Dear Sir,
You have correctly pointed out that "Reality is mind dependent" (perception dependent) and space and time form the background entity. We have described it in our essay "Information Hides in the Glare of Reality" published on May 31, where we have linked perception to the fundamental forces of Nature.
Reality must be invariant under similar conditions at all times. The validity of a physical theory is judged by its correspondence to reality. In a mirage, what one sees is a visual misrepresentation caused by the differential air density due to varying temperature gradient. All invariant information consistent with physical laws, i.e. effect of distance, angle, temperature, etc, is real. Since the perception of mirage is not invariant from different distances, it is not real.
We have briefly described in our essay, but elaborately proved in various threads here (specifically those of Dr. Paul Reed) without contradiction, but many support, that, the basic foundations of SR are wrong descriptions of Nature. The concept of measurement changed with the problem of measuring the length of a moving rod. Two possibilities suggested by Einstein were either to move with the rod and measure its length or take a photograph of the two ends of the moving rod and measure the length in the scale at rest frame. However, the second method, advocated by Einstein, is faulty because if the length of the rod is small or velocity is small, then length contraction will not be perceptible according to his formula. If the length of the rod is big or velocity is comparable to that of light, then light from different points of the rod will take different times to reach the recording device and the picture we get will be distorted due to different Doppler shift.
Length contraction is only apparent from the stationary frame and cannot be real for the moving frame. Example: When we move away from a hill, its height appears to decrease in a fixed proportion. What the man on the platform sees cannot affect the train. The passenger on the train will not notice any length contraction. However, time dilation is real in a different sense. All experiments conducted to prove time dilation are defective. Data from the first experiment available in US naval archives proves that it was fudged. In GPS etc, the time dilation is due to the differential refractive index of the medium, such as the air density, which slows down the velocity of light. Time dilation has meaning only in relative terms of cyclic evolutionary sequences. The evolutionary cycles are different for different categories or different species of the same category. Their evolution over universal time (Einstein's clock at A) can lead to comparative time dilation.
Similarly, we have proved that the definition of simultaneity by Einstein violates the principle of relativity as his clock at A is a privileged frame of reference, with which, he synchronizes the clocks at B and C. We have also shown that the equivalence principle is a wrong description of facts, as it leads to the Russell's paradox in set theory.
There are a large number of different approaches to the foundations of QM. Each approach is a modification of the theory that introduces some new aspect with new equations which need to be interpreted. Thus there are many interpretations of QM. Every theory has its own model of reality. There is no unanimity regarding what constitutes reality. Hence there is a necessity of first harmonizing between these interpretations and defining reality precisely.
All these are happening due to an overdependence on mathematical modeling, the cult of incomprehensibility, search for easier and faster ways like reductionism, and superstitious belief in the established theories. Mathematics explains only "how much" one quantity accumulates or reduces in an interaction involving similar or partly similar quantities and not "what", "why", "when", "where", or "with whom" about the objects involved in such interactions. These are the subject matters of physics.
The problem of division by zero that has led to "renormalization" because the result is supposed to be infinity is erroneous and contrary to mathematical principles. If you divide 20 by 5, then what you actually do is take out bunches of 5 from the lot of 20. When the lot becomes empty or the remainder is below 5, so that it cannot be considered a bunch and taken away further, the number of bunches of 5 are counted. That gives the result of division as 4. In case of division by zero, you take out bunches of zero. At no stage the lot becomes zero or less than zero. Thus, the operation is not complete and result of division cannot be known, just like while dividing 20 by 5, you cannot start counting the result after taking away three bunches. Conclusion: division by zero leaves the number unchanged. This is contained in an ancient mathematical treatise "Ganita Saara Samgraha" written by Mahavira.
Uncertainty is inherent in Nature because of inter-connectedness and interdependence of everything with everything else. When we try to measure something, the result of measurement will not only rest on our operation, but also the environment in which we operate. Even our measuring device and its functioning will be subject to the density fluctuations in the environment that will change the income pulse from the outgoing pulse. Heisenberg was right that "everything observed is a selection from a plentitude of possibilities and a limitation on what is possible in the future". But his logic and the mathematical format of the uncertainty principle: ε(q)η(p) ≥ h/4π are wrong.
The inequality: ε(q)η(p) ≥ h/4π or as it is commonly written: δx. δp ≥ ħ permits simultaneous determination of position along x-axis and momentum along the y-axis; i.e., δx. δpy = 0. Hence the statement that position and momentum cannot be measured simultaneously is not universally valid. Further, position has fixed coordinates and the axes are fixed arbitrarily from the origin. Position along x-axis and momentum along y-axis can only be related with reference to a fixed origin (0, 0). If one has a non-zero value, the other has indeterminate (or relatively zero) value (if it has position say x = 5 and y = 7, then it implies that it has zero momentum with reference to the origin. Otherwise either x or y or both would not be constant, but will have extension). Multiplying both position (with its zero relative momentum) and momentum of the same particle (which is possible only at a different time t1 when the particle moves), the result will always be zero. Thus no mathematics is possible between position (fixed coordinates) and momentum (mobile coordinates) as they are mutually exclusive in space and time. They do not commute. Hence, δx.δpy = 0.
Nature Physics (2012) (doi:10.1038/nphys2194) describes a neutron-optical experiment that records the error of a spin-component measurement as well as the disturbance caused on another spin-component. The results confirm that both error and disturbance obey the Masanao Ozawa's relation: ε(q)η(p) + σ(q)η(p) + σ(p)ε(q) ≥ h/4π but violate the old one in a wide range of experimental parameters. Even when either the source of error or disturbance is held to nearly zero, the other remains finite.
Quantization being opposed to inter-connectedness and interdependence, will only add to the chaos. The degree of uncertainty and manipulations (contrary to mathematical principles) of Maxwell's equations also confuse everything as shown below. The wave function is determined by solving Schrödinger's differential equation:
d2ψ/dx2 + 8π2m/h2 [E-V(x)]ψ = 0.
By using a suitable energy operator term, the equation is written as Hψ = Eψ. The way the equation has been written, it appears to be an equation in one dimension, but in reality it is a second order equation signifying a two dimensional field, as the original equation and the energy operator contain a term x2. The method of the generalization of the said Schrödinger equation to the three spatial dimensions (adding two more equal terms by replacing x with y and z) does not stand mathematical scrutiny. A three dimensional equation is a third order equation implying volume. Addition of three areas does not generate volume [x+y+z ≠ (x.y.z)] and [x2+y2+z2 ≠ (x.y.z)]. Thus, there is no wonder that it has failed to explain spectra other than hydrogen. The so-called success in the case of helium and lithium spectra gives results widely divergent from observation.
Thus, there is a necessity to revisit the foundations of physics and rewrite the theories.
Regards,
basudeba
