Chapter 92: The ‘New Physics’: the Orthogonality of Organizational and Newtonian Physics, Quantum Gravity, the Covalent Chemical Bond, the Enigmatic Pauli Exclusion Principle, Superconductivity, Logic Defined and the Mathematics of Concept/context

by Darryl Penney

Abstract: organizational physics and Newtonian physics are strange ‘bed-fellows’, but creating an orthogonality of the two parts is a relatively painless means of modernizing Newtonian physics by creating a ‘new’ physics. This bottom-up and top-down approach creates a workable combination of traditional and organizational physics, and it is still an orthogonality because (literally) everything is an orthogonality. As an example, chemists are apparently dissatisfied with the current lack of understanding of the atom by physicists and organizational physics is used to understand the Pauli Exclusion principle and link it with the Cooper pairs of superconduction resulting in significant simplification and shows that superconduction is a simple quantum gravity organizational effect. Another simplification is the formation of the universe as seen through organizational physics where the universe depends on the atom that is the orthogonality of the neutron that is the solidification/state of energy/organization that is the orthogonalization of nothing caused by God or chance. Also, a simple proof is given that only one version of ‘everyday’ logic is applicable as we use orthogonality to view the null space as/through a fractal/probability space. Newtonian physics is based on the concept of energy and adding organization orthogonally produces a ‘new physics’ that is based on concept and context and at the same time, traditional mathematics becomes a special case of a ‘new mathematics’ that is derivable from the logic of the dimensions of our universe and not from the counting of sheep.
Physics is, I believe, like the proverbial elephant with the physicists describing different parts according to their own specialities, but the one thing that they do not describe is the organization between the parts. I am calling this organization, ‘organizational physics’ because physics should be, to a significant amount, based on organization, and yet Newtonian physics is described in terms of energy, that can be thought of as orthogonal to organization. Organizational physics is physics derived in physical terms from the bottom-up, from the conception of the universe and stands independently and orthogonally with Newtonian physics that is derived top-down in the terms familiar to us that we used in survival of the fittest.

This is the necessary result of not updating Newtonian physics for 350 years and it requires a re-thinking of the fundamentals of physics, though I must admit that the concept/context of organizational physics is ‘new’ and very recent, see chapter 91 and is the ‘new physics’ that is required to understand modern physics. Newtonian physics is based on energy with bits of organization appended when necessary, and, I believe that the simplest fix is to add organizational physics as an independent/orthogonality. I can do this because the universe is based/derived from fractals that use orthogonality/decision-making as the driver of the expansion of the universe and we can create a bottom-up/top-down orthogonality that will ‘pass muster’ and not disturb traditional physics unduly.

Chemistry, on the other hand, is mainly based on the energy of reactions and in particular, on the bonds between the atoms and molecules and yet little is known about the physics of these bonds. The principle purpose is to simply explain the enigmatic Pauli Exclusion Principle in terms of this ‘new physics’ and its applicability to superconduction and it will be shown that a significant simplification is possible in the explanation of superconduction’s place in the organization of the universe. Additionally, the importance of the electron orbitals to the organizational solution expands our view and brings many new insights into the workings of the universe. Superconduction is an effect of the organizational solution of our universe and by the application of the mathematics of concepts used by our mind/brain, we can use the physical measurement/entanglement for our own ends through an understanding of quantum gravity to produce room-temperature superconductors.

preamble: God or chance created our universe from (literally) nothing into an orthogonality of positive energy and negative energy, where the latter is organization that is quantum gravity, that links atomic binding energy of the nucleus to the gravity of the stars [hyperbola y=1/x]. We can view this universe through a fractal [stars to subatomic particles] and a probability space [measurement at a point and constant summation overall giving a fifth dimension (a+b)=1 for a, b measurement/recorders] and this organizational physics (chapter 91), together with Newtonian physics resolves, I believe, all of the enigmas that have occurred with traditional physics.

For example: the Schrodinger’s probability distribution of the electrons in the atomic orbitals, wave/particle orthogonality/duality, quantum tunnelling is probabilistic, Huygens’ instantaneous wavefronts are probability fronts, the stars are a fractal distribution, as are the doublet and triplet organization of subatomic particles, virtual/orthogonal particles are choice and the three quests from the fifth dimension that the Michelson-Morley experiment shows that every measurer sees the speed of light as a constant irrespective of their motion, the overall conservation of total energy [zero] and the creation of dark energy with space etc.

