The free, unhampered exchange of ideas and scientific conclusions is necessary for the sound development of science, as it is in all spheres of cultural life. (Albert Einstein)
The following is a post that I replied to at http://www.physicsforums.com/.
I don't think my reply was that bad given the criticism the Wave Structure
of Matter received (which was completely unfounded - please see comments
However, when I went back to add a further comment 10 minutes later, I found that I was BANNED for life from the physicsforums - the reason given was "crackpot" - and my post was deleted (fortunately I could use the back button and get a copy of the entire thread, which I have posted below).
I wrote to them asking for an explanation and have received no reply (funny about that!). And since then I have posted twice using new accounts. Each time my posts have been deleted and I have been banned.
I wonder what people think of this form of censorship at the biggest physics forum on the internet?
If you are like me and think this is wrong - please post at their forum and tell them so. You can link to this page, or copy the content below and re-post it in your message.
Geoff Haselhurst (November 25th, 2007)
(Posted at the physics forum by OJones, 18th of November, 2007)
There are many 'crackpot' scientific theories to be found online, but when I stumbled across the site http://spaceandmotion.com/ I was horrified by the sheer scale and volume of the unscientific, unfounded, misinterpreted rubbish that the site's creator (Geoff Haselhurst) had published.
I tried to find something that would allow me to excuse this quackery - I suppose I am optimistic about peoples' nature at heart - but reading the 'published' (read FTP'd) papers on the subject on Milo Wolff's site, http://www.quantummatter.com/ just confirmed that there is no 'theory' whatsoever; speculation 'backed-up' by wave equations so general that one would be surprised if they did not appear in a discussion of fundamental physics.
The problem I have is not with the theory - any theory can be put forward for scientific scrutiny as long as it makes testable predictions and is falsifiable - but with its presentation to the public as 'absolute truth', along with Wolff's book for sale on Amazon. My question is; are such crackpot theories dangerous, and if so what action should be taken to limit the damage they do to, for instance, the education of interested beginner scientists who find them by chance?
As a high school physics teacher, I try to make sure that folks understand the difference between a true theory and a speculation.
It would help if there was a large repository page for the crackpots, and by the sheer volume of fools with wildly different ideas that contradict each other yet say the same things ("established science is full of closed-minded, dogmatic, brainwashed conspirators who refuse to believe my "theory")... what was I saying? Oh yeah, the sheer volume of crap should persuade most people to pay more attention to the standard model.
From my pov, part of the problem is that even respectable scientists call each other crackpots.
I had assumed that when I finished college I would know what 'the mainstream opinion' is wrt topics in physics, but I realized that this is often not so easy to determine. When I asked a professor friend how one determines what is and isn't accepted by the mainstream scientific community, I was told to look for the frequency of the references to a paper or theory.
As a physics graduate, it took me a month to get a handle on the state
of the measurement problem. Finally, it was Steve Carlip who set the record
straight and explained that there is no general agreement on this issue.
...consider the war between string theorists, LQG enthusiasts, and deniers of both. How many times have we heard scientists here say that string theory isn't science? Considering the number of physicists working on this, isn't it a bit confusing to call string theorists crackpots; or at least to imply as much? The same goes for the MWT.
This is my reply to the above posts (mainly the first post). Geoff Haselhurst
It is obvious that there are a lot of crackpots on the internet posting
their pet ideas.
However, there are also a lot of crackpot critics on the internet too.
How do we resolve this? By abiding by the rules of science.
Thus it is very interesting that in the criticism above of the Wave Structure
of Matter (WSM) there is a complete lack of science in the criticism. i.e.
There are no reasons given for why the Wave Structure of Matter is wrong
- other than to say that it makes no testable predictions.
However this is clearly not correct. In fact it is a completely bizarre thing to write given that the WSM states that an electron is a spherical standing wave in Space where the Wave Center forms the 'particle' effect of the electron (and a positron / antimatter is just the opposite phase standing wave).
Thus it is up to scientists to see if there is any difference in the behaviour of an electron and a spherical standing wave in Space. i.e. This is a definite testable theory.
Now immediately you have a simple calculation that any maths physicist
can make. What happens when two spherical standing waves move relative to
one another? If you apply the Doppler shifts for the spherical in and out
waves you deduce exactly what is observed. i.e.
