QUANTUM PHYSICS FOR BEGINNERS_ THE BEST GUIDE TO DISCOVER AND UNDERSTAND THE MOST INTERESTING CONCEPTS OF QUANTUM PHYSICS WITH A FOCUS ON THE LAW OF ATTRACTION AND THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY

Citation preview

QUANTUM PHYSICS FOR BEGINNERS

The Best Guide To Discover And Understand The Most Interesting Concepts Of Quantum Physics With A Focus On The Law Of Attraction And The Theory Of Relativity

DAVID CLARK

© Copyright 2020 by David Clark - All Rights Reserved The content contained within this book may not reproduced, replicated or transmitted without direct written permission from the author or the publisher. Under no circumstances will any blaim or legal responsibility be held against the publisher or author, for any damages, reparation or monetary loss due to the information contained within this book. Either directly or indirectly. Legal notice : This book is copyright protected. This book is only for personal use. You cannot amend, distribute, sell, use, quote or paraphrase any part or the content within this book without the consent of the author or publisher. Disclaimer notice : Please note the information contained within this document is for educational and entertainment purposes only. All effort has been executed to present accurate, up to date and reliable complete information. No warranties of any kind are declared or implied. Readers acknowledge that the author is not engaging in the rendering of legal, financial, medical or professional advice. The content within this book has been derived from various sources. Please consult a licensed professional before attempting any techniques outlined in this book. By reading this document, the reader agrees that under no circumstances is the author responsible for any losses, direct or indirect, which are incurred as a result of the use of information contained within this document, including but not limited to errors, omissions or inaccuracies.

Table of Content Introduction -Quantum Physics - The Localization Of Manifestation Chapter 1. Dawn of Quantum -History -Wave-Particle Duality -The Wave Function Chapter 2. Particles, Waves, and Lights -Energetic components and forces -Tao Te Ching -Space-time compression and expansion -Energetic and geometric composition of particles Chapter 3. The Birth of the First Quantum -The Ultraviolet Catastrophe Chapter 4. The First Quantum Concept Chapter 5. Max Planck the Father of Quantum Theory -The Schrödinger equation Chapter 6. How Planck Developed the New Concepts in Physics? Chapter 7. Einstein’s Relativity -The Equivalence Principle -The Problem of Inertial Forces -Relativity of Gravity Chapter 8. The Law of Attraction Chapter 9. Causality in Quantum Physics -Schrödinger's Cat -EPR Paradox -The Many Worlds Interpretation Chapter 10. Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity Incompatibility -Einstein’s Explanation vs Quantum Mechanics

-Why Do We Accept Quantum Mechanics? Conclusion

Introduction Quantum physics is the method in which molecules work and how science and scientists work out how they work. We as a whole, move to the quantum tune and all work in the same way. If you need to clarify how electrons travel through a PC chip, how light photons in a sunlight based board are changed over into power or intensified into a laser, or how the sun keeps on consuming, you need to use quantum physics. To see how things work in reality, quantum mechanics should be combined with different components of material science - particularly Albert Einstein's specific theory of relativity, which clarifies what happens when things move rapidly - to what makes quantum field speculations, Three unique methodologies about quantum fields manage three of the four crucial powers with which matter cooperates: electromagnetism, which clarifies how iotas hold together; the reliable nuclear power that defines the stability of the nucleus in the heart of the atom; and the weak atomic power that explains why some atoms decay radioactively. Over the past five decades, these three theories have been merged into a dilapidated coalition known as the ‘standard model’ of particle physics. Despite the impression that this model is held together with tape, it is the most thoroughly tested picture of the essential work of matter that has ever been developed. Conventional quantum field theories well describe the results of experiments with high-energy particle destroyers, such as CERN's Large Hadron Collider, in which the Higgs was discovered, examine the matter on a microscopic scale. However, if you want to understand how things work in less stressful situations, how electrons move for example, or don't travel through a strong material, making a material a metal, a protector, or a semiconductor, for instance, things get much more confused. However, all these practical problems hide a huge quantum secret. Quantum physics predicts surprising things about how matter functions that are inconsistent with how things appear to function in reality. Quantum particles can act like particles that stay still. Or they can act as waves that are distributed in space or at several points at the same time.

But that's not all; even quantum particles seem to be able to influence each other immediately, even if they are far apart. This truly passionate phenomenon is known as entanglement or, as Einstein (a great critic of quantum theory) has said, ‘distant spectral action.’ Such quantum forces are entirely foreign to us, but they form the basis for new technologies such as high-security quantum cryptography and high-performance quantum computing. In all of this, there are several elephants in the room. First of all, there is a fourth fundamental force of nature that quantum theory has so far, not been able to explain. Decades of intensive research to put gravity under the umbrella of the quantum and thus to explain all of the basic physics within a ‘theory of everything’ have failed. Meanwhile, cosmological measurements show that over 95 percent of the universe consists of dark matter and dark energy, for which we currently have no explanation in the standard model, and dilemmas such as the expansion of the role of quantum physics in the disordered mechanisms of life remain unexplainable. The world is at a certain quantum level, but if quantum physics is the last word in the world, it remains an open question.

Quantum Physics - The Localization of Manifestation Quantum physicists speak of electrons or events that are potential rather than real physical units. So there are several potentials until someone looks, and then forces the universe to make a decision, so to speak, a determination as to which potential to locate and update. All existence is an unlimited quantum field of energy, a sea of infinite possibilities that are all waiting to happen! The mind creates and controls reality. Here's how the law of attraction works. We get what we focus on most of the time. The viewer creates reality by merely observing. The mind, regardless of the structure, contains images. And every image that is held firmly in someone’s brain in any form, must come out. Whenever the mind forms a mental image or an image of anything, it becomes ‘one’ with the infinite universal consciousness, and the developed image is then outsourced to the physical world as a single space-time event. For an image to manifest itself, however, there must be no other

contradictory thoughts to abolish the power of manifestation of the image contained in mind. Another property of the quanta is that they are multidimensional. You are now scientifically seeing that our universe is multifaceted, even though our senses understand length, width, height and time as the only dimensions. However, our souls are multidimensional. Listen to your soul and your feelings. The physical world is comprised of thoughts and vitality. Many quantum physicists, including Einstein, have shown that all physical matter is made up of energy packets that are not related to space and time. This energy field has no precisely defined limits. The universe is vast, timeless and limitless. Science has also shown that the mind has no limits. All thoughts are ‘connected’ to a field of spiritual energy. You are taller and much more powerful than you think. Whatever you want, you already have everything. It has been said that it will be given to you before asking. Science is slowly dealing with quantum physics to prove that this is scientifically true. The infinite intelligence of formless substance, the possibility at the quantum level, and our ability to influence this field give us the experience of ‘having everything.’ You already have all the riches beyond your wildest dreams. We are now starting to find out on a larger scale, both scientifically and spiritually. You have it. Maybe you're not experiencing it right now, but you could if you believe that you do. Having and experiencing are two different things. An easy way to explain it is that you can climb Everest or paraglide, but you may not have experienced alls aspects of your abilities. All you have to do is try and you’ll be able to do it. The quantum field can create an infinite number of structures, forms and experiences and has already done so. The words that you’re reading are also structures already created. The next thought you have will also be one of these things. But did you ever expect that you would experience these words on these pages? Your desire to find such words made them appear in your hands. They have always existed. But out of the passion that you and many others like you

sent to the universe, I was inspired to give you these answers! It is not necessary to predict exactly how things will develop. All you have to do is desire, understand and know that it is possible and will be arranged to come to you. In our life, we simply move our consciousness to experience aspects of ourselves that we have always had, in a universe that has everything we could wish for. Even what we do not imagine exists. This seems to have been done by ‘cutting the whole’ into at least two halves, with one half conditioned to see and the other also to see. Who is conditioned to understand is, therefore, under the illusion of separation, from what is conditioned to see? It is a necessary illusion. But, in reality everything is ‘one’. Sir Isaac Newton thought of nature as a machine that describes the pricing laws that govern the operation of this machine. We had to dig deep into the heart of the atom when it was discovered in 1890. The world inside the nucleus, which was coined in ancient Greece, means ‘indivisible unity,’ helped us to discover radioactivity, and it showed how the atom was divisible. Everything is energy. We all know this term: E = mc2. This energy corresponds to the mass for the speed of light squared. We have found that energy and matter are connected, which can be converted back and forth. We use a study called quantum physics as a study of how the world works on the smallest scales at a much lower level than the atom. There are various elusive small energy packets that physicists call quantum. Everything is energy, be it a rock, a planet or a glass of water, and everything that can be touched and has a taste or smell. All things are made up of molecules, made up of atoms combined with protons, electrons and neutrons that create this vibrating energy package.