Physics and chemistry do abut in the formation of the atom and especially the bonding through electrons, which is the basis of chemistry, and yet the explanation lies in the world of physics. Chemists are not happy with the physicists’ explanation of the atom’s construction, and I don’t blame them, and I agree with the quotation below that shows that physics has been a little backward in answering such a simple question as posed and the reason is, I believe, that much of the strength of physics, the organization, has been woefully neglected, to such an extent that the scorn of the quotation below, is immediately apparent.

‘According to the exclusion principle enunciated by the Austrian born physicist Wolfgang Pauli in 1924, no more than two electrons can occupy any one orbital. This is an extraordinarily deep principle of quantum mechanics; it can be traced to foundations embedded in the structure of spacetime, and is perhaps the deepest of all principles …. There is no picture to elucidate the principle: it is handed down on stone tablets as an axiom, from whatever hand carves axioms.’ (The Periodic Kingdom, Peter Atkins, p 116) Surely, the time has come to answer this lampooning of physics, no matter how justly it is deserved and I will use organizational physics to do so, because the problem is completely out of the realm of Newtonian physics.

In chapter 88, the structure of the photon was discussed and in chapter 90, the structure of the nucleus, but the structure of the electron shell, in terms of organizational physics will go a long way to explaining the problem that chemistry has with the physics of the atom. Chemistry can be explained simply by the accounting of energy and that can lead to (unfortunately) down-grading the organization of the atoms, but one question is an enigma, ‘analogous to the distribution in atoms – the atomic orbitals – the distribution in molecules, which spreads over the constituent atoms, are called molecular orbitals. However, even though they have a wider span and a more complicated form, these orbitals are still orbitals, and the exclusion principle still applies: only two electrons can be accommodated in one of these orbitals, and this is why a covalent bond consists of a pair of electrons.’ (p 143)

Further, ‘as so often in the development of science, comprehension springs from simple concepts that operate just below the surface of actuality, and constitute the true actuality. Once atoms were known – and their constitution elucidated in terms of that great invention of the mind, quantum mechanics – the foundation of the kingdom was exposed. Simple principles – the enigmatic exclusion principle, in particular – showed that the periodicity of the kingdom was a representation of the periodicity of the electronic structure of atoms’ (p 148)

The first part of the quotation sums up nicely the formulation and necessity of organizational physics because Newtonian physics is still being used after 350 years and it needs the orthogonality of organization to fully understand/describe the workings of the universe and orthogonality is simply decision-making that we have been using literally forever and has been hidden in plain sight. The second part reveals the frustration of the exclusion principle and together they give the answer to why there are only two electrons in a bond. The short answer is that there are only two electrons in each orbital because two electrons form a bond that underlies all of chemistry, whereas the longer answer requires understanding by looking at the atom as an organization and further, into quantum gravity.

Quantum gravity is simply an attraction between every piece of energy because the law of conservation of energy requires an accounting that the total sum of energy be zero. I can imagine a traditional scientist throwing up his/her hands and saying that the speed of light is the maximum speed and how can every piece of energy be accountable all of the time. I have to refer queries to earlier chapters (88 to 91), but a null space and probability space have the same instant accountability and I am looking at our universe [a null space] through the orthogonality of a fractal/probability space and a null space has the property of creating positive energy and an [equal] negative organizational energy from zero energy.

There is a simple hyperbolic relation [y=1/x], derived in chapter 90, that is the organizational energy that allows us to visualize the accounting of the energy in bonds, speed etc., because the two must be equal and sum to zero. This hyperbolic relation, which is quantum gravity, depends only on the organizational energy that binds the quarks in the elementary particles, the protons and neutrons in the nucleus, the electrons in the orbitals, the effects of diffraction and gravity. In other words, there is a simple hyperbolic relationship between all organizational energy across the universe dependant on the separation only, and that the total sum (of positive and negative) energy is always zero (chapter 91).

The above does not answer the question, but gives a picturesque/understandable accounting of energy that is removed from our actual universe, that is a null space, by viewing it through spaces that we can comprehend, namely a fractal and probability space. I base this premise on three logical reasons, firstly, the Michelson-Morley experiment requires a measuring space, secondly, any conservation of energy requires instantaneous accounting and thirdly, the doublets and triplets of subatomic particles as well as the fractal array of stars. Adding orthogonality indicates a null space as well as being the driver behind the three spaces, and, as given as an example below, the formation of the atom through orthogonality is breathtakingly simple.