1. The de Broglie wavelength of quantum theory.
2. The relativistic mass increase of Einstein's special relativity.
Any mathematician can work this out - just simple wave equations and applying Doppler shifts. So why don't people do the maths and see this is true for themselves.
And this is very remarkable, as it is the first time that these two theories have been united from one set of simple wave equations. To ignore this would be crazy.
Further, the Wave Structure of Matter is deduced as the most
simple science theory for describing reality - founded on the one and
only thing that we all commonly experience, Space (mind and matter are many
things, space is always one thing).
This not only satisfies the central principle of Science, Occam's razor, but also explains the foundations of Metaphysics and Philosophy, that reality must be described from only one thing existing to explain the interconnection of all things in the universe.
What else does it predict / deduce.
2. Mach's Principle.
3. The size of our observable universe within infinite Space (thus the motion of distant galaxies will behave as if they are surrounded by matter).
4. Curvature of the space-time continuum in Einstein's general relativity.
5. That light is due to resonant coupling - and thus is discrete. i.e. The electron can only exist in discrete wave functions thus discrete energy states in an atom or molecule.
6. That the de Broglie wave is a phase wave with high velocity for low relative motion, where de Broglie phase wave has velocity c^2 / relative velocity. This provides a simple explanation for non-locality as found in the EPR experiment.
Given the nature of the above criticism I think they should provide some examples from the site where I have written something that is not true - and that they must back this up using rules of science. Perhaps a list of ten things would be good - as OJones writes;
"I was horrified by the sheer scale and volume of the unscientific, unfounded, misinterpreted rubbish that the site's creator (Geoff Haselhurst) had published."
The Wave Structure of Matter can be deduced by anyone as the most simple science theory for describing reality. As Occam's razor is a fundamental principle of science, scientists must show why this deduction is not true. Specifically;
1. Does anyone have any evidence that the space we all commonly experience existing in does not exist.
2. That all matter interactions are not wave interactions in this space.
Again - scientists must use rules of science in answering this.
Finally, are they also saying that Erwin Schrodinger and Carver Mead are crackpots?
"The quantum world is a world of waves, not particles.
So we have to think of electron waves and proton waves and so on. Matter
is 'incoherent' when all its waves have a different wavelength, implying
a different momentum. On the other hand, if you take a pure quantum system
– the electrons in a superconducting magnet, or the atoms in a laser – they
are all in phase with one another, and they demonstrate the wave nature
of matter on a large scale. Then you can see quite visibly what matter is
down at its heart." (Carver Mead Interview, American Spectator, Sep/Oct2001,
Vol. 34 Issue 7, p68)
'It is my firm belief that the last seven decades of the twentieth century will be characterized in history as the dark ages of theoretical physics.' (Carver Mead, Collective Electrodynamics)
'What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing
but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just
schaumkommen (appearances). ... The world is given to me only once, not
one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier
between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience
in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist. ... Let me say
at the outset, that in this discourse, I am opposing not a few special statements
of quantum mechanics held today (1950s), I am opposing as it were the whole of it, I am opposing its basic views that have been shaped 25 years ago, when Max Born put forward his probability interpretation, which was accepted by almost everybody. ... I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it. ... The scientist only imposes two things, namely truth and sincerity, imposes them upon himself and upon other scientists.' (Erwin Schrodinger)
In hindsight it is obvious that the 'particle' conception of matter does not work and is the cause of the the problems and paradoxes found in physics. Yet until recently no one seriously thought about a pure Wave Structure of Matter in Space. Physicists just went with the particle / wave duality and treated the wave as a 'probability' wave to determine the location of the 'particle'. And they completely ignored any explanation as to why the probability is determined by a wave function, and why the allowed energy states of electrons are discrete (the cause of light quanta) as determined by Schrodinger's wave equations.
The Wave Structure of Matter explains the particle properties of light and matter perfectly. It also explains and solves the central problems of metaphysics and philosophy by explaining how matter is interconnected across the universe.
Given the state of our world, how desperately we need to know the truth
about reality as a foundation for thinking and acting wisely, well for scientists
to ignore this would be gross negligence (to say the least).
