Describe particles as spherically harmonic waves (i.e. balls of EM), and the double slit scattering patterns fall out using Maxwell's equations, with no recourse to quantum mechanics This approach can also be used to classicaly derive the results of the Aspect experiment which is the classic demonstration of the entanglement/spooky-action-at-a-distance thing. I'm sounding like a commercial, but check out http://www.blacklightpower.com/. The maths gets pretty hardcore, but the general overview (and its implications) is damned impressive in itself...
It'll be easy - they'll set up a committe, commission 'Project Phoenix', allocate $20 billion to it, Lockheed and Thiokol will fight for 10 years over who gets to design it, it'll get built in 20-25 years due to problems with the cup holders, everyone will forget what it was for in the first place, it'll get parked outside Cape Canaveral as an exhibit, and shortly afterwards get melted by the global rain of battery acid, which NASA had decided years ago "Probably wouldn't be too bad if it came to it, probably..."
The problem is, aside from string/m-/p-/superstring- etc. theories, we haven't really come that far since Schroedinger, Planck, Dirac, Heisenberg, Einstein et al.. Most of modern physics is based on purely mathematical theory, with little discernable basis in the physical world. Hence, for all of the things that modern physics has accomplished, we're still without a unified theory.
For all of the extra dimensions, predictions of superstrings, dark matter (and the associated WIMPS, MACHOs etc.), dark energy and so on, these things are, on the whole, educated guesses, and more importantly, none of these things has been observed! Unfortunately, it seems to be endemic in the physics community that is is acceptable to spend years forming fantastic theories based on these guesses. Just because the math seems to be significant, it may not have any real-world basis whatsoever.
I liken it to a mathematical integration: choose appropriate boundary conditions and variables, and you will reach a logical, structured, useful result. Choose the wrong parameters, and you can carry on the calculation forever, and, while it may seem like you are making progress toward a solution, you will never reach the answer. Modern atomic, nuclear and sub-nuclear physics was born from Schroedingers equation of the wavefunction of the hydrogen atom. The boundary condition he used states that the amplitude of the wavefunction goes to zero as the domain approaches infinity - leading to all the things we know and love about particle physics (probability waves, uncertainty, wave-particle duality etc.) Unfortunately, that boundary condition was a *guess*, which happened to give meaningful answers, which in turn led people to believe that it was CORRECT and it developed into aforementioned sprawling wierdness. However, use a different boundary condition (quantized non-radiation of radially accelerated charges, i.e. electrons not radiating while in particular energy levels, a theorem provable in several ways using Maxwell's equations and experimentally well verified) and you get a much simpler answer which only uses Newtonian mechanics, Maxwellian electromagnetism and momentum/energy conservation. From this approach, you can come up with stuff that the other theories lay awake at night sweating about.
Sorry about the rant, I spent 5 years of my life immersed in this (vis a vis, I've done my research;) ). THEREFORE: (there is a point to all this...), perhaps the scientific community ought not to so readily resort to the "my theory's got [more dimensions / more dangly Kaluza-Klein thingies / leakier m-branes] than yours" game, and have a look at the physical reality of their theories...
And all for the sake of maintaining the initial (unnecessary and insufficient) postulate that phi(x)->0 as x-->infinity in the Schrodinger equation... (http://www.blacklightpower.com/ - read the book, it's good...)
Unlike, err, Time Cubes (sorry), the math checks out on this one - sub-ground state hydrogen makes up the dark matter, we don't need extra dimensions, quantum mechanics is fundamentally, well, wrong, etc. etc. etc.
P.S. I did four years of physics at a very good university, and my conclusion was this: mainstream physics is barking up the wrong tree...
Has anyone ever pointed out to an obsessive overclocker that letting silicon get too cold is as bad as letting it get too hot?
PHYSICS LESSON - if a silicon chip gets too hot, too many electrons occupy higher energy 'conductive' states, so semiconductivity becomes less efficient - HOWEVER - if the chip is too cold, it takes a bucket more energy to get them up there in the first place, so again, the chip operates less efficiently.
Dunno what the optimum temperature is, but lets just say that using liquid nitrogen WILL MAKE YOUR COMPUTER GRIND TO A HALT. It'd be a good laugh though.
Ok - I've finished now.