I believe that the quark/antiquark pair is an organizational solution that defines the elementary (orthogonal) particles: the proton, neutron and electron each containing a quark/antiquark pair and the extra quarks in the proton and neutron forming a quark/antiquark pair that is the binding energy in the nucleus between the protons and neutrons. The alpha particle (helium nucleus) is particularly stable because of the close tetrahedral packing of the quark/antiquark pair (between the neutrons and protons) and this stability allows element building in the stars. In the same way, the quark/antiquark pair in the electron becomes a close packing of quarks in a pair of electrons in an orbital and thus an organizational bond is formed requiring less organization and less energy. QED

Notice that energy (positive) and organizational energy (negative) are equal and opposite and the total is always zero and further, a quark cannot exist on its own because it is an organizational solution in doublets and triplets. This logical/organizational solution forbids a solitary quark and that has been found by experiment to be the case because it (presumably) creates a singularity. The strength of the alpha particle and the two orbital electrons are the most stable options and form a strong bond, but not as strong [a singularity/solution] as in the elementary particles and this is reflected in both the energy and organization (still summing to zero). Thus, it could be considered that the alpha particle and the two orbital electrons are lower in energy (Newtonian physics) because it is lower in organizational energy, and notice that the organization provides the context that energy does not. A more detailed derivation/explanation of organizational physics and the atom is given in the previous several chapters (88 to 91).

Context is at the heart of organizational physics and is/has the power to link the problem that concerns us with the wider universe and it will be appreciated that that is the antithesis/orthogonality of Newtonian physics. Another aspect of measurement/entanglement is the wave/particle duality that is a necessary part of orthogonality, and considered as concept/context by the mind/brain. I suspect that the electron, like the oscillations in the neutrino, oscillate between a wave and a particle, or is something that we can only imagine as such a combination. This oscillation could be represented/considered as a ‘wave packet’ that is often used to describe photons (principally) as a combination of wave and particle [by the mind/brain that considers the ‘between’ of the orthogonalities], but the oscillation between the orthogonalities seems more likely in a physical sense. Hence, what can be proven for a waveform, should be able to be proven for a particle and vice versa, so, for interest sake, let us do that for a wave because it has been done for a particle, above.

The ‘stickiness’ of the electron pair and of the proton/neutron bond in the nucleus/alpha-particle is explained by the simple use of the hyperbolic quantum gravity function and between two large masses it becomes the familiar Newton’s Law of Gravity equation. From chapter 90, ‘consider that “Newton’s law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. This is a general physical law derived from empirical observations by what Isaac Newton called inductive reasoning. It is a part of classical mechanics and was formulated in Newton’s work Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (‘”the Principia”’), first published on 5 July 1687.” (Wikipedia, Newton’s law of universal gravitation)’

‘I find it difficult to believe that the Universal Law of Gravitation is based on “a general physical law derived from empirical observations by what Isaac Newton called inductive reasoning”! However, this inductive reasoning that was derived from empirical observations must be so, because firstly, Newtonian physics considers positive and negative energy to be the same, when they are better/can-only-be considered as energy and organization, secondly, the negative energy of gravity is independent and completely hidden from/in Newtonian physics, and thirdly, the use of the name Universal Law of Gravitation is a little grandiose/premature considering Newtonian physics’ lack of appreciation of, what I believe is, the true organizational nature of the attraction that is simple and continuous from elementary particles to the furtherest galaxies.’

‘Fourthly, should I shall take the Universal Law of Gravitation as a postulate, for simplicity, because if Newtonian physics is unable to give a proof of the law of gravity, can/should I provide a proof based on the fact that binding/gravity is necessarily purely organisational (negative) energy that is independent of (positive) energy? The proof would be informative and indicitive of a change in thinking that quantum mechanics and relativity have brought to the fore, so, through the mathematics of concepts, that everything is related orthogonaly, the requirements of the principle of Occam’s razor and the simplicity of the relation y=1/x indicates that this relation is probably true. This proof may sound a little strange, but the orthogonality that we have seen in quantum mechanics and relativity limits provability when compared to the preciseness of mathematics, and so, we must welcome the indeterminate into our thinking.’ This hyperbola is quantum gravity and is reproduced here because it is the negative/organizational energy that I believe is the orthogonal counterpart of Newtonian physic’s energy based system, that is based on the units that we used in the predator/prey evolution of the survival of the fittest.

