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?