Overview of Model of Reality

Overview of Theory


1) New discovery: a plausible pulsating solution to Einstein's
    field equations. 
    (Chapters 1-4).


2) Electrons and protons modeled as tiny pulsating particles, 
    their electric fields switching ON and OFF. 
    (Chapter 5).


3) A non-radiating planetary atom can be constructed with pulsating 
    particles, if the electrons are OFF while the nucleus is ON.  That way 
    the electrons are never accelerated while ON.  They will not radiate. 
    (Chapters 6-7).


4) All key quantum experiments re-explained using reality based 
    principles.  For example: 
          
  • The energy hv received by an electron in the 
         photoelectric effect is due to a forward non-acceleration 
         resonance between the incident light wave and the pulsation 
         frequency of the electron. (Chapter 5). 
  • The Compton change in x-ray wavelength is simply due to a
         Doppler shift as the electrons re-transmit the x-rays while 
         receding from the observer. (Chapter 5).  
  • The Bremsstalung cutoff freqency seen for x-ray tubes is due
         to the pulsating nature of the electrons yielding a limited 
         Nyquist frequency of emission. (Chapter 5).  
  • The two "quantized angular momentum states" of the silver atom
         seen in the Stern-Gerlach experiment are actually induced by
         Larmor Wobble in the strong magnetic field. (Chapter 6).


5) Nine Quantum Killer experiments proposed to prove this theory. 
    (Chapters 8-12).  For example:
         
  • The Stern-Gerlach Killer Experiment.  This experiment 
         uses a modified Stern-Gerlach style magnetic with the same
         magnetic z-derivative, but with a small value for the magnetic 
         field itself. This will allow the recovery of the continuous 
         spectrum of L_z. (Chapter 8).   
  • The Bremsstrahlung Cutoff Killer Experiment.  This  
         experiment uses a magnetic field to change the pulsation
         frequency of an electron beam without changing its energy.
         This will change the Bremsstrahlung cutoff frequency 
         without a change in energy, challenging the photon 
         hypothesis. (Chapter 9).  
  • The Compton Killer Experiment.  This experiment 
         uses polarized x-rays.  If an x-ray beam is horizontally 
         polarized, then there will be no x-ray radiation at 90^o.  
         However, Compton's theory requires a 90^o "photon" if a 
         -44^o electron is present.  The presence of these -44^o electrons 
         without 90^o x-ray radiation gives a Compton Contradiction. 
         (Chapter 10).


We now expand each overview topic:

1) New discovery: a plausible pulsating solution to Einstein's field equations.

. . . The gravitational and electric forces are not analogous forces for charge and mass. Gravity approximates an inverse square law force like the electric force, but gravity affects the propagation of the electric force, and not vice versa. Light is bent in a gravitational field, and the presence of gravity will red-shift electromagnetic frequencies. The presense of the electric field is not believed to red-shift gravitational waves, but gravitational waves have never been detected, so this is only theoretically accepted today.
. . . Recently, physicists have realized that the gravitational influence can become so great that the electric force cannot propagate at all. If this happens gravity will win a tug-o-war with the electric force, even though gravity is usually considered 10³⁵ times weaker. In addition, we will show how the gravitational influence can actually cloak the electric force, eliminating it completely between certain charges. When this happens, calculating the electrical potential energy between a pair of charges that "cannot feel each other" becomes crazy. There really is no potential energy there at all.
. . . But what happens if one crashes these "cloaked charges" together while they cannot "feel each other"? The potential energy of assembly instantaneously appears, causing an instantaneous increase in the mass function, and a gravitational shock wave is emitted that could temporarily be orders of magnitude larger than we have previously imagined that gravity could be. With this gravitational shock wave we will show how the electric field lines can be cut so that the electric force temporarily turns off.
. . . This concept is the key to understanding how electric charge and gravitational influence could become a pulsing balancing act. These pulsating gravitational and electric fields could be extremely rapid with huge pulses that time-average approximately to Newton's and Coulomb's Laws.
. . . This is indeed what we are proposing. A pulsar is modeled with alternating gravitational and electrical pulsations. The charge/matter is first gravitationally sucked in, then electrically ejected in a periodic manner. We will first apply this theory to macroscopic pulsars seen in our galaxy. We will see how the radiation fields from these macroscopic pulsars match our theoretical predictions. The absence of any pulsar theory that works makes this new theory a very interesting consideration.
. . . While dreaming about galactic pulsars, we were hit in the head with a brick (similar to the way Newton claims he was bonked in the head with an apple), and realized that this pulsar theory could be applied to electrons.

2) Electrons and protons modeled as tiny pulsating particles.