Chapter 1 - Dawn of Quantum History The research that led to quantum mechanics is essentially the history of science itself. Tomes have been penned on the progress of scientific understanding through time, so here only the very briefest of relevant highlights are included. The ancient Greeks were one of the earliest human cultures to gather resources sufficient to facilitate free time for expansive study of, and speculation on, philosophical matters, including the operation of the natural world. Around 400 BCE, Greek philosopher Leucippus and his pupil Democritus, some of whose writings survive to the present, theorized that all matter, the rocks, the trees, the water, the people, is made of tiny particles they termed atoms. Their theory would be the dominant one on the matter for roughly the next 2000 years. During the 1600s, French philosopher René Descartes applied the atom idea to light, which he wrote consists of tiny particles he called corpuscles. Later that same century, Dutch scientist Christiaan Huygens concluded, based on his work in mathematics that instead light is a wave. Such a clear conflict of opinion about light, something so familiar to all of us, set into motion its detailed study by many, including some of the most recognizable names in science, among them most notably: Isaac Newton, Thomas Young, Michael Faraday, Edmond Becquerel, James Clerk Maxwell, Max Planck, Albert Einstein, and Niels Bohr. Andrew Robinson's 2006 biography of Thomas Young describes him as "the last man who knew everything," a reference to both the science of the time period and Young's abilities across a wide range of topics. Young, who lived in Britain from 1773 to 1829, involved himself in such diverse areas as medicine, language translation, including the Rosetta Stone, life insurance, and the wave nature of light. Young's experiment with waves is a common sight in high school physics labs where a ripple tank of water is illuminated in order to highlight waves moving atop the water's surface. When the waves are partially obstructed, such as by fixed pieces of wood, various effects such as reflection, refraction,

and interference can be observed and studied in much the same manner Young had done. When Young widened his experiments beyond water to light, via what is now called Young's double-slit interferometer, he also found refraction and interference. Those similarities with water caused him to conclude light is a wave. Young's 1801 report to the Royal Society titled On the Theory of Light and Colour was so detailed and convincing it overturned light's particle nature espoused by Isaac Newton, and seemed the final word on the subject, at least until late that century. A breakthrough developed during the late 1800s with the study of something called the photoelectric effect in which electrons are emitted from metal when light strikes it. Thomas Young would have envisioned light waves gradually adding energy to the metal until a sufficient amount was reached for an electron to be dislodged from the metal. However, experiments showed that long wavelength / low energy / low frequency light (three ways of saying the same thing about light) never triggered such an emission, regardless of the light's duration or intensity (brightness). Our eyes distinguish between different frequencies of visible light by color. Red light is lower in frequency than blue light. Note this does not mean lower frequency light is red, merely red is how we perceive visible light of relatively low frequency. Since frequency correlates with energy that means a given brightness of red light contains less energy than the same brightness of blue light. Experiments found that only when the energy/frequency of light shined on metal was increased to a certain level were electrons emitted by the metal, i.e. from some metals red light does not trigger electron emissions, but blue light does. Because of this photoelectric effect, during 1905 Albert Einstein theorized that light does not take the form of a continuous wave but rather a stream of "discrete wave packets," now commonly called photons. If you noticed "discrete wave packet" sounds like it's both a wave and a packet (particle), you have just had your first peek behind the quantum curtain at the elusive, ambiguous nature of light. In this briefest history of science, we have reached the dawn of quantum mechanics.

Wave-Particle Duality

In this sense, Descartes who favored a particle nature of light, and Huygens who favored a wave nature, were both right. As was theorized during the early 20th century, light has both particle and wave natures, just not at the same time. Later experiments revealed an even stranger situation: whether light acts as a wave or particle depends on whether you are observing it! As of this writing, there remain multiple theories why observing makes a difference, and ahead this author will advance his own. It is important to note that for the purposes of quantum physics "wave" is merely terminology, it does not mean something physical is actually waving like a flag in a breeze, or water at a beach. Instead "wave" is a contrivance, or visual aid, that represents an entity or unit of energy, the precise location of which is uncertain. Wave and particle are two models of light. To compare and contrast further, consider the wave on a long rope that is produced when one grabs hold of the rope's end and shakes it. The rope will curve and sway as a wave of energy propagates along it. In this example, the rope is indeed a physical item that is waving due to the energy shaken into it. Exactly where is that energy? It is not in any one place, instead it is distributed along the rope. A light wave is somewhat analogous to that rope wave, except there is no rope. Since there is no rope, nothing physical is waving. The term "wave" is employed not only because light waves can act similarly to water waves, but also to remind us the energy of the light is not in any one spot, but rather within some fuzzy, imprecise, uncertain section of space. When Einstein mentioned "discrete wave packets" he was speaking of quantization. In the application of quantization, larger amounts are split into their smallest constituent parts. Quantize light and you get a photon, the smallest amount of light possible. The closer we examine reality, the more things we find that are apparently quantized. This is the origin of the word "quantum" in quantum mechanics. Energy, time, and space, among others, all appear to be quantized, yielding the "resolution of reality" where resolution means "level of detail." The concept of resolution might be familiar in regard to the number of pixels (individual dots) on an electronic device's display. An 8K television has about 8000 pixels across its screen. If that screen's total width is 80 inches, that's roughly 100 pixels per inch, or 40 per centimeter. That pales in

comparison to space, thought to be quantized at a resolution of about 1 trillion per inch, a value derived from the Planck length, theorized as the smallest possible distance in space, Given the ultimate high resolution of reality, our eyes perceive movement of an object within space to be smooth and continuous, but that object is actually moving in a series of discrete steps. If the "building blocks" of space were instead very "grainy," perhaps one inch or one centimeter apart, yet all else somehow the same, when objects moved we would see them step an inch or centimeter at a time, jumping from one place to the next. It was not until the 20th century approached that our instruments became sophisticated enough to measure reality not as continuous but rather quantized in discrete building blocks, lots of them, but also few enough that we began to notice the effects of those blocks, those quanta. Waves thought of as continuous, when we look closely, appear as quantized particles. Experiments performed during the 2000s have demonstrated that objects far more substantial than a photon, for example a fluorinated buck ball composed of 108 atoms, also act as both a wave and a particle. At some larger amount of mass, wave-particle duality appears not to occur, but this is uncertain because it reaches the limits of the formulas underlying our mathematical understanding of physics. This wave-particle duality mass limit is a consequence of the Planck length. As of this writing, scientists have various opinions, or interpretations, of the source of wave-particle duality.