But most will ignore this - as like all humans they are programmed to believe in the dogma / paradigm of their time, i.e. the Standard Model of particle physics, particle / probability wave interpretation of quantum theory, the Big Bang cosmology, ...)
There is much more. But this is a good start.
PS - This page on censorship in physics publications is important too.
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. (Max Planck)
Although I am fully convinced of the truth of the views given in this volume I by no means expect to convince experienced naturalists whose minds are stocked with a multitude of facts all viewed, during a long course of years, from a point of view directly opposite to mine. But I look with confidence to the future to young and rising naturalists, who will be able to view both sides of the question with impartiality. (Charles Darwin)
I wish, my dear Kepler, that we could have a good laugh together
at the extraordinary stupidity of the mob. What do you think of the foremost
philosophers of this University? In spite of my oft-repeated efforts and
invitations, they have refused, with the obstinacy of a glutted adder, to
look at the planets or Moon or my telescope. ...
In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual. (Galileo Galilei)
Philosophy / Metaphysics of Mathematics - I fully agree with you about the significance and educational value of methodology as well as history and philosophy of science. So many people today - and even professional scientists - seem to me like somebody who has seen thousands of trees but has never seen a forest. A knowledge of the historic and philosophical background gives that kind of independence from prejudices of his generation from which most scientists are suffering. This independence created by philosophical insight is - in my opinion - the mark of distinction between a mere artisan or specialist and a real seeker after truth. (Albert Einstein)
On the Mystical Foundations of Mathematics - Pythagoras, .. was intellectually one of the most important men that ever lived, both when he was wise, and when he was unwise. Mathematics, in the sense of demonstrative deductive argument, begins with him, and in him is intimately connected with a peculiar form of mysticism. The influence of mathematics on philosophy, partly owing to him, has, ever since his time, been both profound and unfortunate. (Bertrand Russell)
Mathematics and Music - The astronomer Galileo Galilei observed in 1623 that the entire universe "is written in the language of mathematics", and indeed it is remarkable the extent to which science and society are governed by mathematical ideas. It is perhaps even more surprising that music, with all its passion and emotion, is also based upon mathematical relationships. Such musical notions as octaves, chords, scales, and keys can all be demystified and understood logically using simple mathematics.
Famous Mathematics Quotes - As I work on these maths physics pages I collect mathematics / mathematical physics quotes that I think are important and add them to this page.
Covert Censorship by the Physics Preprint Archive - This page on censorship in Physics is here to show people that there are serious problems in getting new knowledge published in Journals (particularly if it contradicts current paradigm of 'particles' and 'fields', where it is just assumed that particle / wave duality is insolvable, waves are just 'probability waves', etc.). The particular example I have used relates to problems that Nobel Physics Laureate Brian Josephson had in getting articles published. But the problem is endemic and applies equally to philosophy.
Censorship at the Physics Forums http://www.physicsforums.com/ - This is a copy of a post that I replied to at http://www.physicsforums.com/. I don't think my reply was that bad given the criticism the Wave Structure of Matter received. However, when I went back to add a further comment, I found that I was BANNED for life from the physicsforums - the reason given was "crackpot" - and the post was deleted. I wrote to them asking for an explanation and have received no reply (funny about that!). And since then I have posted twice using new accounts. Each time my posts have been deleted and I have been banned. I wonder what people think of this form of censorship at the biggest physics forum on the internet? If you are like me and think this is wrong - please post at their forum and tell them so.
Physicist Dr Milo Wolff on the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) in Space
I think all scientists would agree that to be certain that the Spherical Wave Structure of Matter is true, we must demonstrate that its Principles correctly deduce what we observe from observation and experiment of the interconnected motion of matter in Space.
And here it is appropriate that I acknowledge the wonderful mind and pioneering work of Mathematical Physicist Dr Milo Wolff on the Wave Structure of Matter (1986 - 2007). His early work of applying the spherical scalar wave equations to mathematical physics led him to deduce the fundamentals of both Einstein's Special Relativity (mass increase) and Quantum Theory (de Broglie wavelength) in one set of wave equations, thus both theoretically and metaphysically uniting these two theories (metaphysics of Space and wave Motion - not Space and Time). His work over the past 19 years has led to further deductions of the fundamental laws of Nature from first principles (i.e. a priori, rather than their current a posteriori empirical / inductive foundation which is always uncertain).
