Quantum physics and control wave
In the case of the jumping oil drop
According to the interpretation of classical, orthodox, Copenhagen, or Bohr quantum mechanics, particles traverse all possible realities before reaching their destination. In fact, they are not talking about particles, but probability waves. These probability waves collapse and become particles when and only when we try to measure or observe (!) Them. "Quantum mechanics are contrary to common sense, and that's how we have to breathe it," says Seth Lloyd.
Solvay Conference 1927
This article is based on, and mainly quotes, a paper by the eminent researcher and author Natalia Wolchover. She goes to great depths in understanding quantum physics. Naturally, she does not reach the end of the road, the most important thread remains untied. Of course, with the infinite energy of the aether missing from science's arsenal, Natalia Wolchover is naturally stuck in her brisk explanation. At the bottom of the article, I will try to take her train of thought further, justify it and bring it to a logical conclusion. (Tt)
What the above theory and process description would be other than the inexhaustibility and death of human logic. Scientists in the field even claim many similar incomprehensible things. "For nearly a century, 'reality' was a vague concept. The laws of quantum physics suggest that particles spend most of their time in a state of mind, even without basic properties like the exact situation, instead they are everywhere and nowhere at the same time. Only then, if we measure them, they materialize suddenly, seemingly taking a position as if their place were given by the randomness of a roll of the dice. " says John Bush.
It was Einstein and Schrödinger who never gave up hope that the matter would continue to be seen not as spirits but as real. Unfortunately, they were in the minority, fighting almost alone. Meanwhile, the mathematical veil of statistical mathematics and illogical philosophy covered the field of quantum physics. Now, however, a ray of hope has emerged, a new experimental result that will perhaps illuminate the darkness. The illuminating light beam did not emerge from the brains of physicists, but from the laboratory of hydrodynamic specialists. [N.W.]
During a special hydrodynamic experiment, a surprising and promising phenomenon unexpectedly emerged. In the experiment, dripping oil droplets collided with the surface of the vibrated liquid, then bounced back into the air, then fell again, and so on. The direction of the jumps, on the other hand, was disturbed by previous surface waves, as a result of which the oil drop jumped back and forth. Among the surface waves created earlier, of course, there were the waves created earlier by the droplet. Among the so-called back-and-forth waves, the self-generated waves represented the trend, and in the long run, this determined the direction of the oil droplets. The system calls the system of self-generated waves the leading wave. As we will see, this particular guiding wave will also give meaning and explanation to the behavior of the droplet in complex experiments. [N.W.]
2. Figure Bouncing oil droplet
Before examining the phenomenon in more detail, we still need to make a detour in the direction of background energy. Where does the droplet get its energy for endless jumps? There could be an explanation that when he falls, he arrives so happily on an existing wave that he transfers energy to him. But then the opposite can happen. For the bounce to never subside, some background energy and even background vibration are essential. In the world of elementary particles, however, it is known that there is in the background an infinitely high-energy physical vacuum, in the correct usage of the aether, that makes vibrations in every cartilage. It can provide as much energy at any time and for as long as it takes to jump indefinitely. Current official quantum physics is also about uncertainty and background vibrations, albeit without indicating the source. (Tt)
There must be an invisible entity behind most physical processes, and without its energy certain processes are inexplicable. Let's face it, this kind of entity cannot be dispensed with, and for this reason, its existence can be considered proven. A confounding factor in "modern" physics is the occasional energy surplus. For centuries, the law of conservation of energy has been sacrosanct. But it is flawed because it does not include the energy of the invisible ether. Once you do, you will no longer have a problem with the energy of the cluster that appears. The present law of conservation of energy should be renamed the law of reduced conservation of energy, and the system with the addition of ether should be renamed the law of full conservation of energy. (This designation is also temporary, as more background energies may emerge in the future.) What is special and unusual, and even unbelievable, is that particles are located at discrete energy levels, can penetrate insurmountable obstacles, are formed spontaneously, or are destroyed spontaneously. At present, the existence of a high-energy vacuum lurking in the background is not accepted. However, by accepting the high-energy aether and the guiding wave, we can now obtain explanations that have a normal internal logic and are plausible. (Tt)
In the oil drop experiment, the drop jumped over a flat surface in the direction of the 3rd dimension. But where does the quantum particle bounce, since he is already receiving the vibrating waves in a 3-dimensional sea of spatial ether. Of course, it will jump into hyperspace, that is, dimension 4. Meanwhile, it regularly disappears from us because we are only able to observe the particle in the 3 dimensions. Thus, the idea of statistical quantum physics of particles that are destroyed and then reborn is not correct. They are not destroyed and are not born again. They exist all the way through, but they rarely appear to us because they are mostly in hyperspace. (Tt)
3. Figure Lightwave
After this short detour, let’s look at a famous but problematic experiment.