‘An atom consists of a cloud of electrons surrounding a minute central nucleus ….about the size of a fly at the center of a football stadium’. (p 69) This quotation gives some idea of the size of the electron orbitals and it is clear that the representation of the electrons is, as Schrodinger and Born proposed, as being the ‘probability of finding an electron at a given position’ (The Material World, Rodney Cotterill, p 39) seems sensible as we are looking at the atom in a probability space. Clearly, in these circumstances, it is better to consider the electron in a wave mode and see if we can show that the wave mode produces a bond between the two electrons. Notice that the relative size of the electron cloud versus the nucleus is apparently determined by the constant [absolute] speed of light and the fitting in of the wavelengths/standing-waves.

Likewise the Tunnel effect, that reminds us that we are looking at the particle in a probability space, so, its wave orthogonality denotes the probability of where it will be, not where it actually is, which is, of course, unknowable in null space. In other words, the wave is the probability and the particle is the measured particle, if it could be measured. The Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer theory says that ‘the electrons in a superconductor exist in pairs, and the waves of all the pairs are locally in phase’ p 236). Also, Brian Josephson showed theoretically, in 1962, that pair tunnelling is just as likely as single electron tunnelling.’ (p 236) Clearly, this is an enigma in Newtonian physics because both electrons have the same charge, and yet are happy to coexist!

This reminds me of the Pauli exclusion principle, where two electrons are happy to occupy the same Bohr orbit. The answer is, as above, ‘the waves of all the pairs are locally in phase’, and why is this so? Clearly, it is not energy related because the two particles have the same charge, so, it must be organizational and a guitar string is such a wave organization in that it can hold one or two waves on the same string, provided that they are in phase and this is called a standing wave. Notice that, like the orbitals, the string can hold one wave or two waves as a standing wave, but can we visualize a standing wave plus another? The Pauli Exclusion Principle says that only a maximum of two have been seen and this is backed up by the [logical] complication of contemplating more than two waves on a string.

A small digression appears worthwhile at this point because the overall subatomic and macroscopic effects of the wave effects on a string, together with the same correspondance of subatomic and macroscopic effects occuring with diffraction of a water wave shows, I believe, a simplicity/regularity that is carried through all levels of a fractal, and the same effect is even more apparent with orthogonality, as discussed below.

This sentence is suggesting that ‘everyday’ logic is a symptom of the fact, I believe, that the universe is simple, along the lines of Occams’ razor and defined by the simple equation (1+(-1))=0 [Theory of Everything, chapter 91]. Quantum gravity shows that diffraction is enigmatic conceptually, but necessary contextually due to the simplicity of the universe’s derivation. It seems that in the orthogonality of particle/wave, a maximum of two gives the least complexity for a string and the packing is closer for two particles and would seem to avoid the possibility of logical singularities. It could be considered that a standing wave is organizationally simpler than two waves and as the positive and negative energies have the same magnitude, the positive energy is lower and the standing wave becomes a lower energy/organization somewhat stable bond. QED

Questing is the basis of a measuring space and virtual/orthogonal particles are, I believe, the physical/organizational manifestation of choice because if the things that can be used are not presented, how can they be used? So, from a purely logical perspective, all space should be bubbling with orthogonal fractal growths of (literally) nothing, as has been found experimentally, and similarly, from a logical point of view, reactions are forced to react to quanta because organizationally, quanta are a logical requirement of a system that is not infinitely divisible. Organizational physics shows that no enigmas exist because organization is the base on which everything must rest and enigmas only appear when Newtonian physics is used on its own. Organizational physics shows a logic that flows across physics, and we notice that the standing wave representation of the Bohr atom is consistent, as is the ‘locally in phase’ and the ‘pair tunnelling’ found in superconductors, and everything falls logically into place when both parts of physics is used.

Compare that superconductivity ‘depends upon a subtle attraction between pairs of electrons, which is mediated by the lattice of positive ions. This overcomes the inherent repulsion between two particles having the same electric charge, but the effect is weak and readily destroyed by thermal fluctuations if the temperature is more than a few degrees Kelvin. Normal electrical resistance arises from the scattering of the electron waves by the lattice vibrations. In the superconducting state, the motions of all the Cooper pairs are mutually in phase (i.e. in step with one another) and a change in the momentum of one pair requires a compensating change in all the others.’ (p 284)

Firstly, the ‘subtle attraction between pairs of electrons, which is mediated by the lattice of positive ions’ is partially correct because the thermal excitation of the lattice breaks apart the covalent bonding, but the force is overwhelming as the separation decreases and is ‘subtle’ because it is a secondary attraction. The covalent bonds must be reasonably/sufficiently weak to allow Life to function chemically with the multitude of organic chemicals that the body uses. In other words, the magnitude of the bond must enable Life to exist in the forms that we are familiar with, and presumably we are part of the multiverse that allows us, because we are here, to exist and these natural constants that allow us to exist must form an organizational solution that allowed us to evolve.

