Physical Reality - On Dirac, Quaternions and the Wave Structure of Matter in Space by Geoffrey Haselhurst

Geoffrey

I have started reading your essay and think I'll like it. I had, earlier this year, sent in a response to a "Your Cosmology Hypothesis Invited" and it turned up on Google under "Cosmology Hypothesis". My ideas generally run afoul those of the Establishment.

I'd be interested in any real arguments, but not in 'put downs' as these are a 'dime a dozen'.

Jim

Geoffrey:

In the above Post I should have mentioned that I am currently planning to correct errors and revise portions of the Google article.

Jim

Dear Geoffrey Haselhurst,

my congratulations, your essay manifests how elegantly one can overcome with at least two fundamental assumptions!

Why could de Broglie and Schrödinger not defeat the Kopenhagen interpretation with your arguments?

And the same for the light-speed limit; - I am delighted that with your glance on it, it vanishes entirely and the most beautiful interference pattern of matter becomes evident.

Will it complete your picture, if I suggest to take the quaternionic approach also to make the notion of "time" as 4D reality plausible?*

Best wishes!

Renate Quehenberger

*) http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1524

Hi Geoff,

Thanks for your comments on my Essay, I will try to find time to respond to them soon. I have read your essay briefly & given you a high Community rating. Again I will try to find time to give it more attention...

Regards,

Declan Traill

Geoff,

That is a very interesting and concise view of major issues. I can't say I can verify every aspect, but it certainly matches alot of what I see as the direction needed to resolve these problems. There is one additional misconception I would add though. Action creates the effect of time, but we experience it as sequence and physics emphasizes sequence by treating it as a measurement issue between events, rather than a change of configuration. For example, the earth doesn't travel that narrative dimension from yesterday to tomorrow, but tomorrow becomes yesterday because the earth rotates. This makes time an emergent effect of action, similar to temperature. In terms of waves, time is frequency and temperature is amplitude.

I go into much of this is in my own entry. Much of what I write about is the psychology of how something this basic gets overlooked, but sequence is foundational to experience and rationality, so it can be a significant filter to look through. In fact, it seems the more educated the person I point this out to, the more resistant they are to considering it. It really does require stepping back from one's own train of thought for it to really be appreciated.

One would think that if time were a vector from past to future, a faster clock would travel into the future more rapidly, but the opposite is true. Since it ages/burns faster, it travels into the past more quickly. Remember that in the twins thought experiment, the one in the faster frame has died, by the time her twin in the slowed frame has returned, so with every passing day, her life recedes further into the past.

I enjoyed the article. I think it is progressively compelling and logical in its presentation and conclusions.

As a lay person without the advantage of the Math background I found it simplified enough to follow and appreciate!

Good job

If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is [math]R_1 [/math] and [math]N_1 [/math] was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have [math]S_1=R_1 N_1 [/math] of points. After it anyone give you [math]dS [/math] of points so you have [math]S_2=S_1+ dS [/math] of points and [math]N_2=N_1+1 [/math] is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have [math]S_2=R_2 N_2 [/math] of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be: [math]S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] (S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1[/math] In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points [math]dS [/math] then the participant`s rating [math]R_1 [/math] was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

Mr. Haselhurst,

a fine essay. Very upbeat and optimistic too. I especially appreciate this quote:

"What we call empty space is in fact full of waves, but the transverse wave components do not cancel so space vibrates in an infinite variety of patterns, what we now call the quantum field."

You also write, " Basically the terms on the left represent the phase of the complex / vector plane waves of background space that are fundamental to quantum physics, the four terms on the right represent the scalar product of this which is in the four dimensional space-time structure of matter in Einstein's relativity and Schrodinger's relativistic scalar wave equation. "

But do you realize that these vector plane waves live on a 3D surface of a 4D object? General relativity describes how this surface is curved in 4D by a mass. Geometrically, mass is a normal to this hypersurface (perpendicular simultaneously to its all 3 orthogonal planes). Can you describe this geometrical relationship? i.e. how exactly mass relates to light? I mean it in practical terms that go beyond the mass-energy equivalence.

About light you write, " The velocity of light is constant simply because we are dealing with a purely theoretical model of non-accelerated reference frames (which do not exist in reality, gravity exists everywhere) and as explained below all forces / acceleration are due to wave interactions caused by changing velocity of waves."