. . . The electron's mass-energy is roughly 1/2 MeV. This mass-energy is the amount contained in a static electric field emanating from a charge with a radius roughly 2x10^-13 cm. An electron, however, is known to be more like 2x10^-15 cm or smaller. The electric field energy from such a small particle is roughly 50 MeV. This is troublesome to say the least. If the resultant mass-energy of the electron is indeed just 1/2 MeV, then the mass function for a static electron must go negative below this radius(?). Presently, particle theories assume that an electron is a point and use a cleverly worded "renormalization procedure" to ignore the infinite self-energy of such an object.
. . . From these observations we realize that no reality-based theory for the electron can use a static electric field. It won't work. But if one insists that a reality-based theory exists (quantum theorists insist that a reality-based theory is impossible), then the only conclusion that can be made is that the electron's electric field is NOT static. And if the electron's electric field is not static, then what makes it oscillate or turn on/off? Nothing besides gravitational influence is known to block electrical influence.
. . . Thus, it seemed very natural to imagine the electron as a tiny pulsar. We decided to write down a theory with tiny electron micropulsars to see just how far we could get explaining the weird electron behavior seen in the laboratory. We are stunned at just how far we got. First of all, if one imagines an electron as an object that turns its electric field on and off extremely rapidly, then one has to imagine Coulomb's Law as a time averaged force. A good way to imagine a time-averaged pulsating force would be if an army troop fired machine guns into a boxcar on a railroad track. The boxcar would accelerate as the soldiers rapidly fired their bullets into the back of the boxcar. The force from this rapid barrage of bullets would accelerate the boxcar uniformly like a constant force (the transfer of momentum to the boxcar is essentially constant), and one could indeed solve for the boxcar's motion using Newton's continuous calculus even though the force is actually pulsed and only constant if one considers the time average. Time differentiating and integrating time-averaged quantities works if the pulsations are extremely short and plentiful. This is how we will imagine that charged elementary particles convey their electric Coulomb force, like a troop of soldiers firing a barrage of bullets into the back of a boxcar. The time-average of the force yields the Coulomb force, and the electron mass function time-averages to m_e .
. . . However, we will show that this time average for m_e has two strange properties. If the electron indeed is about 2x10^-15 cm, then since its time-averaged mass m_e is just 1/2 MeV, we will show that the mass function must temporarily go negative for part of its pulsation cycle. We will show that cloaked electric charge temporarily acts as an effective "negative mass" as it gets into its "implosion" phase of its pulsation. In addition, if the mass function goes negative temporarily, any comparisons between the magnitudes of the instantaneous electric and gravitational forces are invalid. The gravitational influence may be much larger than we thought, but this could be offset by the "effective mass" of the elementary particle going negative for part of its pulsation cycle and hiding the true instantaneous gravitational strength.
. . . In addition, if the gravitational influence in the elementary particles gets large enough to keep the electrical influence from propagating, then this influence is large enough to radically slow local clocks. It is known that clocks slow down near gravitational influence. If this is the case, clocks at infinity could go to a million seconds while clocks near the particle pass a picosecond. This could make the time-averages just crazy, allowing even more for the weird proportion of the gravitational and electrical time-averages.
. . . What does this pulsating model for elementary particles buy us? Most importantly, pulsating charged particles allow us to return to a planetary atomic model, a model for the atom that was abandoned during the 1930's because of Erwin Schrodinger.

3) A non-radiating planetary atom can be constructed with pulsating particles.

. . . A static charged particle must radiate if it accelerates. There isn't really any way around this. In particular, if a static charged particle is put into a circular orbit, then it must emit periodic electromagnetic radiation. The orbiting particle undergoes an periodic centripetal acceleration.
. . . But atoms do not radiate. Therefore, electrons cannot be static little charges that orbit the nucleus. In the 1930's physicists were faced with this grim fact. But rather than abandon their perception of charge as static, they abandoned the whole concept of a particle in general! In hindsight, this seems like a desperate thing to do so that physicists could have some sort of theory to explain this weird phenomena. It was Erwin Schrodinger who started the strange view that we do not have planetary atoms. He hypothesized that a nucleus had a surrounding "standing matter wave electron cloud", following Louis De Broglie's hypothesis of "matter waves". The probability for detecting an electron in this matter wave cloud was proportional the square of the amplitude, which had no physical meaning and could be a complex number. It was then shown that this "standing matter wave" could be interpreted as a steady-state "probability current" which would not radiate, since steady-state currents do not radiate. This hypothesis did indeed seem strange and met a lot of resistance. Albert Einstein himself vehemently disagreed with it until his death in 1955. However, Neils Bohr agreed with it, and his side won the political war.
. . . To us it seems preferable to abandon the concept of static charge rather than changing the whole concept of a particle in general. If one allows a dynamic electric field for elementary particles, then a planetary atom can be imagined. In particular, for our pulsating model, both the electron and nuclear electric fields constantly pulsate on and off. Thus, if there is a correlation between the pulsations of the electron and its nucleus, then the electron can be accelerated only while its electric field is off. This stable electron orbit would not radiate electromagnetic energy because it would be "off" while accelerated, and unaccelerated while "on". Adding other electrons to the atom would necessitate that the new electrons' pulsations have correlations to the nucleus as well as to the other atomic electrons.

