Site Introduction (Oct. 2007): This website is primarily on the subjects of truth and reality. We get about 50,000 page views a day and are one of the top philosophy / physics sites on the Internet. The central thesis is best stated in three parts;
i) We must know the truth to act wisely, and truth comes from physical reality.
ii) Our present and past societies are not founded on truth and act unwisely (overpopulation, destruction of nature, pollution, climate change, religious and economic wars, etc.).
iii) We now know the correct language for describing physical reality (all matter interactions are wave interactions in space), and this knowledge is critical for our future survival, being the source of truth & wisdom.

So how do we prove that this is true? Everyone will agree that true knowledge of reality must explain and solve the fundamental problems of knowledge in physics, philosophy and metaphysics. This website does exactly that. The above subject pages provide short summaries / simple solutions to these central problems of knowledge. To begin it is useful to read the Introduction & Summary to this Physics Philosophy Metaphysics Website.

Short Summary of Quantum Physics
These Quantum Physics pages (on either side) show how this new understanding of physical reality (that all light and matter interactions are wave interactions in Space) explains and solves the central problems of Quantum Theory.

The mistake was to work from Newton's foundation of particles and instantly acting gravity forces in space and time (many things) and then have to add more things to explain light and electricity, i.e. charged particles, continuous electromagnetic fields and waves (Faraday, Maxwell, Lorentz, Einstein's Special Relativity).
Thus by 1900 the central concepts of Physics were;
Matter as discrete particles with both gravitational mass and electrical charge properties (mass-charge duality).
Light as continuous electromagnetic waves (velocity of light c).
Continuous electromagnetic fields created by discrete charged particles (discrete particle-continuous field duality).
Local charge interactions limited by the velocity of electromagnetic waves (velocity of light c).

Over the next 30 years Quantum Theory destroyed these foundations by showing the exact opposite, that;
Matter has wave properties thus a particle-wave duality (de Broglie Waves, Schrodinger's wave equations).
Light has discrete particle properties thus a particle-wave duality (Light 'quanta', Max Planck, Albert Einstein)
Continuous deterministic fields are replaced by discrete statistical fields e.g. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, Niels Bohr's Copenhagen Interpretation, Born's probability waves to predict the location of the particle.
Non-Local matter interactions (instant action-at-distance EPR Bell Aspect)

The solution to this confusion and contradiction is simple once known. Describe reality from One thing existing, Space (that we all commonly experience) and its Properties. i.e. Rather than adding matter particles to space as Newton did, we consider Space with properties of a continuous wave medium for a pure Wave Structure of Matter. This is the Most Simple Science Theory of Physical Reality (despite many claims to the contrary, science does actually work, we just needed the correct foundation of continuous Space rather than discrete matter).
Most importantly, this Dynamic Unity of Reality provides simple solutions to all the 'strangeness' of quantum physics that has resulted from this discrete / disconnected 'particle' conception of matter. i.e.
Matter is a Wave Structure of Space - the Spherical Wave Center creates the 'particle' effect.
Light is a Wave Phenomena - however, spherical standing waves (matter) act as spherical resonators and only interact (resonantly couple) at discrete frequencies / energies which gives the effect of discrete light 'quanta'.
Reality is both Continuous (Space) and Discrete (Standing Wave Interactions).
Reality is both Local and Non-Local - matter is causally inter-connected in Space by its Spherical In and Out Waves (traveling at velocity c, i.e. Einstein's Locality). However (and very importantly), with relative motion these matter wave interactions form de Broglie phase waves that travel at high velocities (c²/v), explaining EPR and apparent Non-Locality / Instant-Action-at-a-Distance.
Reality is Causally Connected but Non-Deterministic / Statistical. The waves in quantum theory are real waves (not abstract 'probability waves') but lack of knowledge of the interconnected whole (infinite Space) causes statistical behaviour of matter (as Einstein believed).

I realise this is a pretty abrupt / radical introduction to a new way of seeing things - that it will take some time to adjust. But the Wave Structure of Matter is simple sensible and obvious once known. Each Quantum Physics page has a short summary and important quotes, so it is easy to click around and confirm things for yourself. Enjoy! Think!
Geoff Haselhurst - Email - Nice Letters.