An old, much-analyzed observation is the so-called two-slots interference experiment. A light beam or electron beam is launched in the direction of two slits above each other. By covering one of the slots, the image of a light bundle appears as a spread-out blob on the umbrella behind it. The upper and lower parts of the spot are scattered light because the material of the slit bends the waves towards itself. This is because the waves at the edge of the beam enter the force field of the atoms forming the slit and are bent in the direction of the atoms, causing them to spread out. (Light waves in a force field, see here!) When we open both slits, you get what are effectively two light spots on top of each other. The umbrella, however, will not be uniformly illuminated but will show light streaks and dark streaks. Fourfold brightness stripes appear where the paths of intersection are an integer multiple of the wavelength, so they arrive at the umbrella in the same phase. Where they arrive in opposite phases, they cancel each other out, and a dark stripe appears on the screen. This streaking can only occur for waves, not for point particles. The photons and electrons are however not simple particles, they are particles riding on waves. Their behavior is determined by the waves. Waves form invisible streaks, which are displayed by the particles they guide. If we cower one of the slots, then we essentially eliminate one-half of the interference-prone waves, making it impossible for interference to occur. The photons that pass through the remaining open slot might be sufficient to illuminate the stripes, but there are no stripes. They are evenly distributed on the umbrella, giving a uniform patch of light. (Tt)
There is also a two-slit but single-photon experiment, which raises qualitatively quite new problems. In this case, there is only one particle in the device, and it passes through one or the other slit- you might think. However, the pattern (the stripes) on the screen is still formed, while the single-particle has nothing to interfere with. Perhaps it could be that the particle splits in two (?) before the slits, the two halves pass through one slit and the other, and then merge on the umbrella, either canceling or amplifying each other. Thus, depending on the path length, they form stripes after a certain time. According to both the Copenhagen view and the modern view of physics, particles are dual. They are simultaneously or alternately particles too, and waves too. But if we consider them as waves, there is still a fundamental problem. Because there are not two independent waves, but only one, because the other slit, and therefore the other wave line, has been hidden out. (Tt)
Guide wave theory will give the right solution. According to this, the particle bounces along its path and creates another wave with each jump. They expand circularly, travel at the speed of light, and of course, pass through both gaps. When the particle then passes through one of the slots, it finds itself on its own interfered waves and continues to bounce under their control. After all, the interference image also forms on the screen. If one of the gaps is now covered, then the remaining guide wave has nothing to interfere with, the light strip system does not form. The Copenhagen trend called the classic, explains this by the extremity that interference collapses when the phenomenon is observed or measured. This was already a lot for Einstein, he did not accept, although in other places He himself liked to use the overly abstract line of thought. (Tt)
It was once surprising for R. Feynman to assume that a photon or lightwave travels in all directions in space at once, but only reaches a single point. It may be a question of what will happen to the other waves that have gone astray. Another big question is what the thing looks like energetically, as the waves that went “wrong” carried energy away. Yes, because these waves absorb energy with each formation. In this way, the process requires extra energy that today’s physics cannot account for. Therefore, the radiation process is a clear violation of the principle of conservation of energy. According to ether theory, however, the excess energy is provided by the ether of infinite energy. The bouncing particle, on the other hand, has a good energy balance when it reaches its destination. This energy transfer process is not a problem for the ether. It’s like standing on the shore of the ocean and we would carry the water out with a thimble. The water level will not change and we should not have to worry about where the water is from. (Tt)
How the dual nature of the particle or photon is realized can also be a problem. In such a way once we have the particle and once we see something bouncing on top of the waves. But perhaps we are closer to the truth if we think of the jumping particle as an invisible, energy-fluttering substance and the powerful waves on its surface. (Tt)
"At the time, Bohr interpreted the probability wave equation as the complete definition of a particle and claimed the awful that particles have no explicit orbit. However, de Broglie encouraged his colleagues to use two equations: one describes a real physical wave; the other binds to the variables of the wave equation the path of the actual, specific particle, i.e. the photon interacts and is driven by the wave but is not defined by it. But Broglie argued that particles do have a specific trajectory, we just can't measure them with sufficient accuracy, the initial position of the particles to derive the exact path from it. " [N.W.]