4) All key quantum experiments re-explained using reality based principles.

. . . The goal of Model of Reality is to explain modern experiments with reality-based ideas. Basically, our goal is to rid modern physics of photons, matter waves, and quantized angular momentum. These concepts have enormous paradoxes associated with them.
. . . We describe light as a wave, although it would be a choppy wave since it is emitted by pulsating particles. The quanta of energy received by an electron in the photoelectric effect will be explained by electron pulsations reaching a forward non-acceleration resonance with the incident light frequency. In our viewpoint, an electron's pulsation rate is determined by how much it is accelerated. The more you accelerate an electron, the faster it pulsates. We will show that when the electron's pulsation rate equals the incident light's frequency, the forward acceleration of the electron will essentially be over.
. . . Authur Compton proposed that x-ray "photons" bounce off of electrons elastically like billiard balls. With this assumption he was able to get a pretty good theoretical prediction for the decrease in x-ray frequency of his scattered x-rays. However, this seems silly since Einstein had previously proposed a completely inelastic absorption and a complete transfer of energy for collisions in the photoelectric effect. In the photoelectric effect, electron-photon inelastic collisions are used. In Compton's theory, elastic billiard ball collisions are used. What seems even sillier is that the photoelectric effect's complete inelastic transfer of energy completely contradicts the very definition of "inelastic collision". In an inelastic collision, it is momentum that is always conserved, not kinetic energy. Claiming a complete transfer of energy in an inelastic collision is an oxymoron. These inconsistencies between the Compton theory and photoelectric theory are troubling.
. . . Also, we investigated the velocity of the electrons that were ejected from the Compton target and we were surprised to find that the ordinary Doppler shift from these velocities completely accounts for the frequency shift in scattered x-rays.
. . . Next, x-ray tubes became common. X-ray tubes blast an electron beam into a metal target at roughly 20 kilovolts to produce x-rays. The emission from these 20 KeV electrons has an abrupt frequency cutoff at roughly 5 million terahertz. If one doubles the electron beam voltage to 40 KeV, then the frequency cutoff doubles to roughly 10 million terahertz. Presently, the explanation for this is the complete conversion of 40 KeV electron energy into a 10 million terahertz "photon". Higher frequencies cannot be created according to modern photon theory, since E=hv in the theory (the "photon" frequency is proportional to its energy). Again the explanation for this limiting frequency uses the complete transfer of energy from the electron to the x-ray "photon", even though these limiting x-rays are emitted in all directions, a troublesome situation for conservation of momentum.
. . . To us, all these inconsistencies seem silly. Our micropulsar viewpoint presents a much saner explanation for x-ray tube emissions using the Nyquist point of view. First, a pulsating electron that has smashed into a metal target would produce emission frequencies starting from the low end of the spectrum all the way up to its Nyquist-limited frequency. Why is this? Well, the easiest way to visualize this limit comes from digital audio. An audio CD has a digital sampling rate of 44 kHz. Try to imagine recording and playing back a 50 kHz ultrasound wave using this 44 kHz sampling rate. It seems impossible, doesn't it? This is because the highest reproducible frequency with 44 kHz sampling is 22 kHz, or half the sampling frequency. Our ears can typically hear up to about 20 kHz, so this is the reason a 44 kHz sampling frequency is used.
. . . Thus, an x-ray tube limited to 5 million terahertz x-rays must have had electrons pulsating at about 10 million terahertz. Electrons pulsating at this rate cannot emit higher frequencies than this. Next, the x-ray tube limited to 10 million terahertz x-rays must had electrons pulsating at 20 million terahertz. Electrons pulsating at this rate cannot emit higher frequencies than this. In summary, these pulsations will yield a Nyquist-limited frequency emitted in all directions. There are other "pro-photon" concepts and evidence besides the ones mentioned here. We will address all of them with reality based ideas. So we move on to our overview of "matter waves".
. . . A "matter wave" is another concept that we would like to eliminate. The most striking "matter wave" evidence is electron interference. It is possible to send an electron beam around a filament and observe interference fringes that appear on film. A coherent pulse of electron micropulsars yields a better explanation. If the two portions of the bent electron pulse cross each other while their electric fields are both "on", then their repulsion will be immense, and the electrons will not continue on towards the film. This deflection will cause a minimum on the film. If the two portions of the pulse meet while their electric fields are "off", then they will continue on and strike the film causing a maximum.
. . . We will see that a beam of pulsating electrons acts like an electron pseudo-wave. However, the advantage of this micropulsar concept is that it is reality-based, and one can imagine what is actually happening. With matter waves, the Schrodinger wave amplitude itself has no physical meaning, and one cannot imagine that something is waving. In our Model of Reality theory, electrons do not actually cancel each other out. In the Schrodinger theory, a minimum on the film is actually interpreted as the electron wave being 180^o out of phase and canceling. It is troubling to try to think just how matter can cancel itself out. In our theory, the pulsations simply keep the electrons from striking the film. No more and no less. One does not need to unnecessarily introduce something non-reality-based like a complex valued wave function.
. . . Quantized angular momentum is another concept that seems incorrect to us. It all started with the Stern-Gerlach experiment. In this experiment, the two observed deflections of the silver atoms seem to imply only two "up" or "down" values for its angular momentum, even if two Stern-Gerlach apparatuses were put back-to-back and tilted to some arbitrary relative angle. We will show that atoms have non-radiating planetary electron orbits, and that the huge magnetic fields used in the Stern-Gerlach apparatus actually induce these electron orbits into the two states that give two observed deflections. We will assert that they are NOT quantized. When two Stern-Gerlach apparatuses are tilted relative to one another, we will show that the second tilted apparatus simply induces the atoms into two new "angled-up" or "angled-down" states and that the angular momentum component along the field is actually not conserved.

