Dear Sir,
Discontinuousness is generally attributed to objects under observation. However, as you have rightly pointed out, our measuring instruments and processes are capable of measurement only in phases. Thus, the discontinuities are due to us and not due to the object of measurement. Since whole is not only the sum of its parts (water is more than hydrogen and oxygen), combining the results of measurements by omitting the unquantifiable, leaves gaps in our knowledge of the object or event. This introduces uncertainty. As you say: "there is a totality comprising of all disconnected or separated universes (or equivalently domains), in which we only can comprehend some chunks while by our nature we glue the disconnected parts together that constitutes an integrality to us".
You have understated the problem of "discrepancy as there is need for large corrections", as it is the biggest ever imaginable discrepancy. There is a need to look at the fundamentals. Energy cannot be 'dark' - non-interacting - as we cannot perceive it directly, but perceive it only through the effects of its interactions. Only because it is smooth and persistent, it cannot be called energy, as fluids have that characteristic. The dark matter concept arose out of the galaxy rotation curve, which uses the 'present rate of expansion' determined by galactic red-shift and the theoretical age of the universe. The mismatch has led to the speculation regarding inflation, which has been accepted on the assumption that since big-bang, the universe is 'expanding' continuously. But the observation of galactic blue-shift and mergers challenge this view. What if the universe is a closed system and big bang is like a pebble thrown to a circular pond? The surface water moves in waves, which rebounds from the periphery. Suppose this process repeats itself as held by ancient Indians. With every cycle, the velocity of 'expansion' would reduce. This will explain why we are at a far ahead location than would be predicted by the current rate of expansion without inflation. This will also explain the anisotropies in the cosmic microwave background.
Because of blue-shift, we can assume that the galaxies appear to move apart at times to come close at other times like the planets in the solar system. This implies that the universe is a closed system which rotates on its axis. This means the galaxy rotation curve is fiction and dark matter/energy concepts myth. We have written about these to the Nobel trio in 2012 without any response.
You are right about the role of plasma (regardless of its charge) in gravitational lensing, as plasma is distributed by gravitational field around stellar objects and refraction law of electromagnetic light would apply depending on its density. In the thread of Dr. Collin Walker, we have discussed this aspect. Regarding relativity, you can see our essay: "Reasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics" in this contest, where we have raised these issues.
Way back in 2007, we had written to Sir Anthony Legget that there is a macro equivalent for every micro object or event including superposition, entanglement and spin without any 'mystery'. We had given the example of Jupiter and proton, whose internal structures are identical. Schrödinger equation in so-called one dimension Hψ = Eψ (it is a second order equation as it contains a term x2, which is in two dimensions and mathematically implies area) is converted to three dimensional by addition of two similar factors for y and z axis. Three dimensions mathematically imply volume. Addition of three (two dimensional) areas does not generate (three dimensional) volume and x2+y2+z2 ≠ (x.y.z). Hence, the Schrödinger equation could not be solved for other than hydrogen atoms. For many electron atoms, the so called solutions simply consider them as many one-electron atoms, ignoring the electrostatic energy of repulsion between the electrons and treating them as point charges frozen to some instantaneous position. Even then, the problem remains to be solved.
If there is symmetry, there cannot be any mechanism to break it without destroying it (human body is one example). The mathematics of Higg's mechanism is questionable. Same with Dirac. SM is bound to remain incomplete as graviton will never be found. In QCD, the non-linearities in the theory have dramatic physical effects. One coherent, non-linear effect of the gluons is to "confine" both the quarks and gluons so that none of these particles can be found directly as excitations of the vacuum. Likewise, a continuous "chiral symmetry", normally exhibited by a theory of light quarks, is broken by the condensation of chirally oriented quark/anti-quark pairs in the vacuum. The resulting physics of QCD is thus entirely different from what one would expect from the underlying theory, with the interaction effects having a dominant influence.
There are many unexplained questions relating to the strings. For example, given the measurement problem of quantum mechanics, what happens when a string is measured? Does the uncertainty principle apply to the whole string? Or does it apply only to some section of the string being measured? Does string theory modify the uncertainty principle? If we measure its position, do we get only the average position of the string? If the position of a string is measured with arbitrarily high accuracy, what happens to the momentum of the string? Does the momentum become undefined as opposed to simply unknown? What about the location of an end-point? If the measurement returns an end-point, then which end-point? Does the measurement return the position of some point along the string? (The string is said to be a Two dimensional object extended in space. Hence its position cannot be described by a finite set of numbers and thus, cannot be described by a finite set of measurements.) How do the Bell's inequalities apply to string theory? We must get answers to these questions first before we probe more and spend (waste!) more money in such research.
In our essay here, we have shown that even the so-called chaotic systems are really not chaotic, but have some underlying mechanism not evident to us.
Regards,
basudeba