The Wave Function If you have previously read about quantum mechanics, you have likely encountered the phrase "wave function" many times. A wave function is the mathematical representation of the wave part of an object's wave-particle duality, expressed as a sum of several values. Several scientists contributed to the development of quantum mechanics and the wave function during the early 1900s, most notably Max Planck, Louis de Broglie, Werner Heisenberg, Niels Bohr, Max Born, and Erwin Schrödinger. Initially, many scientists thought the wave function represented where the energy of a photon (or other particle) is spread along its wave. They thought, for example, perhaps 60% of a photon's energy is in one spot, plus 30%

adjacent, and 5% a bit farther, etc. However, experiments involving how light scatters showed that idea to be incorrect. During 1926, physicist Max Born first promoted the interpretation that instead the wave function is a sum of probabilities, a view widely accepted today. As a side note, Max Born is a grandfather of entertainer Olivia Newton-John; alas, apparently Isaac Newton is not also one of her ancestors. "Wave" function is a bit of a misnomer: upon Born's insight, it probably should have been renamed Quantum Probability function, or similar, since probability is at the heart of quantum physics, however the name "wave function" stuck. As an example of the probabilities a wave function expresses, imagine a coin flip. The coin might land heads, tails, or rarely even on its edge, though to ease the analogy we will ignore the possibility of a coin landing on its edge or any other very unlikely position. Whether heads or tails will happen is uncertain in advance of the flip. A mathematical representation of that coin flip needs to include all possibilities, as well as the probability of each. For our ideal coin, we can compute it will land heads up 50% of flips, plus tails up 50% of flips, plus a 0% chance of anything else, so its wave function equation would look something like Coin = 50% heads + 50% tails Note that an actual wave function requires math more complex than this idealized, simple example, and probability is derived by applying something called the Born rule, also formulated Max Born. For the moment, all you need remember is that essentially a wave function sums all the possible states of an object for which there is fuzzy uncertainty of location, energy, and other properties

Chapter 2 - Particles, Waves, and Lights The phrase "quantum mechanics" comes from a paper written by MAX BORN in a 1924 "Zur Quantenmechanik". Regardless of the background of the phrase, it suggests that particles are mechanical devices. From the perspective of quanta modules and Quantum-Geometry the phrase catches the fundamentals of particles. The quanta modules are elementary quantized mechanical devices. Each particle is defined by a

unique mechanism made possible by the variability of the quanta modules. Qualitative description of the proton: The variability of the quanta modules enables the formation of different energetic shells representing the housing and movable components of the particle. Energetic flow is made possible switching devices formed by quanta modules. Flow is also achieved by activation of voids and virtual components. The interaction matrix was made in order to investigate the energetic possibilities within the proton subcomponents. The matrix indicates that the combined tetrahedron/octahedron is sufficiently complex to be interpreted as a quantum-mechanical machine. There is a resemblance between particles and ordinary machines. The proton has a rotor component as well as a stator. The enclosed Octet corresponds to the rotor and the surrounding tetrahedron/octahedron resembles the stator. The proton can be seen as a void-to-local-action converter. The proton internalizes parts of the surrounding void.

Hadron spectrum as illustrated in “Quanta modules and physics” (1987). In light of wave-particle duality, the environment for the particles or the housing for the particles is not included. For the proton, housing and internal particle is the same. For eta, kaon, pion and muon, the housing is the cube and the polyhedra above represent the mass of the particles. Within the cube these masses perform an oscillatory motion.

Energetic Components And Forces Tao Te Ching Mass is defined by the internal motion of the particle. The particle’s local environment is defined by the particle itself. Motion is oscillation. The ‘internal particle’ move back and forth or in and out within its limited environment. Oscillation implies a standstill and a reversal of motion. Motion also implies a transfer of momentum to the containment wall - the limit of the particle’s environment. Charge compression and expansion is the emission and absorption of 60 quanta modules – half a Quantum of Action. Charge is an inherent property of particles. Neutral particles emit/absorb neutral charge. Emission/absorption facilitates and blocks the internal motion of the particle. Emission/absorption is made possible by partially overlapping functions and bistables within the particle.

Spin is a strange property of a particle that shows up in many different ways. Half integer spin can activate half a circle or it can activate half a sphere. Half integer spin divides the Quantum of Action in two. Half integer spin creates a right-hand or left-hand twist within the particle. Zero spin causes the ‘internal particle’ to invert during motion. Quarks are related to the internal voids of the particle. The introduction of void creates insulation between the various particle components. The insulation separates the internals of the hadron into positive and negative parts and the associated attraction/repulsion between these components. Strong interaction relates to the dislocation of quanta modules within the Mite and the associated expansion/compression of the particle internals. The dislocation creates a tension within the Mite which in turn causes the quarks to expand. The expansion/compression of the quarks also drives the symmetry split within the particle. Weak interaction relates to the congruence of positive and negative Mites and the possibility to form complex patterns of partially overlapping combinations when all Mites are either positive or negative. Weak interaction enables these independent functions to coexist. Weak interaction also enables the formation of virtual Mites or quanta modules within the particle. Electromagnetic force is similar to weak force with the exception that interaction takes place in particles composed of pairs of positive and negative Mites or quark anti-quarks pairs. Action takes place when these pairs are separated by angle or frequency. Gravity: The relationship between mass and gravity comes from the leakage of energy that takes place when the particle’s internal particle hits the containment defined by the Quantum of Action and momentum is transferred to the particle containment. Energy leaks during the rebound or reversal of action.

The Quantum of Action is energetically split into three major parts accounting for 100%, 50% and 15% of active quanta volume (120Q). This division is the result of the particle symmetry split mechanism and the instantaneous state of the particle. Instantaneousness is limited to 15% of the particle’s volume.

Space-Time Compression And Expansion In the particle’s instantaneous state both space and time are compressed. Expansion and the emergence of the individual quarks are a function of time. This indicates a merger of space-time and the interpretation of the particle as a space-time wave. Instantaneousness allows for compression of the particle. Change of frequency allows for particle expansion. Space-time compression leads to a state of “ignition” where spin, charge and mass merge into one integrated and instantaneous state. This state is limited to 15 % of the Quantum of Action (18Q). Both the Octet and the Quad are composed of six Mites corresponding to 18Q. These two units are minimum carriers of the elementary charge and become visible when the particle reaches the state of ignition. The waveparticle duality might therefore be interpreted as a process of space-time dilution and compression. Space-time compression involves three steps: Homogenization represented by the distribution of charge over all 120 quanta modules of the Quantum of action: symmetry split where the charge is concentrated to 60Q – half Quantum of Action and the state of ignition where charge is concentrated to 15% of Quantum of Action.

Energetic And Geometric Composition Of Particles

Proton: Quarks are quanta modules. The Mite has the quanta composition AA+B+ or A+A-B-. The A+B+ combination represent 2/3 of Mite volume. The A- -module represents 1/3 of Mite volume. If the A+B+ combination is identified as the up-quark (u) and A- is identified as the down quark (d), the Mite has the quark composition du with charge 1/3q. This combination is not a complete particle because of the fractional charge. Therefore particles have to be defined both in terms of quanta module charge (sign) and volume (Q). Positive Mites (A-A+B+) and negative Mites (A+A-B-) are congruent. Therefore the volume of the Mite can contain no less than six partially overlapping quanta modules without congruent individual quanta modules. The proton must have two A+B+ and one A- components activated, representing the two positive up quarks and the negative down quark. Here another difficulty appears. Two A+B+-modules are congruent within the Mite. Two positive up quarks cannot occupy the same energetic state. The exclusion principle prevents this. The dilemma can be solved in the following way: Assuming the Mite has an integrity of its own; the composition A+B+ is equal to Mite with the A-module subtracted. Subtraction in this case means that the A- module is a hole or void within the Mite. Two positive up quarks and one negative down quark therefore can be squeezed into the Mite without violating the exclusion principle. Charge addition gives 2/3 + (3-1)/3 – 1/3 = 1. With the introduction of the void within the Mite, the two positive up quarks will not occupy the same energetic state. The proton can be seen as an expansion of the individual Mite containing two up and one down quark. In the first step the Mite is rotated to occupy three of the six possible Mite positions in the Octet. In the next step one of the up quarks in the three Mites is rotated and extracted from the Mite and placed in a position that covers the remaining three Mite positions in the Octet. After this transformation we have an Octet with three empty positions in the shape of a negative A-module. In the next step, the tetrahedron and the octahedron are superimposed on the Octet - the result is the proton. This process indicates that the proton is formed both by a mechanism working from the inside-out and a mechanism that works from the outside-in. From an outside-in perspective the proton is a crystallized rhombic triacontahedron. From an inside-out perspective the proton is an expanded Mite. These two mechanisms merge in the formation of the proton. The