Wolff: Wave Structure of Matter - Summary of the Logic and Mathematics of the Wave Structure of Matter.
Wolff: Richard Feynman's QED - From Feynman's Advanced and Retarded Spherical Vector Electromagnetic Waves (Mathematical) to Spherical Scalar Quantum Waves (real waves).
Wolff: Binary Universe - The Binary Nature of Reality (Waves form from two balanced forces, Spherical In-Waves and Out-Waves). Relates this to digital computing.
Wolff: PhD Mathematical Physics / Biography - Milo Wolff - Astronomer, Electrical Engineer, retired Professor of Mathematical Physics, first formalised the Wave Structure of Matter in 1986.
Video Interviews of Dr Milo Wolff on Physics and the Wave Structure of Matter - The following interview between Philosopher Geoff Haselhurst and Physicist Milo Wolff on the Wave Structure of Matter was filmed in 2000 on the grounds of Berkeley University in California. Milo Wolff is a fine theoretical physicist and one day he will no doubt receive a Nobel Prize for his pioneering work on the Wave Structure of Matter. I think you will find these video interviews to be interesting (at times amusing) and very informative about the problems of modern physics and how they can be solved by the Wave Structure of Matter.
Physics Book: Milo Wolff: 'Exploring the Physics of the Unknown Universe' - Buy Milo Wolff's Physics Book on the Wave Structure of Matter from Amazon.
Milo Wolff's Physics Website on the Wave Structure of Matter - My name is Milo Wolff and I am a physicist, astronomer, and explorer of the wondrous cosmology of the universe. I have worked for MIT, Aerospace Corporation, the United Nations, as well as taught at various universities in the USA and Asia. Join the exciting and fascinating exploration of matter, the natural laws, and the universe. You may become a famous pioneer and, at the least, you will have fun! (Milo Wolff)
- What is the Electron? Introduction:
In his later years, Einstein was asked his thoughts about the huge numbers
of short-lived heavy particles, kaons, pions, quarks, mesons, etc. found
using high-energy accelerators and enormous amounts of time and money. These
physicists thought they were finding important basic matter. They wanted
to know what Einstein thought of their work. Einstein was a careful thinker
and not given to theatrics so he was very serious when he replied, "I
would just like to know what an electron is."
This article will show, just as Einstein speculated, that the electron is indeed the leading player in the universe and is intimately involved with light, matter, the laws of Nature, and our lives. The path to the answer, is simple: Reject the discrete material electron and replace it with a wave-structured electron as proposed by Schroedinger and Clifford - using a scalar-wave equation. The math and the proofs are straight-forward because scalar waves are the only possible choice. Only two principles underlie all results. Despite this simplicity the WSM explains the origin of the natural laws, new applications in micro-physics and chips, understanding light energy exchange and lasers, plus the answers to most current paradoxes of physics. It is breathtaking to find so many results together – simply by answering Einstein’s question "What is the Electron". (Milo Wolff, Geoff Haselhurst)
http://quantummatter.com/articles_html/body_point.html - The Wave Center forms the 'Point Particle' Effect. The dual particle/wave nature of the electron has long been a paradox in physics. It is now seen that the electron consists entirely of a structure of spherical waves whose behavior creates their particle-like appearance. The correctness of this structure is supported by the physical laws which originate from this wave structure, including quantum theory, special relativity, electric force, gravity, and magnetism. (Milo Wolff)
- The Derivation of a Unified Field Theory From a Model of Spherical
Abstract: It is shown that if space is modeled as an elastic medium that propagates spherical, scalar quantum-waves, then the ratio of the square of the wave velocity to c2 reveals the same results as the familiar time dilation formula that is produced from the Schwarzchild G44 component. The Schwarzchild radius derived from the scalar-wave model is shown to be equal to the radius of the observable universe, implying that there are no gravitational singularities present within the observable universe. The spherical wave model also produces a formula that calculates the mass of a vector particle associated with each of the four forces and its associated range. (Michael Harney)
http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V13NO2PDF/V13N2HAR.pdf - The Cosmological-Redshift Explained by the Intersection of Hubble Spheres (Observable Universe). The cosmological redshift is described by the intersection of two Hubble spheres, where a Hubble sphere is defined as a range over which spherical, quantum-waves interact, specifically Ru = 1.9 × 1026 m. (Michael Harney)
Deducing Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle - Three short deductions of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle from Wave theorists, Mike Harney, Milo Wolff, and Chris Hawkings. The significant point is that by removing the 'particle' conception of matter and replacing this with the Spherical Standing Wave Structure of Matter we can deduce the Uncertainty Principle due to the spatially extended wave nature of matter. The confusion and paradox of Quantum Theory clearly results from the incorrect discrete 'particle' conception of matter. i.e. There is no discrete particle thus it is impossible to locate the exact position of something that does not exist (the continuous motion of a 'particle'!). In reality there is a discrete re-positioning of the wave center with each spherical in and out wave which gives the appearance of a continuously moving 'particle'.