Werner Heisenberg & Max Born
The Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) explains Werner Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle & Max Born's Probability Waves

Light and matter are both single entities, and the apparent duality arises in the limitations of our language. (Heisenberg)

The problems of language here are really serious. We wish to speak in some way about the structure of the atoms … But we cannot speak about atoms in ordinary language. (Heisenberg, The Tao of Physics, p53)

That every word or concept, clear as it may seem to be, has only a limited range of applicability. (Heisenberg, The Tao of Physics, p35)

The most difficult problem … concerning the use of the language arises in quantum theory. Here we have at first no simple guide for correlating the mathematical symbols with concepts of ordinary language: and the only thing we know from the start is the fact that our common concepts cannot be applied to the structure of the atoms. (Heisenberg, The Tao of Physics, p54)

One obvious objection to the hypothesis of an elastic Aether (Space) arises from the necessity of ascribing to it the great rigidity it must have to account for the high velocity of Waves. Such a substance would necessarily offer resistance to the motion of heavenly bodies, particularly to that of planets. Astronomy has never detected departures from Newton's Laws of Motion that would point to such a resistance. (Born, 1924)

Introduction to Quantum Theory

The problems of the particle and thus the resulting paradox of the particle / wave duality, have caused great confusion within modern physics over the past seventy years, as both Werner Heisenberg and Paul Davies explain;

Both matter and radiation possess a remarkable duality of character, as they sometimes exhibit the properties of waves, at other times those of particles. Now it is obvious that a thing cannot be a form of wave motion and composed of particles at the same time - the two concepts are too different. (Heisenberg, 1930)

The idea that something can be both a wave and a particle defies imagination, but the existence of this wave-particle duality is not in doubt. .. It is impossible to visualize a wave-particle, so don't try. ... The notion of a particle being everywhere at once is impossible to imagine. (Davies, 1985)

The solution of the difficulty is that the two mental pictures which experiment lead us to form - the one of the particles, the other of the waves - are both incomplete and have only the validity of analogies which are accurate only in limiting cases. (Heisenberg, 1930)

Light and matter are both single entities, and the apparent duality arises in the limitations of our language.
It is not surprising that our language should be incapable of describing the processes occurring within the atoms, for, as has been remarked, it was invented to describe the experiences of daily life, and these consist only of processes involving exceedingly large numbers of atoms. Furthermore, it is very difficult to modify our language so that it will be able to describe these atomic processes, for words can only describe things of which we can form mental pictures, and this ability, too, is a result of daily experience. Fortunately, mathematics is not subject to this limitation, and it has been possible to invent a mathematical scheme - the quantum theory - which seems entirely adequate for the treatment of atomic processes; for visualisation, however, we must content ourselves with two incomplete analogies - the wave picture and the corpuscular picture. (Heisenberg, 1930)

The solution to this apparent paradox is to simply explain how the discrete particle properties of matter and light (quanta) are in fact caused by the Spherical Standing Wave Structure of Matter.

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle

At the same time that the wave properties of matter were discovered, two further discoveries by Werner Heisenberg and Max Born were made that also profoundly influenced (and confused) the future evolution of modern physics.

Werner Heisenberg developed the uncertainty principle which tells us that we (the observer) can never exactly know both the position and momentum of a particle. As every observation requires an energy exchange (photon) to create the observed 'data', some energy (wave) state of the observed object has to be altered. Thus the observation has a discrete effect on what we measure, limiting how precisely we can determine both the position and momentum of the particle.

Born's 'Probability waves' (1928)

Max Born (1928) was the first to discover (by chance and with no theoretical foundation) that the square of the quantum wave equations (which is actually the wave-density) could be used to predict the probability of where the particle would be found.
Since it was impossible for both the waves and the particles to be real entities, it became customary to regard the waves as unreal probability waves and to maintain the belief in the 'real' particle.
Unfortunately this maintained the belief in the particle/wave duality, in a new form where the quantum scalar waves had become 'probability waves' for the 'real' particle. Einstein agreed with this probability wave interpretation, as he believed in continuous fields (not in waves or particles) thus to him it was sensible that the waves were not real, and were mere descriptions of probabilities.

