Home

ARCUS:  The World Formula and its Solutions

Consequently constructed using the results of Albert Einstein and Max Planck leading to the Unified Field Theory

 
Articles
The Preaching
 
 
 
 
  
Relativity and Quantum Theory are united now

As I just got problems in explaining my concept I developed another text to a Physician.

Conception of an email of 01-10-2000 to a Dr. of physics, editor of a journal. I didn't send it away, because there all my principles are opened. They show the obstinacy with what main-stream physics believes in its principles, although it had to see that they are wrong if it was attentive.

"Dear Mr. Dr. ...,

... In principle I don't negate theories. Interpretations are changed by me. But alone this is enough for experts removing away from me. Why do they this? 1. Wordings of great physicians are requested in the end. The stability of present physics stopped with Heisenberg, Born, De Broglie and Hawking would go lost. Nearly all the scientists exclusively Prof. Linde (Stanford University) think it must be improbable that something like my work could be true. And they don't answer my emails, too. Unfortunately in determined times paradigms are put into release radically. This fact comes with big probability. Who doesn't know expecting this will come along to the release of history. 2. It may be better to ignore a complete solution, because one could become unemployed by this solution. 3. No, but no, publication of my ideas is possible. Just here in www.

Einstein hoped one might find a solution from his theory which would make unification possible and lead to a world formula. I found, but Einstein already had that world formula. He didn't know it. This formula is still seen if one has solved all the other problems doing detailed work (I needed 12 years doing it), and then one looks in which function this is already reflected abstractly. Simply then one finds Schwarzschild's solution and one interprets its terms to be a unity of universe and its physics and its philosophy, but still in the end after discovering the light in tunnel clearly.

Before I did this, I found the expected solution of general relativity theory. It says that all the cosms are oscillating black holes, so the macrocosm and all the microcosms - exactly they are oscillators. The universe is a hierarchy of all these oscillators. They are distinguished into divergently closed (unstable, a state of it is temporarily open) and convergently closed (stable, they can be destabilized). Now I took such a cosmos and I set Planck's constant quantum into its mathematical solution. A very interesting system resulted, how every cosm is made out of quantum numbers and unstable black-white holes partially decaying into stable particles. This way stable states become primary and unstable states become inexhaustibly secondary.

Some consequences followed:

  • All the stable particles have a geometric dimension. Therefore protons, electrons and neutrinos have a primary character (the universe is the largest stable particle). They carry the special mass why their surfaces are vibrating. Better: The whole body is in vibrating movement. With it the origin of the matter is moving along. This reflection creates the resting MASS of the cosms.
  • Now a simple dualism of wave and particle could not remain. That problem had to be interpreted in a new way without touching the present measurements and laws.
  • Additionally, electrical elementary charge seems to be a pendent of an elementary mass practically representing a gravitation charge.

This way this picture of logic became to a complete thesis:

  • Two forces determine the universe: electromagnetism and "gravitomagnetism", dependent on:
  • the movement of an electric charge makes an e.m. wave by changing an electrically caused magnetic field and by twisting the intrinsic polarizing of its real vacuum. Then the charge don't become a wave itself.
  • the movement of a mass makes a gravitomagnetic wave by changing a gravitationally caused dipole field also along its real intrinsic vacuum. Then the mass itself does not become a wave. But the moving mass is escorted of the momentum of its intrinsic wave if it has an interaction.

Now these cohesion should be found. Results of electrodynamics are known, then o.k.

Einstein predicted with general relativity theory that a moving mass would make gravitation waves. The interpreters of his theories sticked at the thought of spatial curvature, that they could imagine this wave only being a vibrating of curvature, but they could not think in an exchange wave of wave momenta like e.m. waves. Nevertheless the solutions of general relativity theory describe gravitation waves analogously to the light waves in state of transversal waves of vacuum light velocity C.

 

  1. Interpretation error – De Broglie:
  2. The destiny took its run so. Apparently, De Broglie didn't read Einstein's theories exactly. As he found the waves caused on movement of masses (in 1924), he baptized them to be "matter waves". Never anybody thought that these waves could be gravitation waves or g.m. waves. But matter waves really are the quantum mechanical gravitation waves! Obviously, quantum physicists cannot understand Einstein's theories completely if they are not prepared to a unification concept in this thought. After all, recently "matter waves" were proved at fullerons. They "already" reach into the macroscopic. The last step will be done by me, when I shall make and prove macro-"matter waves". At this time one will see that they have the same behavior like e.m. waves.

    Starting from these theses, I have written a completely new universe. All the riddles are able to be solved out of the whole cohesion of this thesis. One part I myself solved. But this structure is such a kind of new and different that ignoramus cannot be friends whit it.

    After all, this system gives a thesis which seems to be disproved today:

    If the electromagnetism is made by two charges, the gravitomagnetism also should know a positive and a negative mass.

    The mass of positrons (and also of antiprotons) should be negative. Practically it would be the antigravitation between proton and antiproton. Antiprotons would have its own gravitation, a negative gravitation then. General relativity theory predicts such a state from "stupidity" of Einstein's cosm constant lambda.

    My solutions show the plausibility to start from negative mass.

    But now this idea seems to be disproved by two experiments obviously. It was put to the files:

    Particles and antiparticles of zero- kaons were examined. One didn't find any contrary mass. My solutions predict for particles that these kaons already consist of each one electron and one positron state. The mass of a kaon is only given as quantum effect. It really is a wave momentum, a momentum mass like at photons, but now leading to an apparently resting mass, although the particle was never balanced in rest. So there are no contrasts between the masses of kaons! At the inside of kaons the rest masses of electrons are already compensated against the positrons. So nobody could measure contrasts of rest masses.

