Thread: Like a sponge
View Single Post
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 24-April-2008, 05:11 PM
Michael Noonan's Avatar
Michael Noonan Michael Noonan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Deep in thought
Posts: 1,631
Smile Why

I have been asked on anotherr forum why I believe it is possible to unite quantum mechanics and general relativity. This is about the best answer I have so far:-

Quote:
General relativity 'does not' call for vast energy and is large scale, quantum mechanics 'does' call for vast sums of energy and is at the bottom end of the scale. If the answer is neither at the top nor the bottom then what is in the middle?

As it turns out the proton is about the same number of orders of magnitude up to the estimated size of the universe based on the measure of the speed of light as down to the smallest quantum distance light can travel based on Planck time. Of all the quantum particles the proton is the most strange in that it does not disappear in a nuclear explosion or change form to other than a neutron. A neutron if left unpaired with a proton will revert to being a proton in around ten minutes. All other quantum particles are measured on their waveform. That means we only know they exist because of the measure of energy they produce.

The school is still out on neutrinos and some say they do have mass others say they do not. What is known is that it is virtually impossible to interact with them. It is a good thing for at any given time there are hundreds travelling through the human body so interactions are certainly not desirable. It turns out that one way to form something as stable as a proton is to give it a structure less breakable than nuclear fusion and able to interact with energy. It means a stable worm hole. A worm hole is asymmetric at each end which would barely be detectable in the energy required to keep it open. A proton has barely detectable asymmetry.

I can say that I have not found any one else who backs this line of thought so it would mean a new science. When one consider what electric universe proponent go through it is a sure bet that any new idea will face stiff opposition. The problem is how much energy can a structure be safely subject to if it has not ever been thought of as a structure. That is a big ask of a scientific community on the remote chance that an idea outside accepted conflicting theories even has any merit.
Posted on BAUT as a courtesy,
Michael.
__________________
"Nature is obliged to let reality determine its laws, whereas mathematics is under no such constraint."