It seems to be clear, therefore, that Born's statistical interpretation of quantum theory is the only possible one. The wave function does not in any way describe a state which could be that of a single system; it relates rather to many systems, to an 'ensemble of systems' in the sense of statistical mechanics. (Einstein, 1954)

Albert Einstein is correct that matter is spherically spatially extended (but as a Spherical Standing Wave, not as continuous spherical force field) thus it is true that matter is intimately interconnected to all the other matter in the universe (by the spherical In and Out-waves). It is this lack of knowledge of the system as a whole that is the ultimate cause of the uncertainty and resultant probability inherent in Quantum Theory.

Thus the last and most successful creation of theoretical physics, namely quantum mechanics (QM), differs fundamentally from both Newton's mechanics, and Maxwell's e-m field. For the quantities which figure in QM's laws make no claim to describe physical reality itself, but only probabilities of the occurrence of a physical reality that we have in view. & I cannot but confess that I attach only a transitory importance to this interpretation. I still believe in the possibility of a model of reality - that is to say, of a theory which represents things themselves and not merely the probability of their occurrence. On the other hand, it seems to me certain that we must give up the idea of complete localization of the particle in a theoretical model. This seems to me the permanent upshot of Heisenberg's principle of uncertainty. (Einstein, 1954)

Einstein believed that Reality was not founded on chance (as Born and Heisenberg argued) but on necessary connections between things (thus his comment God does not play dice). He was largely correct, matter is necessarily connected due to the Spherical Standing Wave Structure of Matter, but due to lack of knowledge of the system as a whole (the universe), then this gives rise to the chance and uncertainty found in Quantum Theory. It is also true that we must give up the idea of complete localization and knowledge of the 'particle', which is merely a mathematical concept and is caused by the wave-center of the Spherical Standing Wave. Remarkably, Stephen Hawking was very close to the truth when he wrote;

But maybe that is our mistake: maybe there are no particle positions and velocities, but only waves. It is just that we try to fit the waves to our preconceived ideas of positions and velocities. The resulting mismatch is the cause of the apparent unpredictability. (Hawking, 1988)

References

Davies, Paul, Superforce, London, Unwin Paperbacks, 1985
Einstein, Albert Ideas and Opinions (1919-1954), Crown Trade Paperbacks 1954
Hawking, Stephen. A Brief History in Time, Bantam Books 1988
Heisenberg, Werner. Quantum Theory, University of Chicago, 1930

Quotations from 'Einstein's Theory of Relativity' by Max Born

Copernicus' constructive achievement was that his system explained in a simpler way the phenomena which the traditional world system was able to explain only by means of complicated and artificial hypotheses. (p12)

Absolute, True, and Mathematical Time, of itself, and from its own nature flows equably without regard to any thing external, and by another name is called Duration: Relative, Apparent, and Common Time is some sensible and external (whether accurate or unequable) measure of Duration by the means of motion, which is commonly used instead of True time; such as an Hour, a Day, a Month, a Year...
For the natural days are truly unequable, though they are commonly consider'd as equal, and used for a measure of time: Astronomers correct this inequality for their more accurate deducing of the celestial motions. It may be, that there is no such thing as an equable motion, whereby time may be accurately measured. All motions may be accelerated and retarded, but the True, or equable progress, of Absolute time is liable to no change. The duration or perseverance of the existence of things remains the same, whether the motions are swift or slow, or none at all..
Concerning Space Newton expresses similar opinions. He says:
Absolute Space, in its own nature, without regard to any thing external, remains always similar and immovable. Relative Space is some moveable dimension or measure of the absolute spaces; which our senses determine, by its position to bodies; and which is vulgarly taken for immovable space...
And so instead of absolute places and motions, we use relative ones; and that without any inconvenience in common affairs; but in Philosophical disquisitions, we ought to abstract from our senses, and consider things themselves, distinct from what are only sensible measures of them. For it may be that there is no body really at rest, to which the places and motions of others may be referred... (Newton p57)

