Physics

A professor asked me to find an explanation to the double-slit experiment.

It is not even a quantum physics problem. It boils down to Maxwells principles, mostly.

Autofeedback

I feel that there are some serious problems with Einsteins theory of general relativity. Most basic problem is that everybody seems to agree that Einsteins formula is 100% correct, no matter how large the numbers you make it crunch are. It is very unlikely that a formula is this accurate over long distances. It has been established that Newtons formula is not very reliable at long distances. This is not a mistake, the formula is based on observation and over long distances there hasn’t been that much observation due to technical limitations which are now being bridged by more modern technology.

I solved most of general relativity’s problems by using a model called “automatic feedback”. This means that particles are not moved around in space due to a ‘force’ (which Newton actually meant as a model) or by a fabric of “space time” (which is also a model) but by its own field. I call this “automatic feedback” or ‘autofeedback’ as ‘auto' means ‘self’.

The lines in the double slit experiment would be caused by Planck’s constant.

Gravitational redshift

Basically a particle is moved around by its own field. I also think that energy levels in a particle are changed by its own field. This explains some phenomena like gravitational redshift. General relativity has a strange explanation of gravitational redshift but it also fails to explain why the energy levels in light particles change along with the redshift. If it were time dilation, the energy levels in the light wouldn’t change.

The changing energy levels in particles could make atomic clocks move slower, which Einstein explains as ‘time dilation’ and ‘spacetime’.

The cumulative effects of time dilation would be plain bizarre. If you would go to space now, you’d have to set your calendar back one day. If you go next year, you’d have to set it back two days.

Big bang theory

Also, if you would assume that a particle without autofeedback would lose energy, that would be an alternative for the big bang theory (which I hate). This is currently known as “tired light theory” which is also a name I hate.

Black holes

The idea of black holes in the centres of universes I’d like to solve by applying a principle similar to that of a ball; the gravitational center of a ball is in its center, but there is no mass there. The problem is that people insert enormous values into Einsteins equation, which is not possible with Newtons equation, we know that much, and then assume that anything the formula presents is automatically correct. What helps is that the fabricated pictures of black holes are very successful clickbait, whereas no one cares about tensors. This means that the perception is that science is popular, when in fact no one cares about the actual science.

If the speed of light is constant and light cannot escape from a black hole, then “time” is either “standing still” or “moving backwards”. It makes no sense.

LIGO

The problem with LIGO and similar measuring methods is: I’m sure they are measuring something, but what exactly are they measuring? The bias is to confirm that the \$1,1b investment was a good one. I’m sure if you make very sensitive measuring equipment, you’re bound to pick up something sometime, but I have some experience in measurements and how easy it is to be biased when it comes to your interpretation.

Space travel

As for space travel, I’ve come to understand that the entire surface of the moon seems to be dust. It is pulverized rock ground into very annoying dust by tiny meteorites slamming into the moon surface. The moon landers kept having to clean their equipment or it wouldn’t work because of all that dust. In our atmosphere the rocks vaporize. If any astronaut gets hit by a meteorite, he or she’s dead meat. It’s a miracle no one got hit by one yet. Once that happens it’s too late, but at least everyone will wake up and smell the coffee: There is nowhere to go.

Remaining questions

The question that remains is why do particles that move do the following things:

- clocks move slower

- energy is lost

- moving objects become shorter

That is the next mystery to be solved.

© Koos Swart 2006 - 2020