The first section (61 p.) of my book is my problem shooting concerning some of the physics problems that we up to now haven’t been able to solve satisfiedly. The different parts of the theory converge wholly accordingly to Karl Popper’s criteriums for what science is. The full theory is stringent, consistent and nearly entirely causal. There are many explaining graphs in this book. This is not a TOE or a GUT. What is?

Shut up and calculate!

Humans are the thinking creatures. How do we humans perceive our surroundings? In a way that makes sense for us in order to survive and procreate, of course. If I with military terms would try to explain the macro world and the micro world, I’d say that macro is strategy and micro is tactics. Here we have two different ways in how to think, and you may be good at one but not good at the other. Yet they are both indispensable, from the small to the big, for the outcome of a war, and there is no clear interface between the two. Strategy is about the bigger goal, and tactics is about the detailed means to reach this bigger goal. An apposite analogy would be if strategy is compared with Relativity and tactics is compared with quantum mechanics. Our classic viewpoint is such that we look at it from the big to the small, but actually the causal order goes from the small to the big.

But how does this apply to the theory of relativity versus quantum mechanics? I think that we humans are incapable of perceiving the superposition property in quantum mechanics. Understanding superposition property was never a requirement for us surviving or procreating. But the superposition property is a weird feature indeed! If we set up the double slit experiment, and measure the outcome, we find that the wave function collapse. We measure the wave function of a photon as if it is transformed into becoming a seemingly random spot on a surface. The spot isn’t observed at a given place since the wave-particle was in a probability state. It is where it is, but we have no way of telling exactly where the transmitted photon particle is going to end up. It can show up at any of a finite number of pattern defining places if you transmit many single photons sequally. So indeed it is weird, and our brains will never be able to fully understand or correctly perceive the physics of a wave-particle, since our brains are not wired for that. But somehow this unintuitive result, which to us looks like magic, is solid state physics. We just plain cannot perceive it or imagine it. We will at some point in time finally have to learn to accept that, I think.

My thesis:

Thermal energy Vs. Gravitational force

_____________________________________________________________________

This is just one graph/image among many that I have created for my thesis. If you can make sense of this graph you can presumably understand my full thesis too.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

I doubt many will care about my theories, so why not bring up a good hypothesis? Nothing gets the physics community going as much as a speculative hypothesis.

A hypothesis

What if? What if there existed a one-dimensional dimension that we cannot see, isn’t tangible and is behind a “wall” which constitutes a spaceless interface, and makes it possible for entangled particles to be immediately entangled over large distances as seen from our three dimensions + the time dimension? Think of an old-time telephone switchboard where the callers are phoning from all over the place and are connected at the telephone company who can listen in on all of the callers. That would be the easiest way to explain it with a metaphor. This is not to say that you can straight off interpret the metaphor literally as if the interface had the function of a switchboard. This is a hypothesis, use your imagination!

What if? Everything existed at once in one spot in this interface dimension because there is no time lapse or space in this dimension? Can we consider quantum entanglement experiments as an indication of my hypothesis about a none-time “switchboard” property dimension? What if the Spinor’s 720 degrees rotation property indicate that the spinor is at its heart in this interface dimension of no place and everywhere at once. Can the conjugated variables, of undefined orientation and defined angular momentum, of a particle be explained by introducing this interface dimension? What if a non-time “switchboard” interface dimension explains quantum properties? If you ever wonder, I adhere to the “non-locality” phalanx, albeit with my own twist.

What if? As I see it, black holes are collapsed objects with infinite gravitation within the two-dimensional but curved event horizon. What if black holes penetrate the barrier to the above-described interface by its sheer gravitational force, staying eternally still in time?

What if? What if photons penetrate the barrier to this interface by its sheer speed and by it not having rest mass? A photon travels at the maximum speed in vacuum, and it may be two-dimensional like a spot of light on the wall from a flashlight, yet on the move with a speed of 300,000km per second. A photon would experience time the same way a black hole does, if they could experience time.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Teaser for my total rebuttal of Kurt Gödel’s Incompleteness theorem, also in the book.

So we have two statements:

1. A means that A is unprovable
2. False formulas are unprovable

One can easily replace (1) with either “False A is unprovable” or “True A is unprovable”.

(- +) = (-) (imaginary)

(+ +) = (+) (true)

(- -) = (+) (true)

(+ -) = (-) (imaginary)

The following is an explanation of what I am claiming here:

1. We would get (- +) = (-) (imaginary) if A could be false and provable, which it cannot. False propositions cannot be proved true.
2. We get the formula (+ +) = (+) (true) if it is true and provable.
3. We get (- -) = (+) (true) if it is false and unprovable.
4. Thus we get the formula (+ -) = (-) (imaginary) for the true and unprovable.

________________________________________________________________________________________