Quantum mechanics introduced the concept of uncertainty but does quantum mechanics truly understand the root cause of uncertainty?
Each particle will be influenced by gravitational waves, which are quite significant as we get down to the fine accounting for energy. Energy is conserved and this means we need to keep track of every energy increment all the way down to the finest scale. We know from deBroglie that where w = angular frequency. We can imagine that the particle shell in NPQG is rotating and each rotation x QM spin corresponds to Planck’s constant h joule-secs of orbital energy. This yields an entirely new physical interpretation of uncertainty, where that energy threshold at 1/2 a transfer turns out to be h/2. A tipping point. And that means EPR was correct because entanglement is apparently higher energy than h/2. So long Bell tests, may I show you the door? Goodbye spooky action at a distance.
Does this argument have the makings of a publishable proof? It’s short but logical and cogent. This might be a good candidate publication idea for the following reasons :
- it is brief
- it ties together some very weighty topics
- it is a different way to think about existing knowledge
- it does not require a detailed exposition about NPQG
I have complex and mixed feelings about journal publishing. I am philosophically opposed to many aspects of the academic journal publishing model. I am also free to state my opinion because I am not playing the physics career game and am not constrained by the onerous journal publishing rules (spoken and unspoken) that reinforce hierarchical power in academic research organizations.
On the other hand there are positive aspects to publication with known and competent referees. Even though I find the current publication model abhorrent, given that I have a decent understanding of this situation and a vision for a better solution, I might reluctantly try to publish again at some point.
I think I’ve architected the machine that quantum mechanics, GR, QM/QFT/QED, LQG, Bohmian mechanics, and string theory can run upon. There is a lot of design and implementation to do and I’ve started an open source project at https://github.com/edwardbarak/NPQG. I’m envisioning building up demonstration and learning reference models, that can show both Euclidean (Map 1) and ‘Planckified Riemannian’ (Map 2) observer frames. Existing models will need to write to NPQG APIs and may be informed by new insights via NPQG.
J Mark Morris : San Diego : California : August 5, 2020