On the other hand, superconductivity is something that we are building, using our mind/brain and that is allowable from the fifth dimension [measurement/recorder a and b for any a, b, Mandrake effect]. Similar to diffraction, superconductivity appears to be a by-blow of the organizational solution of constants that allow our chemistry to work properly and allowed us to have evolved. This is an important point that diffraction is a result of the simplicity of quantum gravity that is part of the binding/gravity hyperbola and superconductivity is a result of the necessity of the electron-electron bond that provides life with the means of existing through chemistry, particularly organic chemistry.

The ‘subtle attraction’ is due to the close tetrahedral packing of the quark/antiquark pairs that form a less powerful binding energy than that of the elementary particles, but still in the form of the organizational energy obeying the quantum-gravity hyperbolic relationship. Trying to use quotations from Newtonian physics is clouding the issue because electric charge is energy based and the repulsion has nothing to do with the orthogonality of organization because energy and organization are independent/orthogonal. In other words, two electrons repel energywise, and that is unrelated to them coming together organizationally because energy and organization are orthogonal and they can only exist separately/without-respect-to-each-other.

Firstly, there is nothing ‘subtle’ in combining two electrons in a bond, nor protons in the nucleus, but it happens and these huge forces are overcome/turned-off by using an orthogonality ‘switch’ that toggles between energy and organization because they are required/defined to be independent and can only exist if they are independent. Orthogonality is the means of creating space, and space creates the energy of the universe [dark energy] and gives it form by using the wave/particle and quark/antiquark orthogonality/duality to keep the electron and proton separate in the atom.

Secondly, ‘the effect is weak and readily destroyed by thermal fluctuations’ is in general, true, ‘many molecular species form softer solids than ions do, and are more easily shaken apart into their constituent molecules by the gentle application of heat’ (The Periodic Kingdom, Peter Atkins, p 144) but, ‘there are certain cases in which atoms can form covalent bonds to neighbours, those neighbours can bind neighbours, and so on, to form a potentially infinite solid. One example is diamond, a form of carbon.’ (p 145) Thirdly, the ‘Cooper pairs are mutually in phase’ shows that the covalent bond above, is probably being used/formed.

The above illustrates, I believe, the basis of superconductivity, but there is still the question of how it all fits together, so consider the quotation below, from http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/webprojects2000/igrant/bcstheory.html.

‘BCS Superconductivity Theory
In 1957, Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer (BCS) proposed a theory that explained the microscopic origins of superconductivity, and could quantitatively predict the properties of superconductors. Prior to this, there was Ginzburg-Landau theory, suggested in 1950, which was a macroscopic theory. This will not be dealt with here, but Ginzburg-Landau theory can be derived from BCS theory.
Cooper Pair Formation
Mathematically, BCS theory is complex, but relies on an earlier ‘discovery’ by Cooper (1956), who showed that the ground state of a material is unstable with respect to pairs of ‘bound’ electrons. These pairs are known as Cooper pairs and are formed by electron-phonon interactions – an electron in the cation lattice will distort the lattice around it, creating an area of greater positive charge density around itself. Another electron at some distance in the lattice is then attracted to this charge distortion (phonon) – the electron-phonon interaction. The electrons are thus indirectly attracted to each other and form a Cooper pair – an attraction between two electrons mediated by the lattice which creates a ‘bound’ state of the two electrons.’
An illustration is given of one electron bouncing between the atoms in an array and a second illustration shows a more stable Cooper’s-pair/covalent-bonded electron pair passing unimpeded through the array. The previous paragraph seems to emphasize the lattice, whereas a covalent bond emphasizes the electron bonding, and further, the lattice is important in the breaking of the covalent bond by heat/agitation.
‘The formation of Cooper pairs is supported by the fact that BCS and the Ginzburg-Landau theories predict the charge and mass of the supercurrent ‘particle’ to be 2e and 2Me respectively.’
Notice that this is probably the effect of two electrons bonding and not a variable result that includes the lattice and thus supports a covalent bonding.
‘Cooper Pairs – BCS Theory Supercurrent Carriers
The Cooper pairs within the superconductor are what carry the supercurrent, but why do they experience such perfect conductivity?
Mathematically, because the Cooper pair is more stable than a single electron within the lattice, it experiences less resistance (although the superconducting state cannot be made up entirely of Cooper pairs as this would lead to the collapse of the state).
Physically, the Cooper pair is more resistant to vibrations within the Cooper pairs move through the lattice relatively unaffected by thermal vibrations (electron-phonon interactions) below the critical temperature.’
The above quotation is not an explanation and so contains an enigma that Newtonian physics cannot answer, and that is ‘why do they experience such perfect conductivity?’ To answer this question requires organizational physics because organizational physics is the solution to an organizational problem and it has been pointed out that we have to consider our world O, in which we are the observers, as well as world P that is the physical world and this must be divided into the macroscopic world M and the atomic world A. The difference is that world M experiences friction and world A does not, and this is because world A is an organizational solution that contains rules/solutions that cannot be broken. If these rules are broken, the system falls into chaos, and cannot return to order. The danger points become singularities, such as the Lorentz transformation that necessarily prevents the speed of light being exceeded, but in doing so, the space places restrictions on the creation of energy.
For the universe to survive, the three derivations/quests from the fifth dimension in a probability space [space-time and (a+b)=1 for measurement/recorders a and b] must be observed, and they are the transfer of energy, as a photon, at a constant speed with respect to any observer, conservation of (zero) energy and the organizational creation of energy as space is created. The solution to the problem is the minimum solution that contains no friction, otherwise the universe would grind to a halt, which ours has clearly not done. If there is no reason for friction to exist, why should it? The fifth dimension provides an organizational solution by questing the three factors that are available to it, and that is sufficient to create a universe and the parasite of Life.
A digression might be appropriate because the orthogonality means that there are two solutions as were discussed above for the electron being a wave and a particle. However, the mathematics of concepts allows context that everything is joined together and solutions can be obtained via different contexts. This shows, in the Theory of Theories that a theory is ‘robust’ and I maintain that based on the dimensions, this theory is ‘robust’. Thus, the fact that the universe continues to operate inflicts the greatest enigma that we have accepted over the last hundred years, that the universe runs with no friction.