    Nothing else will be left than to measure the mass of positrons. On principle of my solutions, there will be one plausible experiment at least. I am convinced that the result will be the negative mass if I could make these experiments.

    Mathematically one thinks to be able to conclude from inertia to heaviness directly. Inertial mass is the same as heavy mass. Or are only their amounts the same? The inertial behavior of antiparticles would be the same as particles. Is then everything the same?

    After my solution only the amounts are the same. The cause of inertia is given by Mach’s thesis, which I prove mathematically in my book: All the around-masses of the finite universe determine the structure of gravitationally exchange quanta. This looks like all masses would have interconnecting cables to all the other masses, where they would exchange their momenta of wave relations permanently. The movement of one mass is dependent on internal gravitation then. At the same time it is a change of the structure of the movement in this moment. This is the effect of inertia. If now there are not only a movement structure of all the positive masses but also such a structure of all the negative masses, then the behavior of the negative masses referred to its own inertia is the same as the behavior of the "contrary" inertia!

    Disproving the anti-heaviness over a non-given anti-inertia, all the pure thoughts made in present are a weak work therefore. Really they don't speak about high intelligence.

    (remark: the general relativity theory describes a state of finite chaining of all the masses into a completely curved system of their geodetic lines - this is a black-hole-state and a limited state and it is not the measurement of all the things. This means: gravitation waves in big dimensions change the curvature, gravitation waves in small dimensions change the curvature only a little. Nevertheless, they are quantum-effective exchange waves! Logically: Big masses make a strong curvature. Small masses make small curvatures.)

  3. Interpretation error: Heisenberg and Born
  4. I noticed: one cannot catch a particle directly. Only its momentum can be measured from its movement as an effect of its wave caused by the particle. Therefore the position of a particle can never be indicated by wave quantum interactions ('cause these are the only medium to indicate another!!!!). Only the momentum of that particle is measurable using Planck's quanta. Then the objectively real orbit of a particle cannot be measured, cannot be reflected.

    The uncertainty does not consist of particle position and wave momentum, but of interaction position of the wave momentum and of the dimension of its wave momentum.

    It then can be called no more: position probability of an electron, but interaction probability of a wave momentum of the electron. The total problem now is still a problem of only waves. Such a dualism of wave property and wave property is not a dualism any more. The particle properties of a resting particle may not be used because they are only rest masses, electric chargea, magnetic momenta, spins - these are different things than properties in movement.

    (When the speed of a particle is increased to light velocity extremely then also the momenta of subparticles have their interactions inside of the particle. Then one isn't still at the particle position, because this is not existent at all! But one can measure the interactions of the subparticles. This way one can also simulate such a state calling "big bang", although this hasn't gone so at all because subparticles were always locked inside of their unstable receptacle particle.)

  5. Interpretation error: "virtual particles"

"Virtual particles" are phenomena of wave momenta. The concept using the word "particle" is wrong here. One could speak of virtual momenta or of wave momenta. Why is this more correct? Above we noticed: the moving charge makes the momentum of its e.m. field. The moving mass makes the momentum of its own g.m. field. Or both is combined at particles. Momenta of these waves escort the moving masses or the moving particles. They are not the same as the particles! Therefore the concept of a "particle wave" is already nonsense. 'Cause moving particles make the wave which is not the same like particles, but it is the guide of the particles. The momentum of each of the escorting quanta of the wave in not at the position of the particle, but it wanders along the particle in its kind of orbit dependent on its orbit curvature and its speed. There isn't any particle wave, but a particle beam, which existence cannot be proved directly. Directly one can only prove the multiple number of the momenta of the wave quanta of the moving particles. Momenta are only working at momenta (never a wave quantum works at a particle itself but at the wave momentum of a particle!). The exchange of energies is only running over momentum exchange, but not over the immediate touch of masse points! A particle is able to tunnel because its momentum has already reached the other side of the wall where it was interacting and bringing its particle there, but the particle way was not able to be observed. This is logic! But this is different than present science interprets publish their blurry opinions. Using my united field theory, blurry interpretations are unraveled and finally understandable, clear and logical! One only can escape from it with that stubbornness blowing against me.

Fluctuations of vacuum are fluctuations of wave vacuum or of wave quantum compensations. The real vacuum of the real particles is unknown by present physics, where positive mass and negative mass are compensated following my opinion. Obviously, these observed particle formings and annihilations are nothing else than the observation of those proton neutrino pairs predicted by me, formed at 248 K to pairs and annihilated below of 128 K. Because matter of our environment is warmer than the receptacle of the experiment, these neutrino activities cannot be stopped. Only an experiment far away the Earth in the universe will prove that there are no fluctuations of vacuum any more, because pair forming rate of proton neutrinos has essentially decreased. Unfortunately, you can try to cool the environment on Earth making such an experiment.

The consequence is that wave momenta are not able to make a black hole conception of  HAWKING for evaporation and explosion. Hawking's theories are wrong, because the wrong "particle concept" was used for real wave quanta. Wave quanta like quanta of light do not change the balance of the black hole. That black hole would only eat the wave quanta into itself.

For first discussion it's enough. Do you see some chance helping me, for example for being supporter of my ideas or for opening a door for short publishing of my idea in any professional journal? Then another discussion would be meaningful"

These are my sites

http://www.arcusuniverse.com of my theory about World Fomula named Ideal-Oscillator-Theory, just as a variant of the Unified Field Theory

http://www.eu-charta.com of my social critics at Germany and the European Union

 

 
· All rights reserved: Arcus (Heinz-Joachim Ackermann, since1998) ·