mechanism also suggests that essentials of the proton can survive within the single Mite. The Mite therefore can serve as a seed for the formation of a proton. Possibly this seed can be a part of the formation of larger nuclei with mergers of protons and neutrons. From a global perspective the proton can be formed in the following way: If three A+ are removed from the tetrahedron, the tetrahedrons net charge will be – 1. If three A-B- modules are removed from the octahedron, the net charge of the octahedron will be +2. However, these charges are symmetrically distributed. Spin causes the symmetrical distribution of charge. Hence the net charge of the tetrahedron is -1/3 and the net charge of the octahedron is 2/3 if spin properties are accounted for. When the tetrahedron and the octahedron are added, three voids in the shape of a Mite are formed within. In these voids, a Mite with a negative A-module removed to from a void within the Mite can be inserted. The result is a proton where the down quark is represented by the tetrahedron, one of the up quarks by the octahedron and the other up quark by the enclosed Mite with a negative Amodule void. However, the proton is not completed yet. The quanta volume of this arrangement is 117Q 0.001 => 0.0001, etc. These very ideas about any energy amount defined physics until the 20th century, and they had to be modified according to the original mathematical model of radiation dependent on the temperature created by Max Planck (known as Planck’s law). Planck did not claim his model provided a comprehensive explanation of the limited radiation of heated objects. Planck’s law was intended only as a convenient temporal mathematical model to reflect the observed radiation distribution to an approximate degree. It was created in order to enable moreor-less adequate practical calculations for radiation at high temperatures (in particular, to predict the radiation energy and color of light of a tungsten filament depending on temperature). In simple words, Planck’s law has the following logic: Since the shorter the wave, the more limited the amount of radiation, Plank suggested imagining that the radiation always consisted of single indivisible portions or pieces of energy – quanta (just as any substance consists of individual atoms or molecules), as well as imagining that the radiation of the shorter wavelength is composed of larger (meaning, more energy) portions. Therefore, more radiation of greater wavelength would be produced, since it is easier for energy scattered in bodies to gather in smaller portions of radiation of greater wavelengths, than in the larger portions of short-wave radiation. As objects are heated to higher temperatures, a significantly larger amount and density of energy enables the formation of bigger and bigger portions of shorter and shorter wavelength radiation, i.e. the amount of radiation of shorter wavelengths gradually increases, which is precisely how

it is observed in reality. This also implies that the lowest possible value of radiation power is one quantum (bigger or smaller depending on the wavelength). By this model, radiation cannot contain ½ a quantum of energy, nor can it contain 1½ or 109¼ quanta. That is, quanta are only measurable in whole numbers, not fractions. As mentioned before, the temperature of an object is the energy of motion of the atoms forming the object? If the temperature is low, this means that the atoms have a low energy level, and if the energy level is low then each atom or each certain group of atoms will produce, on average, smaller quanta (i.e. radiation of a longer wave) than when the energy level in atoms is higher. And if the amount of energy in an atom or in a group of atoms is not enough to form one quantum of UV (or X-rays or gamma rays) then this radiation can never be emitted. Ordinary-temperature objects do not have enough energy to emit even middling-energy quanta of light, but only lower-energy quanta of low frequency (long wavelength) microwave, infrared and radio waves. The greatest peculiarity of Planck’s model lies in the fact that, for some reason, energy is emitted and absorbed only in individual quantities. Any radiation dose is measured in a certain specific number of these smallest radiation units. Just as any amount of gold is a certain number of gold atoms, and just as molecules and atoms have different sizes, radiation consists of quanta (particles of energy!) of a size specific only to that particular wavelength (or corresponding frequency). Summing up, Planck suggested that the shorter the wave (or the higher the wave frequency), the larger the quantum, thus reducing the radiation of shorter waves (higher frequencies). He found that the amount of energy per radiation quantum must always be equally proportional to the frequency of that radiation. To find out the amount of the energy of the radiation quantum of any particular frequency, multiply this particular frequency by the standard coefficient (the Planck constant). Now Planck’s formulas allowed the describing and predicting of the radiation of heated objects precisely rather than approximately! Splitting the quantities that seemed to be continuous into quanta also solved some other physics problems as well. This splitting of quantities into elementary minimal

indivisible units is called quantization. The quantization means the quantities can gain not just any value, but only the allowed whole values, like 1 or 109 or 1,000,000 quanta of energy. It will be shown that this idea works also when considering the structure of an atom. The general effectiveness of this simple concept of quanta makes it virtually indisputable. Quantum physics, which began with this concept, is the most successful, most productive, and precise theory created by humankind. Its unprecedented benefits include all of forms of modern sophisticated technology (thanks to the understanding of semiconductors and the building of transistors with them), and its constant, unremitting development promises further new opportunities that can hardly be imagined today. High-tech experiments used to test the rest of the unusual concepts of quantum physics just prove it even further. However, in the 1900s, after Planck suggested his convenient model, still no one doubted that the amount of radiation energy could actually be of any value (and not of the certain number of quanta). Why should energy be split into elementary indivisible units? It seemed contrived and not believable. For five years afterwards, everybody along with Planck himself believed that he had managed to invent only a temporary artificial schematic approach to the issue of radiation, which worked thanks to a complete fluke, and a real understanding of the observed radiation behavior was yet to come. However, the future held another powerful argument in favor of Planck’s concept of quanta. Albert Einstein realized that the second great scientific mystery of that time, the photoelectric effect, could be easily explained by the existence of quanta. When radiation is absorbed by objects, its energy can be added to the motion energy of its atoms or molecules, causing the object’s temperature to rise. But radiation energy can also be transmitted to individual electrons in atoms. If there is enough energy, an electron can overcome the attraction of the nucleus. Thus, electrons leave their atoms upon the impact of radiation such as light (photoelectric effect). It was known that even a very large amount of long-wave red light (about 650-700nm) could not liberate electrons from atomic binding, while even the relatively small power of violet light (about 400nm) and ultraviolet radiation

(400 to 10nm) could liberate electrons effectively, even if the total energy of violet light or UV radiation is hundreds of times lower than red light energy. So, the total radiation power was not the issue. Violet light and UV radiation had to have some other advantage, although it was logical to assume that in order to liberate electrons from atomic binding, it was necessary to apply as much energy as possible to these electrons. Einstein pointed out that violet light and UV radiation has a great advantage over the red light in Planck’s model because they had a greater power of individual “units” of radiation – Planck’s quanta – than red light.

Chapter 7 - Einstein’s Relativity In 1907, only two years after developing the theory of special relativity, Einstein had the idea that he would later describe as “the happiest of his entire life.” In this (inner) vision, what would be revealed as the essential physical basis of general relativity appeared to him, even if it would take him almost ten years to elaborate the theory mathematically? Einstein realized that “if a man falls freely, he would not feel his weight.” Even the expression “free fall” is telling: though one is apparently always attached to a gravitational field, attracted to the Earth from the perspective of Newtonian theory, one finds freedom when one is falling. It is this freedom that those who pursue free falling as a hobby seek to find and to feel, even if it is only partial due to air resistance. It is of course astronauts in “weightlessness” who truly experience over a long period this feeling of no longer having any weight, of no longer being subject to the force of the Earth’s attraction. Nevertheless, the great idea of Einstein was the understanding that, if we jump up, during the brief moment of our jump, we experience this “weightlessness.” In other words, there is no difference in principle between a vessel in orbit around the Earth and a ball which we throw here on Earth: both are in free fall; both are, for the duration of their motion, satellites of the Earth.