5) Nine Quantum Killer experiments proposed to prove this theory.

. . . Any new theory that seeks to replace an existing one must have experimental consequences or it will be ignored. That is the purpose of our nine proposed Quantum Killer Experiments. These experiments are aimed right at the quantum paradoxes. The first experiment is the Stern Gerlach Killer Experiment.
. . . The Stern Gerlach Killer experiment alters the magnetic mechanism used in this experiment so the continuous spectrum of atomic angular momentum can be recovered. This new Stern Gerlach apparatus uses the same powerful inhomogeneous magnetic field principle, but with a small magnitude for the magnetic field itself. This prevents the two "up" or "down" states from being induced by Larmor Wobble in the strong magnetic field.
. . . The Photon Killer Experiments include the Bremsstrahlung Cutoff Killer, the Compton Killer, the Photoelectric Killer, and the Blackbody Killer. In the Bremsstrahlung Cutoff Killer experiment, we show that it is the pulsating nature of the electrons that Nyquist-limit the frequency of the emitted x-rays, and not the existence of light quanta. This is accomplished by changing the pulsation rate of an electron beam with a magnetic field without changing its energy. In the Compton Killer Experiment, we show that the Compton effect is not due to an elastic photon-electron collision by using polarized x-rays, which are not scattered at 90^o. Compton's theory predicts the simultaneous occurence of these 90^o "photons" along with -44^o ejected electrons. If the -44^o electrons exist without the 90^o "photons", then a Compton contradiction exists. In the Photoelectric Killer Experiment, we show how the validity range of the photoelectric relation is just a tiny fraction of the electromagnetic spectrum, and how electrons are ejected from metal in other frequency ranges according to our new theory. In the Blackbody Killer Experiment, we show how the radiation spectrum given off from a heated blackbody with an ultraviolet absorbent coating contradicts the ultraviolet catastrophe, implying that the blackbody spectrum simply depends on the atoms in the blackbody coating with natural orbital frequencies that are thermally agitated.
. . . The Schrodinger Killer Experiments include the Lyman Absorption Killer and the Lyman Odd Harmonics Resonance experiment. The Lyman Absorption Killer shows that the Schrodinger "ionizaton photon frequency" for hydrogen is fictional by observing available electric current when light with this "ionization frequency" is incident on hydrogen. This is compared to the current available with other "non-ionizing" resonant absorption frequencies. We will see that the special "ionization frequency" is not special at all, and that this frequency is simply a resonant electron orbital frequency just like the others. The Lyman Odd Harmonics Resonance experiment checks for absorption at odd harmonics of the Lyman absorption frequencies.
. . . The Matter Wave Killer experiment proves that electron interference is due to pulsating electron particles, establishing preferred paths to the detector film while in flight. And finally, the Neutrino Killer experiment is conceptually very simple. We propose this experiment for a neutrino source/detector combination where the neutrino source is man-made and the detector is located hundreds of kilometers away from the source. The man-made neutrino source is turned off without the knowledge of the detector technicians. We claim that neutrino data is simply random noise, and that the distant neutrino detector will not be able to ascertain when the source (hundreds of kilometers away) was turned off. Once these Quantum Killer experiments have been verified, it will be interesting to see what happens in the world of physics.


Next: viewing Model of Reality's Contents