Posts
Comments
Interesting. I think students could use a better explanation of QM than the one I got in college which was "Light is not a wave. Light is not a particle. No one knows what light it. Light is a quantum mechanical beast." In all fairness, it's pretty accurate to say no one knows what light is. That doesn't mean anyone needs to be taught that light behaves sort of like a wave and sort of like a particle.
I've always thought the universe is best understood as consisting of two substances, gravitational ether and electromagnetic field. Gravitational ether can wrap itself into vortexes of different energies and densities. The vortexes stretch and pile the ether. So a high energy vortex will contain much more dense ether, and the surrounding ether will become much less dense. The force of gravity then becomes a simple function of a density gradient.
The other substance, electromagnetic field, somehow (this is the big hole in my theory) latches on or interacts with vortexex ether and the interaction gives rise to what we call particles. But the particle is not real, we perceive teh interation between the two substances as a particle/wave dualtiy. This flows from the model I've described. Vortexes of ether with proper internal forces would be very well described as billiard balls. Electric and magnetic fields on their own almost perfectly obey wave equation predictions. However, the electron or photon or whatever, is not actually gravitational ether, nor is it eletromagnetic (or electro-strong-weak) field. What we see as the particle is actually the interaction, and we can prod the interaction to emphasize the particle or wave qualities, but since this is an interaction we're talking about and not some real object, we can never force experimental results that would have the interaction actually be a particle or a wave. In that sense the Heisenberg uncertainty principle could even be used to deduce some of the basic ratios and quantums of interaction between ether and field.