The Equivalence Principle Understanding this universal phenomenon led Einstein to formulate the equivalence principle, according to which a gravitational field is locally equivalent to a field of acceleration. In order to obtain this principle, he drew upon a fundamental property of gravitational fields already brought to light by Galileo and included in Newton’s equations: the acceleration communicated to a body by a gravitational field is independent of its mass. After the development of special relativity, the need to generalize the theory seemed inevitable for multiple reasons. In fact, relativist unification was far from complete. If the mechanics of free particles and electrodynamics finally satisfied the same laws, it was not the case for Newton’s theory of universal gravitation, otherwise the chief showpiece of classical physics. The equations of Newton are invariant under the classical transformation of Galileo, but not

under those of Lorentz. Thus physics remained split in two, in contradiction with the principle of relativity, which necessitates the validity of the same fundamental laws in all situations. Moreover, Newtonian theory is based on certain presuppositions in contradiction with the principle of relativity: it is so with the concept of Newtonian force, which acts at a distance by propagating instantaneously at an infinite speed. The construction of a relativist theory of gravitation thus seemed to Einstein (and other physicists) a logical necessity. Another problem was just as serious: the relativist approach explicitly gives itself the problem of changes of reference systems and their influence on the form of physical laws. But the answer provided by special relativity is only partial. It only considers frames of reference in uniform translation, at constant speeds with respect to one another. However, the real world constantly shows us rotations and accelerations, from the fact of the multiple forces which are at work (such as gravity), or inversely, causing new forces (such as the forces of inertia). What are the laws of transformation in the case of accelerated frames of reference? Why would such frames of reference not be as valid for writing the laws of physics as inertial frames of reference? The answer is that such a question requires a generalization of special relativity. The originality of Einstein’s approach had been, in particular, to bring together two problems, that of constructing a relativist theory of gravitation and that of generalizing relativity to non-inertial systems, into a single endeavor. The equivalence principle made this unity of approach possible: if field of acceleration and gravitational field are locally indistinguishable, the two problems of describing changes in the coordinate systems, including those which are accelerated and those which are subject to a gravitational field, boil down to a single problem. But such an approach is not reducible to “making relativist” Newtonian gravitation. While certain physicists could hope, at the time, that the problem of Newton’s theory could be solved by a simple reformulation, by introducing a force which propagated at the speed of light, it is the entire framework of classical physics that Einstein proposed to reconstruct with general relativity. Better yet, it was a new type of theory which he developed for the first time: a theory of a framework (curved spacetime, now a dynamic variable) in connection with its contents, and no longer only a theory of “objects” in a rigid preexisting framework (as was Newton’s

absolute space). Why such a radical choice? Doubtless because special relativity itself was unsatisfactory on at least one essential point: the space-time which characterizes it, even if it includes in its description a space and a time which are no longer absolute taken individually, still remains absolute when taken as a four-dimensional “object.” However, inspired in particular by the ideas of Ernst Mach, Einstein had come to think that an absolute space-time could have no physical meaning, but rather, that its geometry should be in correspondence with its material and energetic contents. Thus a reflection on the problem of inertial forces, which had caused Newton to introduce absolute space, led Einstein to the opposite conclusion.

The Problem Of Inertial Forces The existence of inertial forces acutely poses the problem of the absolute or relative nature of motion and, ultimately, of space-time. The ideas of Mach in this area had a deep influence on Einstein. For Mach, the relativity of motion did not apply solely to uniform motion in translation; rather, all motion of whatever sort was by essence relative (Poincaré and, long before him, Huygens had arrived at the same conclusions). This proposition can seem in contradiction with the facts. If it is clear, since Galileo, that it is impossible to characterize the state of inertial motion of a body in an absolute manner (only the speed of a body with respect to another has physical meaning), it seems different in the case of accelerated motions. Thus, when one considers a body turning about itself, the existence of its rotational motion seems to be able to be felt in a manner totally intrinsic to the body. No other body of reference is needed: it is enough to verify whether or not a centrifugal force appears which has a tendency to deform the rotating body. In reconsidering the thought experiment of Galileo’s ship, the difference between inertial movement and rotational motion becomes heightened. No experiment conducted in the cabin of a ship traveling in uniform and rectilinear motion with respect to the Earth is capable of determining the existence of the boat’s movement: as Galileo understood, “motion is like nothing.” Relative motion can only be determined by opening a porthole in the cabin and watching the shore pass by. But now, if the boat accelerates or

turns about itself, all the objects present in the cabin will be pushed toward the walls. The experimenter will know that there is movement without having to look outside. Thus, accelerated motion seems definable by a purely local experiment. It is such an argument which caused Newton to allow that one can define an absolute space, in opposition with Leibniz (then Mach) for whom defining a space independently of the objects it contains could not have meaning. Mach proposed a solution to the problem completely different from Newton’s. Starting from the principle of relativity of all motion, he arrived at the natural conclusion that the turning body, within which there appear inertial forces, must turn not with respect to a certain absolute space, but with respect to other material bodies. Which ones? It cannot be close bodies, of which the fluctuations of distribution would provoke observable fluctuations of inertial systems. This is unacceptable, since it is easy to verify the coherence of these systems over great distances. Thus, if we look, motionless with respect to the Earth, at the night sky, we do not see the stars turning. Nevertheless, if we turn about ourselves, we feel our arms spreading out due to inertial forces and, in raising our eyes toward the sky, we can see it turn. This was the initial observation of Mach: it is within the same frame of reference that the arms are raised and the sky turns, and this will be true for two points of the Earth separated by thousands of kilometers. Mach suggested, then, that the common frame of reference is determined by the entirety of distant matter, of bodies “at infinity,” of which the cumulative gravitational influence would be at the origin of inertial forces. In other words, the body would turn with respect to a frame of reference, not absolute, but universal. An absolute motion would be defined in itself, independently of all objects. However, Mach argued, all motion is relative, remaining defined with respect to an “object,” even if this object is the universe in its entirety. The solution proposed by Einstein, that of the equivalence principle and general relativity, incorporates some of these ideas while ultimately distancing himself from the principle of Mach, even though his premises were identical. The distribution of matter and energy in the whole of the universe determines the geometric structure of space-time, and then the movements of bodies are brought about within the framework of this geometry tied to matter.

Relativity Of Gravity Let us now return to Einstein’s great idea in 1907. If an observer descends in free fall within a gravitational field, they no longer feel their weight, which means that they no longer feel the existence of this field itself. This remark, which can now seem obvious to us—we have all seen, on television or in movies, astronauts in weightlessness floating in their ship, and the objects that they drop going away from them at a constant speed—is nevertheless revolutionary, for it implies that gravity does not exist in itself, that its very existence depends on the choice of a frame of reference. He thus distanced himself from the former concept of gravity. What, apparently, can be more absolute than a gravitational field in the Newtonian model? Gravity had been recognized by Newton as universal; here indeed was a physical phenomenon of which the existence does not seem to be able to depend on such and such a condition of observation. However, if we allow an enclosed area to fall freely within a gravitational field, and then put in motion a body at a certain velocity with respect to this area, the body will move in a straight line at a constant speed with respect to the walls of the enclosure; a body initially immobile (again, with respect to the walls) will stay thus during the movement of the enclosure’s fall. In other words, all experiments that we can perform there would confirm that we are in an inertial frame of reference! Thus, gravity, however universal it is, can be cancelled out solely by a judicious choice of coordinate system: what Einstein understood in 1907 was that even the existence of gravity was relative to the choice of coordinate system.