Paul Milewski, a professor of mathematics at the University of Bath in England, however, said that quantum mechanics is very successful, no one can claim to be wrong. He developed computer models for the dynamics of bouncing drops, so under quantum mechanics, he was already thinking about the leading-wave operation. The fact is that none of the physicists were able to predict the exact location of the impact. So while Bohr relied solely on statistics, de Broglie was also forced to accept statistics in terms of receipt, but he made the leading wave and determinism the cornerstone of his theory. [N.W.]
At the Solvay conference, Einstein objected to the probabilistic universe and joked that "God does not play a dice-dice game," however also opposed de Broglie's alternative. It could be this may have been because in 1932, when the Hungarian-American János Neumann "proved" that the statistical probability wave equation could not have other hidden variables. [N.W.]
I wish these hydrodynamic experiments were accessed by the people who developed quantum mechanics at the beginning of the last century! Milewski blurted out. Then the history of quantum mechanics could have turned out differently! [N.W.]
More than 30 years had to pass before it turned out that Neumann's derivation was wrong. It was John Bell who found the flaw in Neumann's original proof. However, the erroneous opinion marked by Neumann had by that time become definitively widespread and ingrained in the scientific ranks. By then, most physicists believed Neumann's proof without reading it. In 1952, David Böhm finally resurrected the leading wave theory in a somewhat modified form. Einstein encouraged this, though unfortunately the physicists never got it. The theory is stored as de Broglie-Böhm theory or Böhm mechanics. [N.W.]
4. Figure Oil Drop
Later in 1986, John Bell, an Irish physicist known for his utterance, went further with setting up a high-impact theorem. In this sense, Bell supported the guide wave theory. Physicists have also misinterpreted this. He wrote of the guiding wave theory that "I see it as natural and simple, it solves the wave-particle dilemma in such a clear and customary way that it is very peculiar to me why it has been generally rejected." The term "I don't understand" was only used symbolically by Bell here, as he understood it very much. Statistical quantum mechanics has proven itself numerically well, making it more convenient for practitioners to remain there in the incomprehensible obscure zone. Now, decades later, the truth of guide wave theory has essentially been proven. Successful hydrodynamic experiments - bouncing oil droplets - essentially prove the truth of the guide wave theory. But again, the convenience of clinging to the usual old, inappropriate explanation prevails. Physicists are reluctant to move forward. Otherwise, researchers would risk their careers if they questioned quantum orthodoxy. [N.W.]
Author of the original English paper [Natalie Wolchover]
So a great idea came up to clear up the obscurity of quantum physics, and lo and behold, the scientific world hasn't moved on it since. Perhaps not because there are still logical gaps left and faced with hidden but large-scale misunderstandings. I have tried to make up for myself and make the leading-wave principle sympathetic. However, this article is a summary and compression of the original excellent dissertation. Furthermore, I used the verbal sentences of the written Hungarian translation, and even some paragraphs because I could not describe them so well and clearly. Therefore, the style and form of my article were then inhomogeneous, at the same time the content of information increased. I hope to have brought the topic to the starting point of a well-founded physical theory. Thus, from statistical mathematics and a set of apparent contradictions, quantum theory can become true physics. However, this path can only be taken after the acceptance of ether theory. (Tt)
Note**: "God does not play dice", Einstein said. The medieval knights-errant roamed by day, but at night they would take lodgings in an inn. They ordered accommodation, a hearty dinner, and a cup of wine. Then they looked around to see if there were any other bored knights-errant in the inn. There almost always was. One was approached and asked if he'd like to play a game of dice to ward off the boredom of the evening. Of course, he did. One of them produced from his pocket a small silver cup with 2 dice in it, the sides of which were marked with 1-6 dots, so that when the shaken dice were rolled out, 2-12 could be rolled. Then the other person threw the dice and the winner was the one who threw the biggest. They gambled money, so one case could risk a village. You couldn't cheat in the game, you couldn't control the roll. Winning was purely a matter of calculating probability. "God doesn't play dice" was introduced into physics by physicists, knowing the history. This was intended to suggest or say that natural processes do not depend on the whims of chance, but obey serious physical laws. There are two opposing views: either natural processes are governed by statistics or, conversely, by serious physical laws. In addition to the above explanation, we can now see that the scientists in the know are spreading a purple haze for the common man. The physical society often spreads fog, sometimes outwards and often inwards. (Tt)
Date: December 20, 2019
1. The origin of this dissertation was published in Science magazine on 30/06/2014. By Natalie Wolchover, wired.com
2. Hungarian translation: 2014 08 03, Zsolt Cseresznye, hirek.prim.hu
3. Tamás Tassi: The ether moves! http://aparadox.hupont.hu/55/az-eter-mozog See here!