The enigmas are caused by our expectations, based on the reality/logic of the predator/prey situation with which we evolved, and, when taking the three quests into account, the enigmas logically disappear. This last sentence suggests an example of one of the most disturbing and enigmatic happenings in modern physics, and that is why do mass, length and energy all react similarly as the speed tends to the speed of light, and the answer is, as has been mentioned before, that it is simpler that all the dimensions change by the one factor [Lorentz transformation], than for one to be singled out. Thus the dimensions must be the basis of logic in our universe and not what we decide logic should be and ‘everyday’ logic must be based on the dimensions, whereas formal logic must be part of mathematics because it is part of our world O and not the physical world P.
So, the Theory of Everything, (1+(-1))=0, shows the fractal and probability spaces that are an orthogonalization of the null space of our universe. This finally puts to rest the problem that I had with the multitude of answers for logic, as shown in chapter 75. I am pleased that this simplicity shows that the four search axioms: elegance, forward-planning, questing and relevance, agree so well with the Theory of Everything, as they should, being derived from the space and the dimensions. For completeness, questing is fractalization/orthogonality, relevance is virtual/orthogonal particles as a manifestation of choice, forward-planning is our sixth dimension necessitated by the predator/prey situation of evolution and elegance is due to [arguably] evolution or the Golden triangle (chapter 78).
Orthogonality creates/is a decision and an organization is based on decisions and the question that a photon [and every other particle, as has been found from experiment] is a wave or particle is immediately answerable as it must be both. An electron forms part of an atom because it must be kept separate from the proton, to which it is attracted, otherwise it will combine to form a neutron and make a universe of neutrons. On approaching a nucleus, the wave orthogonality of the electron puts it into a ‘holding’ pattern and forms an atom of hydrogen that explains the orbitals, and thus, chemistry. It could be said that orthogonality produces the organization by switching to an independent form. The neutron orthogonates to a proton and electron and these can combine back again, with the help of the neutrino, but in forming an orthogonality, the atom is able to form. Thus, the universe depends on the atom that is the orthogonality of the neutron that is the solidification/state of energy that is the orthogonalization of nothing caused by God or chance. Simple!
So, what is superconductivity? From above, it is a by-product of the covalent bond and is the passing from world P to world A, and the effect is that the normal electrical resistance changes to no resistance. The covalent bond producing superconductivity is no different, in principle, to the constant speed of light producing relativity or the lack of a non-infinitely small measuring rod producing quantum mechanics. They are things that happen as part of the organizational solution in our universe and must be the logic as they are derived from the dimensions.
Organizational physics starts at the bottom, from (literally) nothing, and builds up through the orthogonality of a fractal and probability space. Our universe is a simple logical place that derives from only five dimensions, but, if we use the thinking/units of the predator/prey situation that we evolved with, we will create enigmas for ourselves. Organizational physics does from the bottom-up what Newtonian physics does from the top-down, but without the mistakes because it is anchored in the dimensions and that forces logic to align with it. This seems a good point to reaffirm that I am proposing an orthogonality of Newtonian physics and organizational physics because Newtonian physics is so well established, but can be considered a ‘simplification’.
From the same source, the Bristol University Chemistry Department, ‘with the advent of high temperature superconduction, it is relatively simple to prepare and use a ceramic high temperature superconductor in most sixth form/college science labs. What follows are brief instructions for making an yttrium-barium-copper-oxide superconductor – these are taken from the instructions provided with a superconductor fabrication kit that was marketed by Colorado Futurescience; Colorado Futurescience no longer make this kit, and so made the instructions available on the web at http://www.webcom.com/cfsc/scpart1.html. The method is typical of ceramic processes in scientific research.’