Chapter 8 - The Law of Attraction The Law of Attraction has become a term for a household. Clearly, it has become a buzzword for those learning ways to improve and enhance life. However, the purpose of the law and its enforcement are two things. The literature is full of interpretations and explanations of the purpose of the law, but much too little attempt has been made to describe the physics of the law. Much has been learned about the meaning of the law and how it can be applied, but the world is still waiting for the mechanics of the law to demonstrate how to really take advantage of it beyond simply keeping optimistic thoughts. What are the processes that make it work? Our efforts have centered on developing and designing resources that allow an individual to enforce the law more elegantly, effectively and with less effort. What we discovered was a missing link on how to apply and execute this incredible fundamental theory of magnetism. Attempting to detect something allows nothing to appear. In the same way, if you don't know something. In fact, the work of Dossey and others has shown that prayer has an impact on whether or not the receiver is aware of it. It is becoming increasingly evident that we are co-creating our own reality in the way we think and feel ... in other words, in our special and personal understanding of reality. We attract that which we consider as true into ourselves Because both consciousness and spirit exist in the spiritual realm on the other side of the veil, it makes sense that when we are in an inspired state or good mood, we can control our reality even better. Once we are linked to Origin, we have more power in our own lives and in our entire sphere of influence to create real and constructive change. Once we remain in that state of grace and reverence, trends arise, synchronicity increases, and people want to be around us and in that state of perfection want to join us. A positive wave function can more easily collapse while in this mode. To stay in that state needs complete consciousness focus. The immediate knowledge of the divine, the one and all that leads to belief in the world that leads to the trust that is needed to step up to a higher-order level. Our focus from those leading to negative, damaging effects. A single person's thought, speech, and behavior can alter the course of the global community as a whole

this phenomenon of "observing" reality often applies to the other sensory mechanisms. When you hear something from within your inner voice, the spirit of reality or higher self, or sense something deep inside your very heart, you do the same thing when you perceive it ... you experience it. Experience is, therefore, a more apt word to characterize the true full existence of the operation of a wave collapse. And even better, when the perception can be multi-sensory. When a person creates his or her own development and positive spiritual growth, he or she draws positive experience into him or herself. The ancient Greeks, who believed he functioned as a ghost, called this cycle Ktisis to "unravel" everything not considered to be in order. Nature does not rule the world and our lives, they are inherently disordered ... in chaos. Nevertheless, the four fundamental forces that physicists claim to materialize nature have recently been redefined as celestial attractors that, over time, establish patterns of order. That is the real mystery of how reality expresses itself. Space is the original force that creates the universe by a point or singularity of zero dimensions. The time is used to chain the points into the other attractors together. An individual must become an attractor in order to make use of the Law of Attraction. Nevertheless, there are four attractor orders: The attractor of the 1st order POINT – leads one to be drawn into one specific task or to get trapped in a rut by being too concentrated on one idea or fixation. The 2nd order CYCLE attractor – allows one to get caught up in logical thought or an infinite loop that essentially repeats itself over and over again. The TORI attractor 3rd order limit – which is a step in the right direction as it allows for a complex flow of Energy but is somewhat constrained due to its quasi-periodicity. The emphasis, purpose and consistency of action and expression that one pays and makes decide the attractor in which they fall. In other words, a person may become an infinite toroid attractor drawing into what they want instead of only taking whatever the strange chaotic attractor has to offer. This is the streamlined nature of the Attraction Law and the secret to its understanding and execution.

These pictures are deliberate palettes in which purpose can be visualized. All geometries and shapes have been shown to come from different ratios of real and imaginary partials that combine in the complex structure that makes up the wave function. Knowing this, and that spoken, or breathed speech is nothing more than a flow of these actual and imaginary elements, it becomes theoretically possible to learn how to draw what you want to see on the screen, hear what you want to hear on the headphones, feel what you want to feel inside, learn how to interact and direct the behavior of the automatons that make up all things. The first step in learning to collapse the wave function is to perceive sense and experience what one thinks and feels on the inside. It, in turn, is the result of applying the law to attraction by studying how to connect with the ideal attractor while paying attention in the images to it. We are both operator and system at the most primal simple level of nature. Change at that point will allow us the ability to set up the next moment and permanently alter their lives. The epitome and final fate of the collapse of the wave mechanism are to achieve convergence between player and instrument.

Chapter 9 - Causality in Quantum Physics Schrödinger's Cat The first thought experiment up for discussion is the one called Schrödinger's Cat. Erwin Schrodinger, a scientist who create the defining equation to explain motion in the universe, but that motion was expressed in probabilities. Since most scientists prefer hard facts versus probabilities, including Schrodinger himself, he decided to come up with an illustration to help others understand the issues inherent in quantum physics. Using analogies, Schrodinger came up with the Schrodinger Cat thought experiment. Let’s look at a few of the issues Schrodinger attempted to explain with his thought experiment.

Epr Paradox The EPR Paradox, otherwise known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox, is intended to demonstrate some of the paradoxes inherent in early formulas of quantum mechanics. An example is quantum entanglement where two particles are tangled with each other. Each individual particle is not defined until it is measured. Then its state is defined and by default, so is the other particle it is tangled with. This paradox originated as a focus within an intense debate between Einstein and Niels Bohr. Einstein, who disagreed strongly with many of the arguments proposed by Bohr and his contemporaries, created the EPR Paradox with his colleagues Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen. This was a way to show that quantum theory was inconsistent with the other physics laws as they were known at that time. The paradox is based on a particle that is unstable with a quantum spin of zero and eventually decays into two particles. Each of the new particles’ spins must equal zero. So one particle that is measured with a spin -1/2, then the other must be a +1/2 in order to equal zero. But until one is measured they both lack a definitive state but have an equal probability of being the negative or the positive. Here’s what made this troubling to the scientists who then pointed it out as a paradox. One, quantum mechanics says until a moment of measurement, a

particle does not have definite quantum spin until it is measured. Two, that as soon as one particle’s spin is measured, the value is set before we measure the spin of the other particle. Einstein saw this as a clear violation of the theory of relativity. Instead, he and David Bohm supported an alternative approach, otherwise known as the hidden variables theory. It suggested that quantum mechanics in its current form was incomplete. The missing, but not immediately obvious, needed to be added to explain the non-local effect, as demonstrated by the two particles. The uncertainty in quantum mechanics isn’t just based on a lack of understanding and knowledge, but a lack of a definite reality. The problem is that the hidden variables are hard to find and scientists struggled see how they could be incorporated in a meaningful way. While Bohr defended quantum theory with the Copenhagen interpretation, which says that the superposition exists simultaneously at all states, therefore explaining the apparent communication between particles because they are represented by the same term with the equations. The Bell’s Theorem was a defining moment against the idea of hidden variables. Again and again, these inequalities were violated and thus quantum entanglement was shown to take place. Today, most professional scientists do not support the idea of hidden variables as put forward through variations of the EPR paradox. Our final mental experiment is a distinctive explanation.