- In this section on Physics, I would like to feed the debate on a certain
number of points, perhaps definitely established for physicists, but which
seem to me still fragile. Tackling with general questions, the first pages
(3.1 to 3.5) prepare the reader to this idea, matter is made of waves. From
the sixth (3.6) which present an undulatory model of particle, we really
enter into the subject.
The following pages display the basis of the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) Theory that I treat from the particle model I have conceived. Other authors after Louis de Broglie, Milo Wolff, Gabriel LaFrenière, Geoff Haselhurst, Chris Hawkings, Serge Cabala, have developed this theory, broadly similar, but with differences in details. Nevertheless, the main difference goes beyond this physical theory, it shows through the whole of ideas and facts displayed on this site and is what leads the reader to this amazing finding: a unique thing as simple as a wave, is likely to explain the entire Universe, as well as the masse, the behaviour and the functioning of the objects it contains. (Denys Lepinard)
Chris Hawkings - Could Matter and Matter Waves be Derivable? - 'The similarity in behaviour between matter and radiation suggests that matter may have an electromagnetic (wave) origin. It is shown that two light-speed waves with opposite directions of propagation yield a formalism which is identical to that describing the properties of matter. For spherical waves, particle localisation is also obtained and phase waves are generated, the properties of which match identically with matter wave properties.' Note: We do not agree with Chris in his use of vector electromagnetic waves (mathematical constructs which have no spherical solutions). We must instead work with scalar waves / real waves in Space.
Wave Structure of Matter Theorists Websites - Links to websites of people working on the Wave Structure of Matter. Physicist Dr Milo Wolff, Denys Lepinard, Mike Harney, Mike Weber, Ray Tomes (Harmonics), Serge Cabala, Gabriel LaFreniere.
'The Gift of Truth Excels all Other Gifts.' (Buddha)
One of the top ten shops at Cafepress for the past two years (out of 3 million shops!).
A brilliant collection of portraits and quotes from 500 of the greatest minds in human history.
|Large Posters - Small Posters - Mini Poster Prints - Framed Poster Panel Prints - 2010 Wall Calendars - Journals / Diaries - Postcards - Greeting Cards - Mousepads - Bumper Stickers - Coffee Cups, Mugs & Beer Steins - Wall / Time Clocks - Buttons / Badges - Fridge Magnets - Jewelry Box & Coasters|
Ancient Greek Philosophy
Chinese Indian Metaphysics
20th Century Philosophers
Physics Prints Science Quote
God Religion Morality
Famous Leader Politics
Evolution Life Nature Ecology
Metaphysical Poets & Poetry
Literature Books Authors
Women Feminism Art
Renaissance Fine Art Prints
Satire Humor Funny Jokes
|Unique Custom Printed Tees - Men's Women's White T-Shirts - Men's Women's Black T-Shirts - Longsleeve T Shirts Hooded Sweatshirts - Women's Long Sleeve Clothing - Tight Sexy Ladies Clothes - Men's & Women's Boxer Shorts / Boxers - Women's Intimate Lingerie: Erotic Thongs / Sexy Slips - Cotton Canvas Printed Tote Bag & Messenger Bags - Children / Infant / Kids Clothes - Printed Kitchen Chef BBQ Cooking Aprons - Baseball Caps & Trucker Hats - Dog Clothes|
Truth & Reality
The Spherical Standing Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) in Space
Theory of Reality
Unity of Reality
Logic & Reality
Special & General
of Light & Matter
& Infinite Space
Truth & Reality
Truth & Reality