Chapter 132: Fixing Fundamental Physics and Saving the World

by Darryl Penney

Abstract: it is time that ‘modern physics’ became ‘modern’ by actually incorporating the physical into it and not ‘making up laws’, such as the law of conservation of energy, law of gravity etc. out of ‘thin air’. The universe does not follow ‘laws’, but is a fractal bound by non-relativistic ‘absolutes’, functions relativistically and allows vast new opportunities for physics when it actually puts the physical into physics.

Keywords: conservation of energy; “New Think”; relativity; quantum gravity; dark energy; Occam’s razor; principle of least action

Extended abstract: the ancient Greeks wasted 2,000 years and fundamental physics the last 100 years by leading civilisation ‘up the garden path’ with theories that do not work. Theories are ‘armchair musings’ [top-down] and need first principles, as in mathematics [bottom-up] as well. A combination of physics, the physical, relativity and entanglement leads to a new way of thinking [concept, “New Think”] using general mathematical physics [context] that generates the organisation to control society and save the planet. Concerning the state of the planet, physics is where the finger points, proven simply in this letter, that shows the target where the Greens and future generations can focus their wrath. The way forward is clear, but our thinking needs to ‘grow up’ and use the new software of “New Think’.

The ancient Greeks were so impressed by music and in particular with the emotional energy that was produced in the listener by the organisation of the notes that they imagined that the motion of the stars were governed by the same simple fractions found on a vibrating string that produced the notes of music. Physics is about measuring things, but in the same way that the ancient Greeks extrapolated too far, physics welcomed Newton’s laws of motion, called them an ‘absolute’ and built on them leading to the law of gravity and the law of conservation of energy that we find in a planetary system. By ‘absolute’, I mean a foundation that must be in place at all times and that any future work can cite and build upon, but it has to be the correct foundation and physics is not using it. This letter provides the base that should have been used.

The law of gravity has never been derived [as is well known] because it was based on an ‘inspired guess’ by Newton, and the reason that it has never been derived in three hundred years is because the law of conservation of energy is incomplete. The two laws that are basic to fundamental physics are incomplete, and it is impossible to derive the full relationship of ‘quantum gravity’. The derivation of all three are simple ‘one liners’ as shown in the following paragraph. To be fair, Einstein ‘corrected’ the law of gravity by using an ‘analogy’ of ‘curved space’ before it was verified by experiment, but to guess a factor of 2 is pure luck. Even worse, fundamental physics effectively ‘went to sleep’ a hundred years ago because it could not explain Einstein’s ‘curved space’, which is not surprising, because it does not exist [the creation equation is linear].

Relativity is the functioning of the universe and a lack of relativity is the form of the universe and a lack of relativity is easily created [and our understanding of the universe] by the ratios of the dimensions [energy (E), organisation (O), time (t) and length (l)] created by expansion. The five absolutes are firstly, the sum of energy and organisation is always zero [from the creation equation (1+(-1))=0], secondly, energy and organisation [dark energy] are necessarily created to balance the necessary expansion [for the creation equation to exist] of the universe [E/t+O/t, all volume], thirdly, the constant speed of light [with respect to any measurer] is l/t (all E and O) and fourthly, gravity [so called quantum gravity] is E/l+O/l (all t). The law of gravitation is:

E(mass1)/l times (for relativity) E(mass2)/l plus O(mass1)/l times (for relativity) O(mass2)/l

Notice that the ‘inverse square law’ is inappropriate and is actually derived from the absolutes and the ‘+’ in the creation equation stands for all relationships [physical, logical, restrictive, use etc.] between two entities.

Fifthly, the role of Occam’s razor and the principle of least action is crucial to the understanding of the functioning of the universe and the latter asks ‘why does light travel in a straight line?’. Newton’s laws of motion say that a photon must travel in a straight line otherwise the laws do not work and so misses out on vital information and is, again, ‘up in the air’. I believe that the answer is that there has to be a unique answer and the only unique answer in every case is the minimum and the organisation that belongs to the minimum energy is the most efficient organisation. I can say this with conviction because if either energy or organisation were not at a minimum, there would be two solutions at the same time and this would cause chaos in the functioning. The functioning of the universe is the logic of the half-truth [true, false, alternating true-false, chaos] and this answers another question that was ‘glossed over’ a hundred years ago concerning the wave-particle duality of the photon because both the wave and the particle are energy according to Einstein and that fitted with physics’ view that energy was everything, but, as above, that is an incomplete view and again, ‘up in the air’.

In a fractal, everything has the same form and function because it is based on a simple equation, so that the functioning of the photon alternates between wave and particle [obeying the creation equation] according to Planck’s equation that provides the necessary choice and opportunity for a reaction to occur. An example concerning a fractal is Adam Smith’s ‘invisible hand’ in economics [what is good for the individual is good for the economy]. We can go further, because the form of the photon leads into quantum gravity that spans the galaxies and organisation of the quarks because the sum of energy and organisation is set [at zero], but not the size of each.

Conclusion: the above is to try to make physicists move on to a new way of thinking [concept, “New Think”] and a general mathematical physics [context] that requires everything to be brought together [entangled]. Putting the physical into physics is the mathematicians’ way of ‘first principles’, and vice versa that mathematics is incomplete itself, because it needs the mathematics of concept-context from the creation equation. Clear;y, mathematics, to have an absolute, must be based on the orthogonal and not on the number line, that is more complicated.

Relativity is a general term for orthogonality that is the creation of two independent entities that are entangled, similar to Cartesian coordinates and it needs a combination of generalist and specialist to understand it. The generalist-specialist duality, of the mind [similar to the wave-particle duality but created by me using orthogonality], combined with the reluctance of the entrenched hierarchy to change is creating a conspiracy that belies the touted ‘openness’ of science.

Prediction (as the relativity to the conclusion): the fact that reading [measuring] organisation brings emotion [energy] shows that art, beauty, elegance, governance, social questions, music [as the organisations of fractions], and even religion rides on the emotion of its organisation, [all from the creation equation], belong in a new expanded physics and shows that “New Think” and general mathematical physics are necessary to solving civilisation’s place in the world and it is every citizen’s right to expect a functioning physics.

The difficulty in getting publication on this subject suggests a conspiracy of ‘reluctance to move’ into ‘uncharted waters’, and I sympathise as it is a truth, but this letter is simple enough for the general public to understand, and, while I would like to see physics ‘mend its own house, it may require a ‘march of children’ demanding that they be taught ‘proper physics’, especially, I believe, as it should lead to solving the world’s problems.

References: everything is general (physics) knowledge or derived from first principles however, more will be found on darrylpenney.com if required.