The Many Worlds Interpretation One well-known model is the many-worlds interpretation, which was originally developed by Hugh Everett. From this vantage point, wave function is such an involved portion of the development of reality that every measurement within the sphere of quantum causes a split in the universe, creating parallel universes. According to this interpretation, each random event splits the universe into the various choices available. Each version contains a different outcome than the others. Imagine a tree with branches splitting off of it. It simply doesn’t tell us precisely when a given event will occur. According to customary quantum theory, until the measurement is made there

is no way to know if it has decayed or not. You would have to treat that atom as if it is in a state of superposition, another words, both decayed and not decayed. As we have seen in the Schrödinger's Cat experiment, these contradictions are inherent when applying quantum theory literally. If quantum theory says an atom is in both states, then MWI concludes two universes must exist, one where the atom is decayed and another where the atom is not. This continues indefinitely, creating an unlimited number of quantum universes. So the Everett Postulate, as part of the MWI, put it forward that the entire universe continuously exists in the multiple states of superposition. Thus there really is no point where the wave function collapses because that would mean that the principles of quantum mechanics weren’t being followed by the universe they were created to describe. In science fiction, the parallel universes have been used to create some incredible stories, but they aren’t based in fact. The MWI doesn’t allow for any communication between these parallel universes, which would make most science fiction stories implausible at best. The differences between Everett’s interpretation and standard quantum theory can be hard to do, because their predictions can be so similar. Yet in 2014, researchers from the Griffith University in Brisbane, Australia, put forth what they believed was a testable multiverse model. Particles obey the classic rules of motion, such as Newton’s laws. These researchers believe that the weird effects often observed within the context of various quantum experiments are the result of the repulsive forces found between the particles and their clones within other parallel universes. This repulsive force creates ripples that can be found throughout these parallel universes. So how do researchers study something like this? Researchers in this case used computer simulations, assuming that there are up to 41 different interacting worlds. Their model reproduced a variety of quantum effects, looking at even particle trajectories, such as can be found in the double-slit experimentation. With additional worlds, scientists observed that the interference pattern comes closer to the pattern that would be predicted by the standard quantum theory. Throughout this process, the researchers also found evidence that increasing the number of worlds affected the overall interference pattern. Thus, the researchers believe that it is possible to determine if the multiverse model is

correct. They anticipate demonstrating there is no wave function. Therefore reality’s existence would have to be based on the classical interpretation. How this will ultimately play out in terms of our understanding of the universe and reality has yet to be seen. But many researchers would like to see if test could be devised to determine if there was such a thing as an objective reality. Yet, it is this initial idea of traveling to different dimensions and time travel that grabs the imagination of young researchers or scientists that draws them into the world of Quantum Physics. It is these young individuals who bring that love of the unique and their mathematical knowledge to solving the various conundrums of this branch of physics.

Chapter 10 - Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity Incompatibility Since we have already brushed upon the idea, but quantum mechanics and classical mechanics (as it is seen under the general relativity principle) are quite incompatible at the moment. Physicists are trying to reconcile according to which science understands the world - but to date, there has surfaced no proven, palpable theory to bring the two worlds together and finally help us understand where we come from, where we are, and where we are going (because, at the end of the day, these are the fundamental questions both classical and quantum physics propose).

In classical physics (as drawn out by Einstein’s general relativity principle), reality is made out of 4 dimensions (also called the space-time continuum). In this paradigm, gravitational fields are continuous entities. In quantum mechanics, however, fields are not continuous, but discontinuous.

They are not defined by the 4 dimensions, but by “quanta”. As such, concepts like the “gravitational field” are missing from the world of quantum physics, which is also the biggest bridge classical physicists and quantum researchers have to build between their points of view. This is not just a matter of fancy definitions. The world of quantum mechanics and the world of classical physics are incompatible because they describe reality in completely different ways, in different terms, and in different perspectives that do not meet at any point. In classical physics, things happen for a reason. They happen according to the old cause ‑ and ‑ effect dictum. Nothing happens randomly, but because

there is something else before it that has caused it. In quantum physics, scientists do not see reality in terms of cause and effect, but in terms of particles jumping from one state to another based on probability, rather than outcomes that are definite. Why is reconciliation important, then, especially given that these two

disciplines seem so different and at such a deep level? Because reconciliation would also bring along relationships of complementarity. Where classical physics fails to give explanations of the microcosms, quantum physics would succeed. And where quantum physics fails to make sense when it is blown up to macro objects (remember the cat that was both dead and alive?), classical physics would be able to breathe in some logic.

Einstein’s Explanation Vs Quantum Mechanics It is a pretty well-known fact that Albert Einstein was not a big aficionado of the quantum mechanics theories that were shaping up during his lifetime. Time proved him wrong in some ways, because some of the quantum theories are actually being proven step by step. Beyond that, however, the questions posed by Einstein are still valid - and they provide quantum researchers with a point of orientation when it comes to the answers they are yet to give.

If Albert Einstein were alive today, he would probably have “converted” to quantum physics - because even throughout his life, his views on this theory changed. If, at first, his theory completely clashed with quantum mechanics, he actually used quantum concepts to explain some of his own theories later on in life. More specifically, in 1935, his experiments revealed what he called “spooky action at a distance” - or, in other terms, quantum entanglement. He then continued his experiments furthering the theory that quantum entanglement was only possible in certain circumstances. Unfortunately, however, he never got a clear answer to this follow-up and it was left to future generations to reconcile the theories. It would be more than interesting to see what he would have to say about the more recent discoveries and experiments in quantum mechanics.

Why Do We Accept Quantum Mechanics? Without a doubt, Einstein’s work reshaped the world in so many ways that it

would take an entire library of books to explain them in plain English simply. In the scientific community (and, dare we say, outside of it too), Einstein is seen as a sort of demi-god - an irrefutable authority that nobody dares to touch.

Nobody except quantum physicists, that is. If Einstein’s theory of relativity is so well-regarded and accepted, why do we even bother with quantum mechanics, then? What demon sets so many contemporary scientific researchers on the path of actually trying to reconcile the worlds of classical physics and quantum physics? Well, the one reason quantum mechanics is accepted and still very much a topic of discussion is because it would actually manage to solve what classical physics couldn’t. And, as it has been shown, it would actually manage to push the boundaries of knowledge and technology beyond the edges of the imaginary and into a spectrum we only dared to touch with our thoughts until not very long ago. September 7, 2014 might have seemed like any other day of fall in the

Northern Hemisphere. The leaves were probably slightly yellow by then and the heat of the summer was slowly starting to wear out. Maybe it even rained a little in the morning, and by the time cities were waking up to life, the fog of a slightly chillier night vanished, leaving room for a perfect day of autumn. What everyone must know is that September 7, 2014 was the day the Theory of Everything officially saw the light of day. You might have heard about it because there was a movie on the life of Stephen Hawking. Or you might have even stumbled upon it long before the movie came out. What is important, however, is that the Theory of Everything is one of the most important attempts at unifying both the theory of relativity and the quantum theory. What was started in the 1920s by Albert Einstein was finally starting to make sense eight decades later under the hands of Stephen Hawking. The Theory of Everything is, perhaps, one of the most ambitious projects ever. It is one of the theories that is bound to change every single little thing not just in physics, but in science as a whole, and, soon enough, in humanity’s perception of pretty much every area of their lives. What the Theory of Everything tries to do is finally build a bridge between quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity. Some would even dare to say that it will “tell the mind of God” (Marshall, 2010) and that it will hold the key to humanity answering the questions it has been trying to answer for a very, very long time now. There are several candidates for the Theory of Everything. Some of them are implausible to be actually proven in equation or in practice, but some of them stand out as sane options that might be the final answer to everything. Out of these, we would like to take the time to name the two most important contenders. As we draw close to the conclusion, we believe it is important for you to know what the most important work in physics is doing now - and as such, we will take the time to expand, just a little bit, on these two theories. One of them is called “String Theory”, and what it says is that there is a tendimensional space we are living in. That sounds more than mind-boggling, we know, but wait until you hear more of it. In essence, the Theory of Everything relies on quantum gravity and it aims to

