think of the collapsing wave function as representing a longitudinal wave expanding along a line if the fourth direction of space rather than a trans- verse probability wave extended over the whole of three- dimensional space while still centered on one individual point in the space-time continuum. This longitudinal wave would represent three-dimensional parti- cle curvature which undergoes Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction along the direction of travel within three-dimensional space. The uncertainties in momentum and energy that are coupled to posi- tions in three-dimensional space and time would now become properties of the embedding fourth direction of space related to the changing curvature due to the requirements of special relativ-

This alignment of time and then spatial axes of the event to the universal standard is really what occurs when the wave packet collapses to create ‘reality’ within the normal space-time continuum. In this case, it is easier to think of the collapsing wave function as representing a longitudinal wave expanding along a line if the fourth direction of space rather than a trans- verse probability wave extended over the whole of three- dimensional space while still centered on one individual point in the space-time continuum. This longitudinal wave would represent three-dimensional parti- cle curvature which undergoes Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction along the direction of travel within three-dimensional space. The uncertainties in momentum and energy that are coupled to posi- tions in three-dimensional space and time would now become properties of the embedding fourth direction of space related to the changing curvature due to the requirements of special relativ-

But Einstein’s perspective on the final results was different. He envisioned the field as a unification of common. three- dimensional physical fields intrinsic to four-dimensional space- time whereas this model holds that the common fields are merely specialized (quantized) field density structures within the five- dimensional single field. In any case, gravitation and electro- magnetism can only be unified (the first step in full unification)

But Einstein’s perspective on the final results was different. He envisioned the field as a unification of common. three- dimensional physical fields intrinsic to four-dimensional space- time whereas this model holds that the common fields are merely specialized (quantized) field density structures within the five- dimensional single field. In any case, gravitation and electro- magnetism can only be unified (the first step in full unification)

Graphing the results of this last equation clearly explains how the orbiting star and star system speeds in the arms of spiral gal- axies maintain nearly constant speeds throughout the rim of the galaxies. The quantities mI'v can be changed to their energy equivalent by simply expressing them in terms of classical kinetic energy. So, mI v becomes 2KE/v. Since the kinetic energy is in- versely proportional to the speed v due to normal gravitational attraction to the general body (galactic core), the quantity mI'v graphs as a straight line from the origin of the graph (galactic center) and increasing as the inverse of the Newtonian predicted speed to the galactic edge. When the two curves are added together, the resulting complex curve predicts that the stars and star systems in the galactic arm will maintain approximately a constant speed out to the edge of the galaxy, which has been observed. The difference between normal Newtonian (and Einsteinian) predicted gravity and ob- servations comes from the addition of Dark Energy to the orbital energy of the stars and star systems.

Graphing the results of this last equation clearly explains how the orbiting star and star system speeds in the arms of spiral gal- axies maintain nearly constant speeds throughout the rim of the galaxies. The quantities mI'v can be changed to their energy equivalent by simply expressing them in terms of classical kinetic energy. So, mI v becomes 2KE/v. Since the kinetic energy is in- versely proportional to the speed v due to normal gravitational attraction to the general body (galactic core), the quantity mI'v graphs as a straight line from the origin of the graph (galactic center) and increasing as the inverse of the Newtonian predicted speed to the galactic edge. When the two curves are added together, the resulting complex curve predicts that the stars and star systems in the galactic arm will maintain approximately a constant speed out to the edge of the galaxy, which has been observed. The difference between normal Newtonian (and Einsteinian) predicted gravity and ob- servations comes from the addition of Dark Energy to the orbital energy of the stars and star systems.

This primary ‘sheet’ at the n = 1 quantum level would corre- spond to Kaluza’s configuration of a unified model embedded in a fifth space-like dimension except that each point along the A- line loops would be continuous in both three-dimensional space and along the fourth dimension with their neighboring points in the new geometry.

This primary ‘sheet’ at the n = 1 quantum level would corre- spond to Kaluza’s configuration of a unified model embedded in a fifth space-like dimension except that each point along the A- line loops would be continuous in both three-dimensional space and along the fourth dimension with their neighboring points in the new geometry.

The second Newtonian gravity term becomes what is called Lambda-CDM, which is now being used successfully in Ein- stein’s equation to explain the Cold Dark Matter halo surround- ing galaxies. Yet another historical episode throws additional light into this matter.

The second Newtonian gravity term becomes what is called Lambda-CDM, which is now being used successfully in Ein- stein’s equation to explain the Cold Dark Matter halo surround- ing galaxies. Yet another historical episode throws additional light into this matter.

Gravity and electromagnetism cannot be unified until they are rendered | true physical dualism with respect to the point- and extension-geometries of spac

Gravity and electromagnetism cannot be unified until they are rendered | true physical dualism with respect to the point- and extension-geometries of spac

From a more practical and timely point of view, this structure of the single field and space-time agrees completely with the Big Bang model of the universe. The Big Bang model is just a reverse sequence of the above explanation. Beginning from an initial infinitesimal point of seemingly unending (infinite) potential, the single field begins to expand into the undefined void surround- ing it and thus creates space and time. The expansion occurs as a three-dimensional (surface) bubble of extremely dense single field expanding three-dimensionally as well as into the fourth dimension of space. When the single field density along the fourth direction of expansion reaches a specific quantum limit, quantum fluctuations (quantum stress points) in the single field cause points in the bubble to blow outward (and thus no anti- protons facing inward are created) creating protons when the blown-out portions of space cap themselves off according to the same quantum limits.

From a more practical and timely point of view, this structure of the single field and space-time agrees completely with the Big Bang model of the universe. The Big Bang model is just a reverse sequence of the above explanation. Beginning from an initial infinitesimal point of seemingly unending (infinite) potential, the single field begins to expand into the undefined void surround- ing it and thus creates space and time. The expansion occurs as a three-dimensional (surface) bubble of extremely dense single field expanding three-dimensionally as well as into the fourth dimension of space. When the single field density along the fourth direction of expansion reaches a specific quantum limit, quantum fluctuations (quantum stress points) in the single field cause points in the bubble to blow outward (and thus no anti- protons facing inward are created) creating protons when the blown-out portions of space cap themselves off according to the same quantum limits.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.