Having recognised that the individual points in Newton's absolute space have no physical reality, we must now inquire what remains of this concept at all. (p78)

Inertial actions arise whether accelerations occur, and these are nothing more than changes of velocity in absolute space.. (p78)

The undulatory, or wave theory, on the other hand, sets up an analogy between the propagation of light and the motion of waves on the surface of water or sound waves in air. For this purpose it has to assume the existence of an elastic medium that permeates all transparent bodies; this is the luminiferous ether. The individual particles of this substance merely oscillate about their positions of equilibrium. That which moves on as the light wave is the state of motion of the particles and not the particles themselves. (p88)
In liquids and gases there is no elastic resistance to the lateral displacement of the particles, but only to the change of volume, i.e., compressions and rarefactions.
..On the other hand, in solid bodies, on account of the elastic rigidity which opposes lateral displacements, three waves, one longitudunal and two transverse, with different velocities, can be transmitted in each direction. (p115)

Faraday came from no learned academy; his mind was not burdened with traditional ideas and theories. (p165)

We recall that Maxwell took the concept of displacement as the foundation of his argument, and we interpreted this visually as meaning that in the smallest parts or molecules of the ether, just as in the molecules of matter, an actual displacement and separation of the electric (or magnetic) fluid occur. So far as this idea concerns the process of electric polarisation of matter, it is well founded; it is also adopted in the modern modification of Maxwell's theory, the theory of electrons, for numerous experiments have rendered certain that matter has a molecular structure and that every molecule carries displaceable charges. But this is by no means the case for the free ether; here Maxwell's idea of displacement is purely hypothetical, and its only value is that it provides a visualizable image for the abstract laws of the field. (p190)

Lorentz proclaimed the very radical thesis which had never before been asserted with such definiteness:
The ether is at rest in absolute space.
In principle this identifies the ether with absolute space. Absolute space is no vacuum, but something with definite properties whose state is described with the help of two directed quantities, the electrical field E and the magnetic field H, and, as such is called the ether. (p204)

The most important is that of Lorentz (1904) which closely connected with the theory of relativity. Lorentz assumed that every moving electron contracts in the direction of motion, so that from a sphere it becomes a flattened spheroid of revolution, the amount of flattening depending in a definite way on the velocity. This hypothesis seems at first sight strange. It certainly gives a simpler formula for the way electromagnetic mass depends on velocity than does Abraham's theory, but this in itself does not justify it. (p213)

Newton included the infinity of space and time in his fundamental principles and speculated on the question of whether or not the stars were finite in number and filled only a finite part of the infinite space. He came to the conclusion that the number of stars must be infinite and spread rather uniformly through space, for a finite number would collapse in consequence of their mututal attraction. Later it turned out that this argument led to mathematical difficulties of so severe a kind that even modifications of the Newtonian law of gravitation for large distances were contemplated. (p363)

About 1929 the American astronomer Hubble demonstrated the existence of a strange correlation between distance and speed of the nebulae: they all move outwards, away from us, and with a velocity which inceases proportional to the distance; or, in other words, the system of the spiral nebulae is expanding- just as the primitive comparison of this system with a gas had suggested to earlier thinkers. Now if one regards the expansion to have been the same in the past as it is today, one is led to the idea that the whole system must have had a beginning when all matter was condensed in a small "supernucleus," and one can calculate the time interval since this "beginning of the world" and the present instant. The result obtained from Hubble's data was 2000 to 3000 millions of years.
Meanwhile the relativistic cosmology initiated by Einstein and De Sitter began to ripen in the hands of Friedmann, Lemaitre, Tolman, Robertson and others. A series of new possible models of the world were discovered between the extreme cases found by Einstein and De Sitter, and the question arose which of them fitted the empirical facts best, in particular those facts established by Hubble. Today there are many ramifications and refinements of the theory and there has been so enormous an increase of observational material that it is difficult to judge the actual situation. Earlier ideas which seemed to be most fertile have turned out to be too narrow or even wrong. (p366)