[General] CLASSICAL,QUANTUM MECHANICS

Wed May 16 11:51:12 PDT 2018

Wolf B.:
Sorry for my delay in replying to this interesting email.

1.    Complex representation of “Psi”:  I have attached one of our old papers where I underscore that we keep neglecting – (i) detector’s physical response characteristic parameter and (ii) detector’s physical response time-period. Especially, in the realm of resonant QM interaction, a photo-detector must first sense out whether the incident radiation has the right QM-resonant frequency for it to be excited as a linear dipole. This time period has to be at least one cycle. Computation using “cos-wt”, instead of “exp(iwt)”, shows that one needs just over a cycle of integration to match the time-averaged squared-real function to “Psi*Psi”. So, in my book, “Causal Physics: Photon by Non-Interaction of Waves” (Taylor & Francis, 2014), I have used the phrase “Quantum Compatibility Sensing Dancing Period”, which is required by a QM-dipole to consummate the available energy through the resonant interaction, followed by the absorption of a “quantum cupful of energy”, (hw/2'pi’), out of the passing-by EM wave energy. Copenhagen Interpretation has succeeded in propagating a culture of mysticism behind QM, even though Nature has always been causal. This is why our causal mathematical relations have succeeded in discovering so many real interaction processes in nature.

2.    There are QM intrinsic harmonic oscillations of particles, there are no waves: If we express the particles as self-looped and self-resonant doughnut-like oscillations of the Complex Tension Field (CTF), then particles can be represented as, a.exp(iwt), You may call this “w” as the de Broglie frequency, instead of a wave-packet. In this model, EM waves are perpetually propagating linear excitation of the CTF. All particles are harmonic oscillators. That is why Schrodinger’s “Wave function” works so well.

3.    QM is glorified Classical Mechanics: I believe that eventually people will be able to get over the blinding successes of QM and realize that even the “Hamiltonian” was originally constructed for Classical Mechanics!

4.    Observer and Interpretations: Our instruments, which facilitate the interactions between the chosen entities and generate the data exploiting the physical transformations of the interactants, are the rational, causal and un-biased OBSERVERS. We, the humans, having widely varying neural-networks, generate widely different “causal” interpretations (fortunately, constrained by mathematical logics). The scientists are not very much different from the very smart lawyers and politicians! At least, the last two categories of people are conscious, most of the time, when they are fooling other people using “cooked-up causally connected reasoning”!! ☺
Chandra.

From: General <general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> On Behalf Of Wolfgang Baer
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2018 10:25 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>; RL Amoroso <noeticj at mindspring.com>; af.kracklauer at web.de; Louis H Kauffman <loukau at gmail.com>; Nina Sotina <nsotina at gmail.com>; Albrecht Giese <phys at a-giese.de>
Subject: [General] CLASSICAL,QUANTUM MECHANICS

Two questions:

 1) Nina Sotina's paper in The Vigier 10 proceedings points out something that has puzzled me for a long time. Schroedinger's 1926 paper introducing the Wave function was a real classic function not an imaginary. In october 1926 Von Madelung derived a classic hydrodynamic formulation of quantum theory but did so from the Schroedinger equation with an imaginary wave function. Both Schroedinger's and Madelung's derivation suggests they thought QM waves were real, an interpretation, which I tend to favor.

Were and who introduced the imaginary?

2) Along those lines I just ran into

 THE GRAND UNIFIED THEORY OF CLASSICAL QUANTUM MECHANICS  by Dr. Randell Mills

The guy knows a lot of physics and claims he can explain the results of quantum theory from purely classical physics.

His claim that the electron is a charge shell rather than a probability is similar to my CAT theory, only my rational is to
analyze quantum theory as a mental projection of the observer i.e. as the physics of the observer.

Is this guy a bullshitter? Anyone heard of him?

http://brilliantlightpower.com/theory-overview/
Theory Overview:
            The claim that classic physics “ only the simple laws of Newton’s Mechanics, Maxwell’s equations of electricity, magnetism, and electrodynamics, and the fundamental constants of nature” are adequate to explain “All observables from quarks to cosmos … in closed-form analytical expressions containing fundamental constants only.”
            “According to Mills GUT-CP, nature is classical. Electrons, when bound in an atom, are considered to be discrete two-dimensional spherical membranes of charge and current that completely surround the nucleus as a bubble.”
 “Mills GUT-CP is a confirmable theory, … Data sets include the electron spin, g-factor, ionization energies of 1-20 electron atoms and ions (400 states); the state lifetimes and line intensities of hydrogen; the excited states of helium; the excited states of H2, the relationships between the masses of fundamental particles; the bond distances, energies, angles, and dipole moments of over 800 molecules; and the parameters of a variety of extended solids. From the molecular theory, Brilliant Light Power has launched a molecular modeling subsidiary, Millsian Inc<http://www.millsian.com/>.
 “ The essence of GUTCP is that every solution is for the true or real source of the observable wherein any solution of an observable as the inherent information for all observables that can be related to that observable.”

 Here is a a site to down load his book

http://brilliantlightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/theory/GUT-CP-2016-Ed-Book-Web-121517.pdf

--

Wolfgang Baer

Nascent Systems Inc.

380W. Carmel Valley Rd.

Carmel Valley, CA 93924 USA

Wolf at NascentInc.com<mailto:Support at NascentInc.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20180516/b927360d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2007.8_CProc._Dtctn.Prcss.Role.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 206249 bytes
Desc: 2007.8_CProc._Dtctn.Prcss.Role.pdf
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20180516/b927360d/attachment.pdf>