Where Einstein had failed E-Book

Claus Birkholz

• Herausgeber: BookRix
• Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
• Sprache: Englisch

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2017

Beschreibung

   Einstein's revolutionary ideas had been suffering from his rudimentary mathematical knowledge beyond the domain of differential geometry. Thus, he never recognised the invariants of his General Relativity, and he never had been able to formulate his "World Formula".

   Hence, his basic equation remained somewhat blurry and fuzzy, touching just one of his invariants; the additional ones fully escaped his notice. His description of physics close to big values of heavy masses went completely wrong: the rotation of stars about the galactic centre of the Milky Way is contradicting his equation. Neither did he succeed in describing a black hole. For compensation, cosmologists invented their concept of "dark matter" later on.

   "Dark energy", accidentally, had been made possible by Einstein's "cosmological constant". Nevertheless, he had been unaware that his "constant" is a variable. Its origin and composition remained enigmatic to him and to his followers until to-day.

   His conviction of needing "hidden variables", however, proved to be principally correct. Bell's premature rejection of them by his no-go theorems had to be revoked by his "superdeterminism" later on. In the end, they paved the way in order to proceed via Quantum Gravity towards a New Physics solving all those problems culminating in the quantisation of Einstein's curvilinear spacetime and in the non-valence structure of matter. The 4 dimensions of space and time, the quark confinement, and the (correct) numerical value of the fine-structure constant are results of theory.

   These works on Quantum Gravity are exclusive. Due to lacking solution ideas of how to approach the problem at all, nobody really is working on it. The author cracked that tough nut successfully.

Leseprobe

Claus Birkholz

Where Einstein had failed

A compendium of New Physics

BookRix GmbH & Co. KG81371 Munich

Historical Facts

Once upon a time there was a little student; his name was Einstein. He dreamt of riding on a light ray. His result, then, became known as the “Special Theory of Relativity”. At that time, in Europe, where he lived, the first fully operational elevators, as we know them to-day, had launched their service. Einstein‘s interpretation is known as his “General Theory of Relativity“.

Only, he had had problems with mathematics. Therefore, he consulted a friend from university; Grossmann introduced him into differential geometry. But alas: This led Einstein to absorb the classical continuum physics that tightly that it unilaterally blocked his further imagination until his death.

Although Einstein correctly had recognised the photon as a quantum object, his mathematical lack of awareness concerning the methods of “group theory” reduced his combinatorial strategy to purely symmetrical and antisymmetrical representations (Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac statistics, respectively). Important notions like that of “irreducibility” (inseparability), thus, passed beyond him. His own idea of a “background independence” just is some poor version of it.

During the 1920‘s, quantum mechanics had been founded on Planck‘s discrete quanta. Again, however, people just retranslated it into some continuous description by functional analysis (“Schrödinger’s view“), according to which “quantisation“ merely meant some curious “cooking recipe“ nobody really took seriously. In spite of its use for calculation, physical argumentation still followed the old, beaten track of classical physics, thus minimising the chance of finding novel features.

Planck‘s revolutionary ansatz of discrete quanta, thus, got lost again – both in Einstein’s works and in those half-hearted formulations of “Quantum Mechanics“.

That classical refusal of trying to understand the most primitive rules of combinatorial analysis on an atomistic level, as it is mediated by “group theory“, converted to an essential characteristic of an entire century: corresponding mathematics (Young tableaux) had been well known – only, people did not care about it because schools preferred to teach the infinitesimal methods of the 18th century, but no combinatorial analysis.

In Austria, Schrödinger and Pauli even came up with a critique stigmatising this type of mathematics, which once should have a good chance of unifying Einstein’s General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics to a common “Quantum Gravity“, as “group pestilence“.

From the perspective of a particle theorist or of a theoretical cosmologist, hence, the last 100 years will have to be ticked off as a lost century where the theory of fundamental physics just lived on its substance. In those times, theory did not really process the experimental findings. Their “Standard“ Models just are busy with fitting – they do not explain anything, however.