What changes the velocity of waves?

Also, light, being the property of the medium, its speed of propagation is dictated by the medium. That's what makes it a constant, which is slightly modified by local conditions in the medium. And you claim that non-accelerated reference frames do not exist (!) I like it. I like it far more than an idea of a stationary frame (to the structure of space, as an absolute reference frame) as some here have proposed. But you're saying, neither a non-accelerated reference frame exists. -? I gotta think it over. Never-ever?

Then you say, " Einstein is close to the truth, he was correct that there are no discrete and separate particles, his error was to represent matter as continuous fields in space-time, rather than real waves in continuous space that cause both matter and time."

Cause time? And *where* do they cause matter? According to my geometrical model, the waves you describe live in 3D, on the hypersurface and "cause" matter appear on this surface in the 4th dimension. Perhaps that's how you meant it?

Otherwise, what is time and how is it caused? In my thread I show that Minkowski spacetime is all about 4 spatial dimensions, because time is simply aligned with one of the spatial dimensions, just like we do it in a graph that plots the trajectory of a cannonball. The fact that the time dimension is aligned with one of the spatial dimensions does not make that dimension any less spatial. There is no time dimension separate from 4D space in Minkowski model.

Then you say, " Further, and few people seem to know this, in general relativity the velocity of light depends on the energy density of space, which is correct."

Again, the speed of light is the property of the medium.

You say, " It is correct that matter is a wave structure and can only exist in discrete wave patterns in the atom,.."

What is an atom according to you?

You conclude, "... wave theory of matter is based on the most simple science foundation for describing physical reality and correctly deduces the laws of Nature."

Again, can you describe how exactly energy of waves relate to the curvature of the surface they propagate in? Like here you are saying:

"This slower wave velocity changes the shape of the surface of the plane waves into a curved surface, what is known as the curvature of the four dimensional space time continuum."

-? are you implying that light curves spacetime? If you can show it mathematically so that we could apply it in practice, this would cause a revolution beyond anything we have ever known. Can you?

Sergey G Fedosin is bombing entrants' boards with the same "why your rating has dropped" message. They are all dated Oct. 4... same message.

WTH? I've seen one fine essay drop 89 (eighty-nine) positions, in "Community Rating" in the past 24 hours, and "Sergey's note" came BEFORE it plummeted. Hmm.

The vote/scaling of this contest is quite nebulous.

"Hackers Rule!", I suppose!

Well??? What else is one to think? The General Public is... Watching...

Dear Geoff

"What we call empty space is in fact full of waves..."

If one want to understand nature one has to understand the fabric of space.

You have helped to get closer to understanding this mystery. Thanks.

Sincerely Karoly

Can you market this as proof potentially all religions are correct because of the fact the stories are a human construct and therefore there could be vibrational space existent formulated by the patterns of belief placed? It would be great to say physics says that, so people can act like little quaternions, and be conscious of the waves they are spreading.

I use "actually it's a physics thing, kinda" in my stories, when I explain my whole idea of waves and frequencies and patterns and paths to other people, and they then believe me. 95% more success in people accepting what I have to say, because they believe in physics. I bet you'd get a crazy large percent more people believing you, if you gave faith a nod, plus it would moot a lot of flames of hate. I'd really like physics to pump this whole idea so we could remove religion out of politics and socio-everything, and place it strictly in culture, and get along like little quaternions do, and figure stuff out like that. That, would be a real great way to solve some current global problems.

I don't know how to write that in math. I wish a physics person would do it. Nobody knows whats inside a black hole after the hole, or where the photon dissappears to? I don't know. I imagine I understand, but I may not.

I mean place, when I say quaternion. Each moment, capable of complete change in pathway, infinite. Like a potential. I see potential in this.

Dear Geoff,

I find your essay refreshing and very interesting. I have passed it on to a retired colleague of mine, Jan Boeyens, who I'm sure will also take great delight in the fact that there are other truth seekers out there. He has written several books, too expensive to buy, but you can find them on some Russian and Chinese sites for free ( :-) I did not tell you). One you might enjoy is Chemical Cosmology. He is also just completing an invited chapter entitled Debunking the Big Bang.

Regards,

Demi

(demetrius.levendis@wits.ac.za)