Slashdot Mirror
Describe particles as spherically harmonic waves (i.e. balls of EM), and the double slit scattering patterns fall out using Maxwell's equations, with no recourse to quantum mechanics This approach can also be used to classicaly derive the results of the Aspect experiment which is the classic demonstration of the entanglement/spooky-action-at-a-distance thing.
I'm sounding like a commercial, but check out http://www.blacklightpower.com/. The maths gets pretty hardcore, but the general overview (and its implications) is damned impressive in itself...
It'll be easy - they'll set up a committe, commission 'Project Phoenix', allocate $20 billion to it, Lockheed and Thiokol will fight for 10 years over who gets to design it, it'll get built in 20-25 years due to problems with the cup holders, everyone will forget what it was for in the first place, it'll get parked outside Cape Canaveral as an exhibit, and shortly afterwards get melted by the global rain of battery acid, which NASA had decided years ago "Probably wouldn't be too bad if it came to it, probably..."
The problem is, aside from string/m-/p-/superstring- etc. theories, we haven't really come that far since Schroedinger, Planck, Dirac, Heisenberg, Einstein et al.. Most of modern physics is based on purely mathematical theory, with little discernable basis in the physical world. Hence, for all of the things that modern physics has accomplished, we're still without a unified theory.
;) ). THEREFORE: (there is a point to all this...), perhaps the scientific community ought not to so readily resort to the "my theory's got [more dimensions / more dangly Kaluza-Klein thingies / leakier m-branes] than yours" game, and have a look at the physical reality of their theories...
For all of the extra dimensions, predictions of superstrings, dark matter (and the associated WIMPS, MACHOs etc.), dark energy and so on, these things are, on the whole, educated guesses, and more importantly, none of these things has been observed! Unfortunately, it seems to be endemic in the physics community that is is acceptable to spend years forming fantastic theories based on these guesses. Just because the math seems to be significant, it may not have any real-world basis whatsoever.
I liken it to a mathematical integration: choose appropriate boundary conditions and variables, and you will reach a logical, structured, useful result. Choose the wrong parameters, and you can carry on the calculation forever, and, while it may seem like you are making progress toward a solution, you will never reach the answer. Modern atomic, nuclear and sub-nuclear physics was born from Schroedingers equation of the wavefunction of the hydrogen atom. The boundary condition he used states that the amplitude of the wavefunction goes to zero as the domain approaches infinity - leading to all the things we know and love about particle physics (probability waves, uncertainty, wave-particle duality etc.) Unfortunately, that boundary condition was a *guess*, which happened to give meaningful answers, which in turn led people to believe that it was CORRECT and it developed into aforementioned sprawling wierdness. However, use a different boundary condition (quantized non-radiation of radially accelerated charges, i.e. electrons not radiating while in particular energy levels, a theorem provable in several ways using Maxwell's equations and experimentally well verified) and you get a much simpler answer which only uses Newtonian mechanics, Maxwellian electromagnetism and momentum/energy conservation. From this approach, you can come up with stuff that the other theories lay awake at night sweating about.
Sorry about the rant, I spent 5 years of my life immersed in this (vis a vis, I've done my research
And all for the sake of maintaining the initial (unnecessary and insufficient) postulate that phi(x)->0 as x-->infinity in the Schrodinger equation... (http://www.blacklightpower.com/ - read the book, it's good...) Unlike, err, Time Cubes (sorry), the math checks out on this one - sub-ground state hydrogen makes up the dark matter, we don't need extra dimensions, quantum mechanics is fundamentally, well, wrong, etc. etc. etc. P.S. I did four years of physics at a very good university, and my conclusion was this: mainstream physics is barking up the wrong tree...
Has anyone ever pointed out to an obsessive overclocker that letting silicon get too cold is as bad as letting it get too hot? PHYSICS LESSON - if a silicon chip gets too hot, too many electrons occupy higher energy 'conductive' states, so semiconductivity becomes less efficient - HOWEVER - if the chip is too cold, it takes a bucket more energy to get them up there in the first place, so again, the chip operates less efficiently. Dunno what the optimum temperature is, but lets just say that using liquid nitrogen WILL MAKE YOUR COMPUTER GRIND TO A HALT. It'd be a good laugh though. Ok - I've finished now.