Categories
Physics

Quantum Ontology and Metaphysics

Yesterday I came across videos on YouTube from a research network group called the International Network on Foundations of Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Information. I found their focus intriguing and I want to write a bit about them here. I think their focus is amazingly relevant for NPQG as we enter the immutable point charge era of science. The research group held a workshop in Spring 2021 about upon the ontology and metaphysics of quantum theory. It seems they are covering this space from many angles including technical, philosophical, and historical, including how interpretations were initially intended and the evolution of thought to their modern interpretation.

It is a fascinating and fortuitous time for this group to be doing complimentary research, because now that we know the fundamental implementation of immutable point charges, we can perform a historical analysis of the evolution in thought and determine where deviations from truth occurred. Then we can drill down to really understand what happened and where error was introduced. The key question remains, how have physicists missed this entirely obvious solution of immutable point charges?

The research group website is here, and their YouTube channel is here. Let’s watch this amazing video by Diana Taschetto on her sleuthing the apparently conflicting contemporaneous statements about Planck’s quantum. I’ll provide comments afterwards.

Bravo! Wonderful insights! You are spot on Diana! How can it be possible that everyone has missed the idea of point charges with a Planck size sphere of immutabillity due to a field effect? Everything becomes so entirely obvious from this model and all the nonsense fades away. Let me see if I can capture your logic. I will embellish it with commentary from my perspective.

Diana’s observations :

  1. After over a 100 years, the story which is told about the origins of quantum theory is myth.
  2. Planck’s proof of Planck’s Law was called out by Einstein as not having a firm foundation in the quantum world.
  3. Planck won the 1918 Nobel price for his discovery of the quantum foundation of nature.
  4. It is widely interpreted that Planck’s quantum is discrete and discontinuous.
  5. Yet Kuhn was in the continuous interpretation camp, while Plank straddled continuous vs. indeterminate.

We are so close to physicists having the solution, that I think we should go there first and then return to the historical sleuthing about who knew what and when and why the statements were made. The bottom line is that physicists missed the idea of point charges with a field effect that gives them immutability at the Planck scale. In other words, point charges with an undefined state for 0 < r < Lp/(2pi) or should it be 0 < r <= Lp/(2pi). It probably makes a difference about how the math is specified for the boundary condition. Anyway, take two opposite point charges and let them chase each other in a circular orbit and you get a little machine that transacts angular momementum in h-bar. Now derive Planck’s law either continuously or at the discontinuous ‘quantum’ levels. That’s it. Those dipoles are central to the architecture for all standard matter particles, including spacetime aether particles, which are generally very low energy.

Dear Diana and QM-QI group, In case my statements werent clear, the answer is that the dipole is both continuous and quantum. A point charge dipole can definitely transact angular momentum in multiples of h-bar. But ultimately it is a continuous mechanism of orbiting point charges. So we get the A/C interaction with nearby matter-energy particles that embed dipoles in their structure. That A/C interaction operates more like a continuous floating ground for the purpose of general relativity. Let’s talk and exchange ideas! Everything is actually beautifully simple once you reorient your thinking.


In this talk, Valia Allori talks about quantum realism and makes these two points that stood out for me.

  • “The measurement problem is for the instrumentalist, and realists should never have considered it.”
  • “If you are a robust realist, then you should care about completing quantum theory, not solving the measurement problem.”

0:00 we only need the robust realist case now that there is a solution to nature given by immutable point charges.

3:00 the measurement problem is a red herring. The quantum is just a circuit effect in the most basic structure, the point charge dipole. The dipole can transact units of angular momentum, no surprise there, and it adjusts its frequency and radius accordingly. Also that basic point charge dipole is a perfect black body and produces Planck’s Law emission curve. Structures have a fair number of point charges, and we can probably model them fairly precisely now given that nature is sort of closed form math, in a roiling sea of energy ripples.

5:00 Collapse of the wave function is entirely mundane adjustment to the basic electrino-positrino orbiting point charge mechanism. When this mechanism transacts angular momentum in h-bar the radius and velocity of the line of travel of the point charges must change. This switching of orbital tracks is the mildest form of what has been called collapse of the wave function. Of course, there are reactions which make major changes to structure and that of course can involve major changes to wave functions.

8:00 You don’t need a high dimensional space to represent nature and the universe. A Euclidean 3D space and absolute forward moving linear time will do nicely. That’s only four dimensions. Now you can start counting additional natural rules as dimensions, I suppose. Point charges come in the -e/6 electrino and +e/6 positrino. That’s it for your charge dimension at the foundation. Of course you can mix and match these in structures that may or may not be stable under various conditions. It’s easy to map all the standard matter particles into counts of electrinos and positrinos.

Figuring out the structure is a bit more challenging, but suffice it to say that 3 nested electrino-positrino orbits at different energy levels makes a generation 1 energy core of the kind found in standard model fermions and photons. So energy, yes that is a dimension. It comes in kinetic and electromagnetic forms in the point charge world. So you can dimension that out as you want – it’s a continuous dimension, but some structures transact in energy quanta. Then of course the math and geometry must be defined for the electromagnetic fields, permittivity, and permeability as well as the classical kinetic operations. It will be interesting to see how the precise mathematical and software modeling of the point charge universe evolves. I bet some beautiful and very short proofs will emerge.

10:00 Hi Valia. The particle physicists just stopped one layer short. It is all so easy. There is an electrino at -e/6 and a positrino at +e/6 and that’s it. Euclidean space and time. The formulas for standard matter particles are expressed as electrinos : positrinos.

  • Proton 15 : 21
  • Neutron 18 : 18
  • Electron 9 : 3
  • Electron neutrino 3:3
  • Muon neutrino 2:2
  • Tau neutrino 1:1
  • Muon 8 : 2
  • Photon 6 : 6

So no wonder it is confusing because these emergent point charge structures do present quite a complicated wavefront especially considering their internal point charge orbits. Yet, they are still particles, albeit quite a bit smaller at radius = Planck length divided by 2 pi. Anyway, I think your analysis is really intersting, but the going will be much easier once you adopt the point charge model because then you will have fundamental model truth as a platform for comparison to historical alternatives.

24:00 Many worlds is snake oil.

30:00 It is much easier to have this debate about realism at the next level down, which is just two point charges that are immutable at Lp/tau and they carry energy and there is a distribution in a Euclidean 3D space and 1D time. Once you get to the immutable point charge layer, what you have is a mathematical model expressed in physical and geometrical terms. Is that real? How exactly is the immutability implemented? Perhaps the math will reveal that clue.

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California : May 6, 2021

p.s. Nature is a trickster. I just realized that when the classical world dropped ~20 orders of magnitude in size in one step, it threw the physicists off track. Then from first principles of nature, emerges stretchy curvy dipoles that provide energy for all standard matter particles and that scales back up!

By J Mark Morris

I am imagining and reverse engineering a model of nature and sharing my journey via social media. Join me! I would love to have collaborators in this open effort. To support this research please donate: https://www.paypal.me/johnmarkmorris

https://johnmarkmorris.com
https://twitter.com/J_Mark_Morris
https://www.reddit.com/r/NPQG/
https://www.facebook.com/NPQG/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnmarkmorris/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s