Thursday, October 4, 2012

I got a very interesting comment from TinaK (see below, more added now):

"I found this amazing Theory of Something 3 days ago via a WOW remark at Yahoo News. I have not read all yet but to me this looks like you are closing up after Einstein and that quantum physics lead all scientists into a gigantic ghost hunt! You seem to even finishing Maxwell’s work 150 years ago and getting Einstein’s findings into a “Something” that can be understood and you are showing. Isn’t that the case?"

GD: Thanks for your kind and observant observation, even if I would not express it as a “gigantic ghost hunt” :-)  Some things are difficult to understand and grasp when everyone is going in the same direction.

"One of the most amazing things I see is that “there is no mass”. kg = As^2/m^3! When thinking about that, isn’t it strange that kg shows up in a pure simple electric law like Coloumb’s? The force between two charges doesn’t have anything to do with mass, yet both in force F and epsilon-zero the kg comes in. Kg should have been eliminated already then, shouldn’t it? How could that have happened?"

GD: Your comment on Coulomb’s law (that the force between static electric charges of course should not include mass - kg - at all) is very noteworthy and interesting. That should have been observed and sorted out long ago. 

I looked it up and it seems that “mistake” happened when Current (A) was added as a base unit in 1933-1946 (the World War II came in between). Having just the 3 base units Length (m or cm), Time (s) and Mass (kg or g) before (Even for electrical units!) lead to confusing systems, so Current (A) was added. But one should then have made kg a derived unit As2/m3 and stayed with only 3 base units instead of increasing them to 4.

Maybe that would have stopped the “ghost hunt” trying to find mass and gravity in particles, when they are mechanisms.

Maybe I will do a table to show what happens when eliminating one of the four base units - You can actually eliminate anyone of them, but only replacing kg with As2/m3 makes sense and a very beautiful system, see the table at Viewer's Q&A.

More from TinaK, October 4:
"Thanks for your responses! What about Quantum Mechanics and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle in 1927, didn’t that contribute to the scientific “ghost hunt” where everyone still is going (String Theory and QLG latest)? I saw some views on that your Q&A page: > Does Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle Apply?"

GD: Yes, my comment is at Viewer's Q&A.

We electricians know that we cannot understand some things by just looking at frequencies on a spectrum analyzer (like using your ears but closing your eyes) (=Quantum Mechanics). To understand the reality, you also (firstly) need to use an oscilloscope and look at a signal in the time domain (like using your eyes) (=classical electricity or mechanics). You cannot find out how a violin is designed just by analyzing its frequencies, without even knowing whether it is a tape recorder, an iPod or a real violin you are trying to describe! 

I don’t understand why current quantum theories don’t consider that and realize that such methods have their limits. It may never be possible to describe mechanisms such as Einstein’s gravity (and now also Mass in the ToS 4.3) using Quantum Mechanics.

But Quantum Mechanics has made valuable predictions which have been confirmed in experiments when you don’t have a clue of what it is you are describing :-)  But I don’t think it is applicable to more complex things.


I'm adding some of the answers to viewer's most interesting questions from here and there under the new Viewer's Q&A page. Hope that contributes to our understanding of the universe.

I saw a ToS discussion group has started up at linked-inThey seem to await someone reading up on the ToS and are having a general discussion until then.

6 comments:

  1. I found this amazing Theory of Something 3 days ago via a WOW remark at Yahoo News. I have not read all yet but to me this looks like you are closing up after Einstein and that quantum physics lead all scientists into a gigantic ghost hunt! You seem to even finishing Maxwell’s work 150 years ago and getting Einstein’s findings into a “Something” that can be understood and you are showing. Isn’t that the case?

    I Googled around and found your comments on http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/9534181/Even-a-theory-of-everything-has-limits.html and http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/blog/2012/09/why-is-gravity-such-a-weakling but did not see their response or reaction yet. Are there more places to be looked for scientist’s reaction at?

    One of the most amazing things I see is that “there is no mass”. kg = As^2/m^3! When thinking about that, isn’t it strange that kg shows up in a pure simple electric law like Coloumb’s? The force between two charges doesn’t have anything to do with mass, yet both in force F and epsilon-zero the kg comes in. Kg should have been eliminated already then, shouldn’t it? How could that have happened?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You find answers to your interesting questions in the blog post above.

      Delete
  2. Thanks for your responses! What about Quantum Mechanics and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle in 1927, didn’t that contribute to the scientific “ghost hunt” where everyone still is going (String Theory and QLG latest)? I saw some views on that your Q&A page: > Does Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle Apply?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks again for your responses. I have read all of the 112 pages of the ToS and we really need to revise our view on reality – You have discovered the reality behind the mysticism and major questions from the smallest particle to the whole universe. I don’t see how the derived mechanical physical laws and much more can be disputed – has anyone done that?

    When coming to chapter 8.2.2, I really got shocked (again) when you show that simple electromagnetic formulas can describe the negtrino itself. Just seeing the negtrino as something like a cylinder of negative charge spinning at speed of light, the formulas give a negtrino length of 0.5 pm (which corresponds to the size of atom cores if there is contact between the negtrinos) and that the force reaches out 1.4 pm or so.

    That is so cool – The elementary negtrino particle is just curled up electricity and can be described by simple electromagnetic formulas!

    Have you noticed how close that is to the Strong Force in Quantum Mechanics?
    Wikipedia says about the Strong Force: “The strong interaction is observable in two areas: on a larger scale (about 1 to 3 femtometers (fm)), it is the force that binds protons and neutrons (nucleons) together to form the nucleus of an atom. On the smaller scale (less than about 0.8 fm, the radius of a nucleon), it is also the force (carried by gluons) that holds quarks together to form protons, neutrons and other hadron particles.”

    Doesn’t that show that the Standard Model with different forces, gluons etc., is part of the gigantic ghost hunt that no one seems to question these days?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great observation that the reach of Quantum Mechanics' Strong Force matches the reach of the magnetic force of the negtrino in composed particles. There is a longer response next post.

      Delete

Real Time Web Analytics