With General Relativity as a one-man-project on the one hand and with Quantum Mechanics (including its extensions by Dirac and some half-baked contributions by deSitter) as a common project of several people on the other hand, a glorious epoch of physics dried up, whose glamour shortly flared up just another time with Gell-Mann’s quark model – in order to be destroyed at birth again by the continuum theoreticians.

The relativity of space and time had shaken the fundaments of classical philosophy, and so did it – even more abstractly – the concept of a world of quanta. Einstein’s quasi idolisation widely accepted still to-day has its roots in the fact that he had proved to be one of the last advocates of a serious theory of fundamental physics which still based on cognition – and not purely on administration.

Hidden Parameters and Free Will

A “free will“ means the existence of not fully deterministic processes in nature. On the other hand, physics always is asking for their „reproducibility“: Non-reproducible processes simply are not subject to physics; they are belonging to the metaphysical domains of “religious faith“.

When persisting in the limits of physics, then we arrive at the philosophically as well as, especially, in religions controversial result that there should exist no really “free will“! In brain research, meanwhile, similar experimentally comparable results are emerging.

Insofar, the indistinguishability that significant between good and evil in religion and in jurisdiction mutated into a matter of random interpretation – a disaster for our culture as grown historically! Therefore that tough resistance against models of that kind on the part of our society, which hardly had swallowed Einstein’s relativity of space and time. Planck’s quanta, now, meant overstraining it.

As a viable alternative to his no-go theorems, even Bell himself had already mentioned an “absolute determinism“ in a BBC interview (1985): his “super-determinism“. This, at a single blow, swept from the table all counterarguments against Einstein‘s objections with respect to “hidden parameters“.

But nobody, then, wanted to renew that old discussion considered as checked off already; the strong degree of persistence on once “beaten tracks“ was overwhelming, even if it obviously was going astray – a crux continuing throughout the entire 20th century till far into the new millennium.

Bell‘s way out by his super-determinism meant that all imaginable measuring values characteristic of our world for all times and locations should already be fixed unambiguously in advance. Vividly spoken, they are representing points on an all-embracing (multi-dimensional) “wall paper“ whose pattern is uniquely dictated from outside; purely from inside, it is unchangeable! Mathematicians would call it an “initial condition“ of our world.

However, as time, as one of its parameters, will belong to it, too, these “initial conditions“ are no temporary properties in the sense of a time interval: more generally, they must be boundary conditions (i.e. “interfaces“) of an even bigger, more comprehensive system our world just is a partial structure of (“multiverse“ models).

Again, we, here, will have to abandon some historically grown centralistic position and have to restart with some new idea. In historical epochs, we experienced that several times, already – most recently when proceeding from the geocentric picture (the earth as the centre of our world) towards the Copernican system (with the earth revolving around the sun), and later on, when we recognised that even our solar system is just one among many ones (in the "Milky Way“), which is spirally rotating about some giant central “black hole“, and, finally, that even our Milky Way just is one of many galaxies in “space“.

Actually, the embedding of our universe itself is on the agenda. This time, it will be the battle with the “sensationalists“ to be fought out, who only are accepting what they themselves can touch with their fingers. By doing so, they are categorically calling the legitimacy of logic relations into question: concrete facts (the old mechanistic view) vs. abstract reasoning (transitivity). –

But not enough with the macrocosm: In the microcosm, this revolution shows up its effects, too. Einstein‘s hidden parameters – let us call them “quanta“ – automatically are leading us towards a level of “states“ still far beneath the level of the “Standard“ Model of elementary particles (quarks and leptons), i.e., towards that level of “quanta“ which had been “hidden“ up to now – similarly as the level of atoms once had been “hidden” under the level of a “chemical substance“.

Instead of trying to found physics on an abstract, continuous, mathematical argumentation on some postulated symmetry behaviour, physics will be shown to result from solid sets of discrete, finite numbers of individual "quanta".