address a wide range of questions in fundamental physics - such as what is going on with black holes, how the universe was formed, how to improve nuclear physics, and how to handle condensed matter physics better. Ideally, string theory will unify gravity and particle physics (which is one of the main points that have to be bridged between classical physics and quantum mechanics). At the moment, however, it is not clear how much of this theory can be adapted to the real world and how much of it will allow for changes in its details. The other theory competing with string theory for the title of “The Theory of Everything” is the Loop Quantum Gravity Theory. This paradigm is heavily based on Einstein’s work, and it was elaborated towards the middle of the 1980s. To understand it, you need to remember the fact that, according to Einstein, gravity is not a force per se, but a property of space-time. Up until the Loop Quantum Gravity Theory, there have been several attempts to prove that gravity can be treated as a quantum force, like electromagnetism or the nuclear force, for example. However, these attempts have failed. What the Loop Quantum Gravity Theory tries to do is to base the bridge between traditional physics and quantum physics on Einstein’s geometric formulation. Ideally, this will prove that space and time are quantized the same way as energy and momentum are in quantum mechanics. If physicists manage to prove the Loop Quantum Gravity Theory, space-time will be pictured with space and time being granular, which would consequently mean that a minimum space exists. In other words, according to the Loop Quantum Gravity Theory, space is made out of a fine fabric of woven finite loops called “spin networks”. Although String Theory seems to be a lot more popular in mainstream media (mainly due to the fact that some of its proponents are quite popular themselves, even well outside of scientific circles - like Michio Kaku, for example), the Loop Quantum Gravity Theory should not be dismissed in any way. Most of its implications are related to the birth of the universe, reason for which it is also called the Big Bang Theory - and, perhaps, the reason for which the eponymous TV show was called that way as well.

Conclusion History constantly proves that reality was always much more complicated and weird than we thought until the next discovery. The microscopic world has its own laws (similarly, there is the difference of principles between the intracellular reality in our bodies’ cells and the reality of our minds), which sound unrealistic to us when first discovered. The reason for this is no mystery. The human brain has been evolving for millions of years to work with everyday reality and everyday reality only. But the universe consists of not only the everyday reality. As human thought and science develops, we learn more and more about the rest of the universe. Just like the fact that the earth is round, though it seemed impossible that people can walk and live upside down on the other side. Like Einstein and unlike Heisenberg and Bohr, some believe that there must be some more reasonable, more realistic understanding of the reality behind quantum theory. But aren’t there more reasons to consider that the next stage in science history will bring even more weirdness? One of the development perspectives of quantum physics itself is the ManyWorlds Interpretation, according to which reality is branching all the time according to all possibilities (which probabilities we calculate in quantum physics) each of which is realized in a separate parallel reality branch. For example, in one reality branch the particle passes through one slit and in the second branch it passes through the second slit; for each particle the “blurring” into the wave of different possible positions (and all the other attributes) means realization of each of these positions in separate parallel reality branch. For now, most physicists are skeptical about this interpretation but the argument against it says only that this is too much… The truth is that you never know for sure until the science finally convincingly confirms or refutes the latest new conception. In general, quantum physics is not the first and may be not the last stage in the permanent development of our knowledge about the universe. It is the most progressive of humankind’s vision of reality for now. It is not only about the micro world, in fact, but also about our everyday level of reality, which is much simpler and still quite accurately described by Newtonian physics. Quantum physics is more basic than Newtonian physics, and the former includes the latter, but the additional unusual phenomena of the

quantum world are simply unnoticed at the macro level. For this reason Newtonian physics is still a good instrument for many practical purposes. Something similar takes place in practical science with respect to gravitation. The description of gravitation by the theory of general relativity is more accurate than by Newton’s law of universal gravitation, but the latter is used in space program calculations because the extra accuracy of the theory of relativity is more than is essential for that task, and therefore the extra complex calculations aren’t worth the trouble. So, possibly quantum physics will be followed by yet another new physics… and perhaps then another one. Could this process be endless? Will our knowledge ever be complete? But those are questions from another area, the area of the philosophy of science. Einstein’s thought experiment with momentum and position measurements led to the prediction of the concept of entanglement, but it is not its best theoretical example today. Another example, the interconnection of the polarization of the entangled photons from the real, modern experiments is not the most obvious, either. The more obvious and understandable example is the entanglement of electrons in terms of their spin. Moreover, this example will serve as a reminder of the rest of main principles of quantum physics. The spin may have positive or negative (upward or downward) value (or direction, known as its “sign”), and when the electrons are entangled it means that the measurement will show that their spin signs are opposite. If we determine the spin of one of the entangled electrons, we immediately know that the spin of the second electron has the opposite sign. In reality this entanglement occurs, for example, when the particles are formed in a single process (in the case of experiments with photons, identical, entangled photons are produced in the process of decomposition of one photon twice their size) or when they are components of one system, such as electrons being components of one atom. Take, for example, a helium atom in the empty vastness of space, where it and its electrons have the highest chances of interacting with nothing at all during the course of our experiment. Helium atoms have only two electrons in a single electron shell. According to Pauli’s exclusion principle, any quantum system consists of different components, i.e. if it contains identical

particles, then they must be in different states. A helium atom has only two electrons, and their first three quantum numbers are the same, so the last quantum number, the spin, must be different. If the spin of one electron is positive, then the spin of the other one should be negative. But until this atom interacts with something, it does not have any definite properties, nor do its electrons have definite spins (uncertainty) until we measure them or some other interaction. Both electrons will be characterized by both directions of the spins simultaneously (superposition), just as the photons in the double-slit experiment are in two places at the same time when they pass two slits (beyond the slits they are in many places at the same time). Each electron can turn out to have the positive or negative spin with a 50-50 probability, but the signs will always turn out to be opposite when acquired. Of course, here it is also enough to determine the spin of one electron to know the spin of the other immediately. If suddenly both electrons-waves leave the atom-wave and move in different directions, they remain in the state of uncertainty waves until they meet another object, such as another atom, or our instrument that measures the spin. As soon as we measure the sign of the spin of one electron, according to quantum theory, the sign of the spin of the second electron becomes definite and opposite to the first one. This will happen no matter how far the electrons go, for a mile or for light years. At the moment of measuring one electron, a collapse of the wave function of both electrons occurs regardless of the distance between them. During the measurement (or contact with anything), the first electron randomly manifests one of the two possible signs of the spin, and the second electron always chooses the opposite sign regardless of the distance between the electrons. At that point, the electrons show their last interconnection (entanglement) as components of what is considered to be a single quantum system, and at that moment the system finally breaks. After that, the electrons are no longer connected, and they can acquire any properties independently of each other in their future. I fact, they may get entangled with new particles that they later interact with. There is one more important and interesting aspect about entanglement. The real experiments with photons prove that the properties are coordinated, but are the properties coordinated instantaneously? It may still happen with some time delay depending on the distance, because we can never measure time and speed with absolute precision.

Shortly before the introduction of all these strange principles of quantum physics, Einstein created a theory of relativity, one of the basic ideas of which is that the speed of light (of electromagnetic radiation) is the highest possible speed. Any movement of anything, any influence of anything on anything, is limited by it. Nothing in our galaxy can affect the Andromeda Galaxy in any way without at least a 2.5-million-year delay, as this is how long it takes for light travels to it (this galaxy is 2.5 million light years away). Quantum theory predicted that there should be the instantaneous interconnection at any distance, so it is clear why Einstein so stubbornly denied the concept of entanglement. However, is it possible to prove or disprove it? Can characteristics in the case of entanglement be coordinated with the speed of light rather than instantaneously? It is clear that there are no methods to measure time and speed with absolute precision. However, instruments’ precision is constantly improving, and modern experiments have shown so far that the speed of interaction between particles during entanglement exceeds the speed of light by at least 100,000 times! Scientists assume that if the speed of interaction during entanglement exceeds the speed of light (that much), then this interaction apparently has infinite velocity, i.e. both particles acquire the exact characteristics simultaneously regardless of distance (non-locality).