Jump to content

The answer isn’t 42, but it’s not far off.


Gary Manuel
 Share

Recommended Posts

This thread has nothing to do with model flying but I thought that someone out there might be interested. If not, scroll on.

 

I’ve always had an interest in the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything. 
 

I am far from being an expert in quantum physics or cosmology, but the subjects have always interested (and confused) me. I have always had a problem with quantum physics. It’s just too complicated and contrived. It’s based on mathematics derived from experimental observations, which works very well, but has lost touch with reality. Surely nature can’t be that complicated or suddenly become so weird as things get smaller. I have always thought that one day, we will discover how the universe really works and we will be surprised by how simple it is.

 

Well I’ve recently come across THIS website and I think it has a lot of potential. Not for the faint hearted but well worth a read if you are interested in such things.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, Gary Manuel said:

It’s just too complicated and contrived. It’s based on mathematics derived from experimental observations, which works very well, but has lost touch with reality

 

I would say with some certainty that the complexity of any theory (or whether we as mug punters consider it 'contrived') is really quite unimportant compared to whether it correctly predicts experimental outcomes.

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends what you mean by unimportant. The "Shut up and calculate" approach is in daily use and has been very successful. It will continue to be successful in the future too as the maths is obviously sound.

 

The problem is that it has been so successful at predicting results that it now tries to adjust our understanding of reality to fit some of the weirder results. What we should be doing is having a closer look at reality to see what's really happening. Once we understand that, the results will no longer be weird. A full understanding might just allow the 20 years plus Quantum Computer development programme to be completed (or cancelled). This is where a full understanding of what is happening in reality is important.

 

I believe that the EWT project is looking in the right direction, certainly in terms of proposing a single fundamental particle and a periodic particle table. It is of interest that CERN has discovered several new pentaquarks and tetraquarks over the last few weeks - exactly as predicted by EWT. 

 

This is not the place to discuss quantum entanglement, the double slit experiment, wave-particle duality, "spooky action at a distance" etc, but these are the particular areas that I have an issue with. EWT offers reasonable explanations not offered elsewhere. Remember, it's only a hypothesis at the moment, but worth consideration.

Edited by Gary Manuel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Science is full of conjectures, and hypotheses. They become laws and theory from mathematics and experiment.

I don’t understand the Standard Model, even with the help of a friends son who is a researcher and lecturer in theoretical physics at CERN and a major Paris university.

I know the Standard Model has problems, most of the mass in the universe is missing, ie, not enough stuff to explain the gravity it feels, and just some speculation as to what it is that is missing, but at present it’s the best we have got, according to the body of scientists who reckon to know. 
I think the person, or group writing the site found by Gary need to demonstrate the maths fits the observation at least as well as the Standard Model.

Things do get weird. Take light. We have whole industries and processes based on the fact it goes in a straight line. Theodolite. But a black hole is black, because the gravity bends light so it can’t escape

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Don Fry said:

Science is full of conjectures, and hypotheses. They become laws and theory from mathematics and experiment.

I don’t understand the Standard Model, even with the help of a friends son who is a researcher and lecturer in theoretical physics at CERN and a major Paris university.

I know the Standard Model has problems, most of the mass in the universe is missing, ie, not enough stuff to explain the gravity it feels, and just some speculation as to what it is that is missing, but at present it’s the best we have got, according to the body of scientists who reckon to know. 
I think the person, or group writing the site found by Gary need to demonstrate the maths fits the observation at least as well as the Standard Model.

Things do get weird. Take light. We have whole industries and processes based on the fact it goes in a straight line. Theodolite. But a black hole is black, because the gravity bends light so it can’t escape

I agree with everything you have said. It's only a hypothesis and has a lot of questions to answer.

 

The standard model doesn't even attempt to consider gravity because it doesn't fit the known data and also because it's negligible at sub atomic levels. It works but it's incomplete and in places confuses phylosophy with reality. We need to keep searching for a unified theory of everything. 

 

One thing is for certain - nature knows the answer. This is where we need to be looking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Robert Cracknell said:

All this is well and good and beyond me......but, can anyone explain why I cannot get a slice of 'Toastie' bread to fit in my toaster without having to trim one side?

Three dimension toaster, toast is 4 dimensions. Needs to lose one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...