The recipe for making a high temperature superconductor reads like a cookbook and seems to be alchemy with no reason for ‘why it works’. It is incredible that it works so simply, and that it works is testament to the mind/brain’s use of the general a and b of the fifth dimension. We can manipulate the physical world through concepts and context generated in our mind/brain and transferred through measurement/entanglement into the physical world. We have taken these concepts and contexts into research of how to do things that benefit us, and taming electricity is one of our greatest feats.
‘In 1964, William Little suggested that a quite different type of superconductivity might be possible in compounds comprising stacks of flat organic molecules…. He postulated that this could lead to Cooper pair formation without the need for lattice distortion… speculated that the effect might even survive at or above room temperature …. the first organic superconductors have appeared. They consist primarily of stacks of tetramethyltetraselanafulvalene (TMTSF)’ (The Material World, Roger Cotterill, p 284) These organic superconductors consist of channels running the length of the superconductor channelling the covalent-bond/Cooper-pairs throughout the body of the superconductor (p 284).
Heat/agitation breaks the covalent bonds and yet the hardest substance known is diamond that is composed of covalent bonds, so, the covalent bond is versatile and amenable to the type of the array in the conductor. ‘It is the atoms lying at the protein molecules surface which have the largest vibrational amplitudes because they are subject to the weakest positional constraints’ (p 335) and thus, the central atoms of proteins have markedly smaller ‘relative amplitude of their vibrations’. (p 335) This rigidity at the heart of the molecule mimics the rigidity of low temperature and by providing the appropriate channels along the conductor/protein, the conditions pertaining to the organizational solution may be attained.
Entanglement in the conductor is assumed, ‘in the superconducting state, the motions of all of the Cooper pairs are mutually in phase (i.e. in step with one another) and a change in the momentum of one pair requires a compensating change in all the others.’ (p 284) So, our first job is to separate out the momentum/energy that is a function of the motion of the electrons (ignoring the energies of mass etc. also) as being of no interest to us at the moment and concentrate on the organization that is (a and b)=1. It is obvious that there is organizational entanglement between every particle in the universe as we are looking through a probability space, but is there any special association for superconducting? Why should there be, if the universe is simple in being derived from five dimensions, and superconduction is an offshoot of the organizational solution? The organizational solution is the one and only quantum gravity (a and b)=1 and no other entanglement is necessary [nor possible].
Our mind/brain evolved to turn the measurement/entanglement of the physical world into concepts and context for survival of the fittest, then evolved technology, such as we see above, in evolving room temperature superconductors. Just as the above has tried to explain the how and why of superconducting, organizational physics is needed to understand that the universe is simple and derived from five dimensions and that is why we can turn the organizational solution of the universe to our own advantage. In other words, our universe is so simple that there are few rules to restrict us.
Unfortunately, the orthogonality of technology/control is lacking/deficient in control, and as a result, our planet/host is facing a mass extinction by being overrun by humans. Organizational physics and the mathematics of concepts enable us to understand physics because it emphasises context that has been traditionally neglected. Context/cooperation is at the heart of the social sciences, politics etc. and this, I believe, is the reason that these disciplines have stagnated and not reached a level that can organize and manage our environment. The organizational solution for us, I believe, is to be found by using the mathematics of concepts on us, as well as the universe, above.
Conclusion: looking at the atom and the important role that the orbital electrons play in chemistry has highlighted the importance of their role in organizational physics. As spectacular as the orbital electrons’ role in the success of room temperature superconduction is, it pales in comparison to realizing the orbital electrons’ role in producing space, forming the universe and augmenting our understanding/realization of the strength of orthogonality behind/within the universe. Orthogonality is firstly, the fundamental decision maker that is the evolution of the mind/brain that we have taken for granted and not questioned its logical function. Secondly, orthogonality underlies the mathematics of concepts because to consider a problem we need to create orthogonal answers and then choose one or the other based on context. Thirdly, our mind/brain uses and is built on the mathematics of concepts that is the orthogonality as shown in the fifth dimension (a+b)=1.
