Herbert Maierhofer
Philosopher of quantum physics
Preface
This text is about the interpretation of quantum mechanics from my point of view!
The official „Copenhagen interpretation“ in scientific circles, on which Nils Bor and Werner Heisenberg once agreed, is not an interpretation in the
sense of how to understand the results of the mathematical model, but explicitly states that they cannot be explained logically. But this would not even be necessary, because the mathematical predictions were sufficient and their confirmation in the experiment. A statement with which I, as a non-studied contemporary, cannot be satisfied. I was always convinced, because we ourselves are a product of this physics, that there must be an approach to this physics that can be understood.
QM is the basis for the description of physics at the atomic level. Its mathematical construct has been proven by thousands of experiments up to the tenth decimal place, so that we can speak of a really secure theory,
I assume. At first glance, the findings of the QM are indeed highly odd and seem to contradict common sense. For example, the wave-particle duality, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, the „spooky action at a distance“ of entangled particles. The aim of this text is to explain these phenomena in a logically comprehensible way.
The starting point
I found the access by chance a long time ago. The starting point was an article in a monthly scientific journal about the paradoxes of Zeno. Zeno of Elea was a Greek thinker around 630 B.C. He had the following train of thought:
A fast runner and a slow runner race each other. The fast one gives the slow one a head start. As the fast one starts later, he reaches a place where the
slow one had already been before, but this one is logically a bit further.
The gap between the slow and the fast is getting smaller and smaller.
But no matter how small the gap, the slow one is always a little bit
further. The fast can’t outrun the slow one!
The article concluded with the statement that this paradox can be solved today with the help of infinitesimal calculus.
But for me this is no solution! I don’t know this kind of calculation, however, in my opinion it can only be a kind of mathematical sleight of hand to deal with infinity. It does not bring a logical solution for the problem.
Every logical conclusion consists of three parts: the initial condition, the logical conclusion, and the result.
As the result in our paradox is obviously false, and the logical conclusion is indisputably correct, only the initial condition can be wrong.
Zeno assumes that the way is infinitely divisible. In his conception the distance was an abstract idea in his head, and there was no reason why it should not be be infinitely divisible.
Today we know that the distance is a connection of two points in real three-dimensional space. This space is influenced, as we know since Einstein, by mass. But only a real, existing substance („substance“ as synonym for something really existing) can be influenced. However, we can now observe that there is no substance in the universe (whether it is matter or energy) that is not quantized, i.e. consists of the smallest particles. So it is not so far-fetched to assume that space is quantized, too.
Under this assumption not only Zenon’s paradox is solved, but also all strange phenomena of QM are explained.
If the space is quantized, and the fast runner is in the last quantum of space behind the slow runner, then in the next space quantum he will be in front of him. He quasi „tunnels“ from space quantum to space quantum. But this means that movement does not take place in the three-dimensional space!!
Zenon also noted that when an arrow is shot, you can only ever see the place,
to which it is currently attached, but never see it flying.
We can only say that it is either there, there, or there! If it is there, however, it does not move. Existence and moving at the same time exclude each other logically!
It is no coincidence that in the representation of movement we rely on the juxtaposition of still images. In principle, movement is not conceivable in any other way at all. If we assume that the three-dimensional space is not continuous but is quantized, then “ between“ the space quanta must be the „dimensionless non-space“. I call it the „Platonic space“ – expansionless – timeless. Platonic therefore, because Platon opposes a metaphysical correspondence to every real appearance. In it, the 3D space quanta are quasi embedded like a liquid.
Correspondence in QM
This explains the wave-particle dualism:
In 3D space, „effects“ appear as particles without momentum (motion).
In Platonic space, the “ effect“ is a wave-like impulse without exact location,which corresponds exactly to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Also the spooky distant effect of entangled particles explains itself self-evidently.
While the particles undergo a change in the three-dimensional, in the
expansionless Platonic space they are are always connected to each other.
The continuous fluctuation between 3D space and Platonic space is also
the reason why everything is connected to everything else in this universe.
Correspondence in the Theory of Relativity
However, not only all the results of QM can be obtained logically consistently under the assumption of a quantized space, but also the explanation of the no less strange results of Einstein’s theory of relativity, like the speed of light as the highest possible speed, the Lorentz contraction, the time dilation.
Imagining the space quanta as elastic spheres with the property of 3-dimensionality, which are deformed by the pressure of a pending impulse in impulse direction, so that a sphere becomes an ellipsoid, explains the Lorentz contraction! It is also obvious that with a larger impulse (faster movement) there is a larger deformation and also a larger resistance. At the speed of light the 3-dimensonality is deformed to 2-dimensionality !!!
This means: A black hole is a 2-dimensional membrane in 3-dimensional space. This again implies that behind the Schwarzschild horizon there is no space with a singularity in the middle. I see a proof for this assertion in the fact that the entropy in a black hole increases with the 2nd and not with the 3rd power.
When an impulse leaves a quantum of space, the energy previously expended is returned to the impulse. This explains the conservation of momentum and the inertia. By the deformation of the space quanta by the momentum, density fluctuations arise. From this, the gravity can be wonderfully derived.
Conclusion
The impulse (movement) experiences a resistance during the fluctuation from space quantum to space quantum, comparable to a movement in water. The faster, the greater the resistance. This resistance is noticeable as mass inertia during acceleration and deceleration. The simultaneous deformation of the space quanta creates a density difference, which is manifested as gravitation! The mass of particles at rest comes from the motion of the constituent particles, for example in protons from the motion of the quarks!
If one takes this fact as given, then this also explains the observable expansion of the cosmos without the assumption of a dark energy. The general cooling of the cosmos of course also results in a lower average momentum pressure on the space quanta. These are thereby deformed less, the space becomes larger! Also the assumption of a dark matter is not necessary in my opinion, because in cosmic distances it cannot be based on a rigid gravitational constant. In this case I am convinced that the MOND theory is a much more realistic approach. Also the structure formation in the cosmos with its galaxy clusters, the filaments and the large voids could be due to the fact that, on average, low-pulse areas expand much more than spaces which are filled with more matter.
Afterword
These thoughts are my purely personal approach to understanding the cosmos. I post them out of curiosity to see what other people have to say about them. Therefore, there is also the possibility of comments here. Maybe someone picks up one or the other thought and can mathematically prove it. In the theory of black holes as a two-dimensional membrane, for example, I am absolutely sure.
Herbert Maierhofer
He lives and thinks in the south of Austria.
Schreibe einen Kommentar