NEOCLASSICAL PHYSICS AND QUANTUM GRAVITY *Imagine that nature emerges from ample pairs of immutable Planck radius spherical particles, the electrino and the positrino, which are equal yet oppositely charged. These are the only carriers of energy, in electromagnetic and kinetic form. The are located in an infinite 3D Euclidean space (non curvy) and observe classical mechanics and Maxwell’s equations. 𝗡𝗣𝗤𝗚 explores this recipe for nature and how it emerges as a narrative and theory that is compatible with GR, QM, modified Λ*CDM, *yet superior in ability to explain the universe and resolve open problems. **For *𝗡𝗣𝗤𝗚* basics see: Idealized Neoclassical Model and the NPQG Glosssary.*

A calamitous series of mis-interpretations has derailed physics and cosmology onto extremely difficult lines of attack where complexity and confusion reign and progress is slowed. I’ll list these in rough time order.

**MICHELSON AND MORLEY 1887**

In 1887 Michelson and Morley failed to detect the spacetime æther. They could not measure how lightly spacetime æther interacts at the low energy density on earth. Spacetime is structured out of particles. ** Observations are always vulnerable to that which they can not observe!** See A Vulnerability in the Mathematics of Physics.

**Hypothesis : IF spacetime ****æther**

**æther**

##### 1) **is the **transducer and accumulator for gravity, and

##### 2) local permittivity and permeability of the **æther** determines photon *absolute* Euclidean speed, and

##### 3) behaves such that the **æther** based observer always perceives photon c speed as a constant,

##### THEN it would be undetectable by Michelson-Morley and experiments to date.

##### HINT : Use the relative strength of the force of gravity in your solution.

Here is an interesting project which I am adding to my list and I welcome collaborators. I know some of you are skeptical about my work, but consider that this project shows why it is complicated (at least for me). First I have to un-think Einstein and spacetime as a geometry. Then I have to think about what is happening in an absolute Euclidean frame. Then I have to show that an observer in an spacetime æther would see what Einstein asserted. Hopefully you will understand that it has been difficult to communicate this idea to physicists because they are conditioned to defend against bad ideas that waste time. The problem is of course that the truly revolutionary idea is indistinguishable and will be rejected as well.

I am thinking in absolute Euclidean space as if Einstein’s spacetime is a composite particle based æther that changes shape with energy.

Examining the strength of the forces we see that the strength of gravity is tens of orders of magnitude below the other forces. Gravity appears to be well below what is detectable, but we’ll need to show that calculation.

Consider that structure emerges from Planck sphere electrinos and positrinos. Is it possible that one of those structures is an AC carrier of the electric field? I mean it is a bit complicated. There’s orbits and continuous energy exchanges between kinetic and electromagnetic form and field propagation at local c. But that’s at the Planck level. Anyway, do you think it impossible that nature evolved an AC transmission mode as a feature of the spacetime æther? That’s pretty much all you need right? The strength of that AC coupling is a function of local energy. I mean think about drilling down from a computer to chip to gates to silicon and doping and field effects and keep going all the way to Planck scale? Why not? And that’s just one set of reactions.

**EINSTEIN**

Einstein’s general relativity (1917) should have been based on a Euclidean 3D space permeated by a physical spacetime æther – where electromagnetic energy density causes a local permittivity and permeability that determines c. The consideration of physical limits, rather than mathematical continuum, would have translated into an maximally dense matter-energy core rather than a singularity and all the nonsense that followed.

**FRIEDMANN**

Wikipedia

Friedmann in 1922 introduced the idea of an expanding universe that contained moving matter. Correspondence with Einstein suggests that Einstein was unwilling to accept the idea of an evolving Universe and worked instead to modify his equations to ensure a static eternal Universe as believed from Newton’s time. Some years later, in 1926 Hubble published the redshift vs distance relationship, namely, all the galaxies in the neighborhood seemed to be receding at a rate proportional to their distance.

In 1922 Fridman was the first to derive the idea of an expanding universe from Einstein’s equations of general relativity. The error was conceptual in that space does expand local to each galaxy, but the universe is steady state.

**LEMAITRE**

Wikipedia

Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître (July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian Catholic priest, mathematician, astronomer, and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain. He was the first to identify that the recession of nearby galaxies can be explained by a theory of an expanding universe, which was observationally confirmed soon afterwards by Edwin Hubble. He was the first to derive what is now known as Hubble’s law, or the Hubble–Lemaître law, and made the first estimation of what is now called the Hubble constant, which he published in 1927, two years before Hubble’s article. Lemaître also proposed what later became known as the “Big Bang theory” of the origin of the universe, initially calling it the “hypothesis of the primeval atom”.

Lemaître made the error of planting the seed that the universe could be traced back to a single originating point.

**FIFTH SOLVAY CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONS AND PHOTONS 1927**

Also in 1927, at Solvay, quantum mechanics took wing. In the following decades the Q-fields, QM, QFT, QED, and QCD, went hook, line, and sinker as believers in the geometry of spacetime. Had they known spacetime was an æther they would have evolved differently and quickly and may have solved nature by 1950 if not earlier.

**HOYLE**

Cosmology’s Century – Peebles

Fred Hoyle coined the term “big bang” for a lecture on BBC radio in March 1949. It was meant as a pejorative; Hoyle favored the steady-state picture.

**McKELLAR, PENZIAS, WILSON**

The CMB was re-discovered in 1964 by Wilson and Penzias of Bell Labs. Since spacetime was assumed to be a geometry, and not an æther, the CMB was attributed to distant radiation.

Since 1975 or so, it is said the major theoretical work on the standard model was essentially complete. On the theory side, progress has been nil since then.

By 1980 it became the era of enormous experimentation with gloriously expensive equipment and huge teams of collaborators. And organizational approach to physics. Dilbert. Office Space. Post-grad drones. Any follower of NPQG knows that chipping away from 10^-20 is a long ways away from electrino and positrino Planck spheres at 10^-35.

**GUTH**

When the idea for an inflationary big bang and expansion was formulated circa 1981 by Guth (et al.). As an origin story it should not have been tied to a single event in time.

**NATARAJAN AND REES**

Circa 1995 Natarajan and Rees missed an opportunity to realize that AGN SMBH were the primary implementation of inflation, Big Bang, and expansion.

*J Mark Morris : San Diego : California : June 25, 2020 : v1*

*p.s. I will add more to the timeline as I encounter historical material.*