Fourthly, orthogonality, underlies fractalization of energy and organization and forms the universe by creating space (literally) from nothing, as shown by the Theory of Everything (1+(-1))=0, fifthly, the expansion of the universe continually creates energy according to the questing of the dimensions. Sixthly, the orthogonality of the neutron produces the protons and electrons that form the atoms, seventhly, orthogonality of energy and organization forms the proton-proton, proton-neutron and electron-electron bond that makes the atom and molecules work. Eighthly, orthogonality produces the quantum gravity hyperbola and ninthly, the fractal array of galaxies that allow us to exist because they are receding from us [Olbers paradox] and so on.
The two paragraphs, above, show the scope of orthogonality and suggests that logic evolves as we use orthogonality to view the null space as/through a fractal/probability space. Einstein postulated the results of the Michelson-Morley experiment in the Special Theory of Relativity that every measurer sees the speed of light as a constant and I do not blame him because it is (at first sight) enigmatic, but, using a probability space, which is a measuring space, explains the enigma in the above. Whilst the universe is obviously fractal, as seen in the stars, galaxies, doublets and triplets of the subatomic particles, combining these two spaces and reducing the orthogonality proves the statement, above. This result is astounding, that everything in the universe is a decision/orthogonality!
However, that is what has been proven and so it is not an enigma if we base it on the dimensions, and then call it logical, and secondly, energy provides the motive power when organization does not, because they are orthogonal/independent. In other words, looking at an action in a different direction, if there is energy available, what logical choices are available? The choices must be available everywhere and it has been found that virtual/orthogonal options/particles evolve from nothing and if a reaction occurs, it will necessarily be at the lowest energy possible, and that ensures no logical singularities. Thus, ‘decision/orthogonality’ makes sense because both are needed for growth and growth/space is necessary for energy creation to drive the universe.
‘When the only tool that you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail’ is what Newtonian physics has done by creating a technology of energy, literally and conceptually, without a control/context and, I believe, this mismatch has contributed significantly to the world’s problems. This ‘new physics’ is based on orthogonality, not energy, and that is a much more fundamental concept. Likewise, the mathematics of concept/context where each of concept and contexts is independent and equally important (with a name change to reflect this) must become the ‘new mathematics’. As a consequence of this statement, that everything is a decision/orthogonality, a prediction/choice must be presented and that is summed in the following paragraph.
Considering that neither Newtonian physics nor traditional mathematics is solidly based on the dimensions, the possibility exists to revamp our social organizations so that they work better for us by using the mathematics of concept/context to improve the ‘survival of the best’ that we have badly implemented via religion [the context of empathy] and it can be done by governments when they implement a workable plan based on the mathematics of concepts (for example chapter 54).
References: all quotations are fully referenced in the body and earlier chapters can be found on darrylpenney.com if required.

Chapter 91: Organizational Physics: ‘Why Things Happen?’, Quantum Gravity, ‘Everyday’ Logic and the Theory of Everything (1+(-1))=0 Derived from Nothing

Chapter 90: Organizational Physics Replaces Mathematical Physics with Fundamental Extensions in Mathematics and Physics.

Chapter 89: The Universe as an Orthogonality, the Quark/antiquark Bond, the Universe is Fractal as are the Subatomic Particles, Quantum ChromoDynamics and the Unified Field Theory Simplified, the Role of Quarks, the Three Fundamental Operators and Inside the Nucleus

Chapter 88: Inside the Photon, the Law of Conservation of Energy, the Big Whoosh, Our Universe Viewed as a Probability Space, Unifying the Photon with Gravity, the Quark Confinement and the Grand Unified Theory (GUT)

Chapter 78: Love, Beauty, Ecstasy, the Golden Ratio and the Reason that Sexual Selection Works

Chapter 75: The Nature of Life and Logic, Newton Laws of Motion, Reflection and Diffraction

Chapter 54: The Determination Orgene, Selecting the ‘Best’ and a General Solution to ‘Struggle Street’ and the World’s Overpopulation.