Re-thinking the Foundation of Physics and its Relation to Quantum Gravity and Quantum Probabilities: Unification of Gravity and Quantum Mechanics

Abstract

In this paper we will show that standard physics to a large degree consists of derivatives of a deeper reality. This means standard physics is both overly complex and also incomplete. Modern physics has typically started from working with first understanding the surface of the world, that is typically the macroscopic world, and then forming theories about the atomic and subatomic world. And we did not have much of a choice, as the subatomic world is very hard to observe directly, if not impossible to observe directly at the deepest level. Despite the enormous success of modern physics, it is therefore no big surprise that we at some point have possibly taken a step in the wrong direction. We will claim that one such step came when one thought that the de Broglie wavelength represented a real matter wavelength. We will claim that the Compton wavelength is the real matter wavelength. Based on such a view we will see that many equations in modern physics are only derivatives of much simpler relations. Second, we will claim that in today’s physics one uses two different mass definitions, one mass definition that is complete or at least more complete, embedded in gravity equations without being aware of it, as it is concealed in GM, and the standard, but incomplete, kg mass definition in non-gravitational physics. First, when this is understood, and one uses the more complete mass definition that is embedded in gravity physics, not only in gravity physics, but in all of physics, then one has a chance to unify gravity and quantum mechanics. Our new theory shows that most physical phenomena when observed over a very short timescale are probabilistic for masses smaller than a Planck mass and dominated by determinism at or above Planck mass size. Our findings have many implications. For example, we show that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle is rooted in a foundation not valid for rest-mass particles, so the Heisenberg uncertainty principle can say nothing about rest-masses. When re-formulated based on a foundation compatible with a new momentum that is also compatible with rest-masses, we obtain a re-defined Heisenberg principle that seems to become a certainty principle in the special case of a Planck mass particle. Furthermore, we show that the Planck mass particle is linked to gravity and that we can easily detect the Planck scale from gravity observations. The Planck mass particle is unique as it only lasts the Planck time, and in that very short time period it can only be observed directly from itself, and it therefore closely linked to absolute rest.

Three Dimensional Space-Time Gravitational Metric, 3 Space + 3 Time Dimensions

“…This result should come as no surprise as already in 1960, Rindler [23] showed that the Minkowski space-time could be simplified from [2]. Further also in the moving system…”

“…In our theory, a collision between two light particles is the only pure mass, and the collision stands still. It is at absolute rest, see [2] [3], it takes up spatial dimensions as the light particles are similar to that suggested by Newton, namely indivisible and with spatial dimension, actually they have a diameter equal to the Planck length. That they have a diameter equal to the Planck length is not an assumption, this is what we find after calibrating our model to gravity observations.…”

“…That is, space and time are basically two sides of the same coin. This point we have described in some detail in [2], here we will extend this three-dimensional space-time geometry (3 + 3) to also hold for gravity. We suggest we must have the following space-time metric (Cartesian coordinate system and flat space-time)…”

“…These are four-dimensional space-time theories, where there are three space dimensions and one time dimension. However, our recent investigation indicates that such a four-dimensional space-time geometry not can be consistent with our new unified quantum gravity theory [2] [3]. We initially [4] tried to force our new theory into a four-dimensional space-time, but it seemed to lead to a few inconsistencies in some derivations that we first became fully aware of later.…”

“…Planck length. Hawking2 [54] in 1971 that suggested micro black holes only say the micro black hole has a mass approximately equal to the Planck mass. Perhaps he had already seen problems if he put them exactly equal to the Planck mass.2Be aware that, for example, sources like Wikipedia often is very inaccurate when it comes to the history of physics and who came up with what theory first, for example, they incorrectly credit Hawking as the one who first comes up with the idea of micro-black holes in 1971, when Markov is four years ahead of him in publishing such an idea.…”