Relation Between the Newton Principle of Action and Reaction and Gravitational Waves, Together with the Heisenberg Indeterminacy Principle, as a Possible Key to an Explanation of the Quantum Nature of Our World

Pavel Voráček

Published Aug 1, 2015• 0 citations

Abstract

Initially it is proposed to interpret the fact that the delay of gravitational interaction in a binary system causes the emanation of gravitational waves, as a generalization of the Newtonian Principle of action and reaction. Then, the impact of such a concept is shown for a situation with mutual and simultaneously acting electromagnetic and inertia force, as well as consequences for a possible validity of the Mach principle. Further, the same phenomenon of retardation of the physical interactions is applied on the mechanistic Bohr model of the hydrogen atom together with the Indeterminacy principle, which results in a realistically adequate quantum description of the atom involving the pertinent de Broglie wave. Finally, the physical conclusions made before are discussed from a philosophical point of view; a new `para-deterministic' concept is presented being an alternative to both the deterministic and holistic views of our world.

Related papers

Basic Principles of Deterministic Quantum Physics

Daniele Sasso

In this paper the following results are achieved: at first we demonstrate that Heisenberg's indeterminacy principle is based on a mathematical model that is unsound because of an inadequate use of the Fourier development and we prove a new mathematical model. In second place we show that with regard to physical quantities there isn�t theoretical indeterminacy and only the inadequacy of measuring instruments can cause working indeterminacy. Then we prove within the ambit of the new theory: the stability of orbital motions of atomic electrons, the quantized wave equation, the fine and hyperfine structure of atoms, the Lamb shift as a consequence of the relativistic correction. Results on these subjects are concordant with experimental data and are obtained without making use of probabilistic concepts. We think that only the most adequate use of mathematical models can allow a further evolution of our scientific knowledges that must be adapted to the examined physical event and supported with more valid analyses.

Apr 1, 201111 citations

Determinism and the gravitational Planck constant

Antonio Zecca A

A discussion is given of the uncertainty principle in view of the introduction of a Gravitational Planck Constant. The need for such a gravitational constant is shown first. A reduced electromagnetic Planck constant and the analogous reduced gravitational Planck constant are defined as h/e^2 and H/m^2 respectively. An attempt is made to reconcile the quantum uncertainty concepts with a deterministic view of the physical world. This conclusion is achieved trough the detailed analysis of the measurement procedures of physical quantities.

arXiv:gr-qc/0211042Nov 12, 20020 citations

Generalized proof of uncertainty relations in terms of commutation relation and interpretation based on action function

Jong, Chol, Shin-Hyok Jon, Son-Il Jo +1 more

The uncertainty principle is the most important for the foundations of quantum mechanics but it still remains failed to reach a consensus of its interpretation, which gives rise to debates upon its physical nature. In this work, we address the problem of its foundation from a different aspect to present an alternative formulation for proving the uncertainty relations in a general way in terms of commutation relations and action function. The relationship between the de Broglie relation and the uncertainty principle is studied from a new angle. As a result, it is demonstrated that the de Broglie relation is the foundation of the uncertainty principle. Starting with the origin of the problem, we show that the de Broglie relation provides the form of the wave function and the determined form of the wave function in turn leads to the conception of operators for quantum mechanics, and thus it is possible to provide with the help of the operators and wave function a generalized proof of the uncertainty principle as the law governing ensemble of states. As a decisive solution to the problem, the interpretation of the uncertainty principle in terms of the action function is offered that gives one self-consistent explanation in agreement with the known physical phenomena. Eventually, we show the necessity and possibility of reassessing and improving the foundation and interpretation of the uncertainty principle as a leading principle of quantum mechanics.

arXiv:2208.14053Aug 30, 20220 citations

A note on the nature of the de Broglie waves

Mahdavi, M. R.

In this note we will first argue that there is evidence in supporting the view that de Broglie waves have a gravitational origin. In view of the extreme weakness of the gravitational field, however, this seems to be an unlikely proposition. We consider the problem of the atom in the light of a proposed electron theory [physics/0212013] and show that in this theory an insignificant perturbation in the gravitational field might in effect be amplified by astonishingly large orders of magnitudes. On this basis we then propose a realistic model of an atom where the electron continually tunnels through the electrostatic field of the proton and the de Broglie waves take on the role of the missing electrostatic interactions. Although the discussion is a qualitative one, and as such may not be considered as being conclusive, never the less, we believe that on the evidence presented here the possibility of a gravitational origin for the de Broglie waves must be seriously considered.

arXiv:physics/0301013Jan 9, 20030 citations

PHILOSOPHY AND QUANTUM PHYSICS

Rom Harr

THE conceptual problems raised by the discovery of quantum effects have not been fully resolved after half a century. Part of the reason for this is undoubtedly to be found in the mutual ignorance which prevails between physicists and philosophers. In his book Heisenberg brings together a philosophically inclined temperament with an unrivalled knowledge of physics. The result is a book of very great interest, however much one might disagree with his conclusions. The collection of essays of which the other book is made up is intended to bring crucial conceptual problems in physics especially to the notice of philosophers. The design and intention of the collection is admirable for this is the proper way to overcome the departmentalization of interest that has left the deep conceptual problems still unresolved. Men like Heisenberg who combine philosophical temperament with scientic knowledge of great distinction are rare, and yet the difficulties can only be cleared up by the application of philosophical techniques of analysis to problems which are an intimate and difficult part of physics. A great deal of the interest of Heisenberg's book lies in the very comprehensive account he gives of the origin and growth of the Copenhagen school, and the way the new phenomena forced a largely unwelcome picture of nature upon Bohr and his friends. The most important chapter from a philosophical point of view is that in which Heisenberg defends this interpretation against the attacks to which it has been subjected. The essence of his argument for the interpretation can be summed up in two propositions. (i) The Copenhagen interpretation of physical theory, which depends upon the acceptance of the so-called Principle of Complementarity, is an inevitable and final interpretation. The reason for this is that there are only two possible general models for understanding given physical phenomena; a particle model or a wave model. These are exhaustive and exclusive because the former depends upon discontinuous and the latter upon continuous (using substance here in the traditional philosophical sense). If we find, as we do, that the two fundamental constituents of the universe, matter and radiation, each exhibit two classes of phenomena, one explainable only on a particle model and one on a wave model, then we are compelled to adopt a complementarity hypothesis and give up the idea of finding a single and uniform model for the understanding of phenomena. There are only two kinds of models; they are mutually exclusive; both are required; hence we either despair before an insoluble problem or adopt the Copenhagen interpretation. (2) Any serious criticism of this interpretation must offer an alternative

Jan 1, 20160 citations

Unified Theory Replaces Quantum Theory & Uncertainty Principle

Rati Ram SHARMA

Heisenberg argued that wave and particle are too exclusively different in properties, making the intrinsic wave-quantum unity of light impossible to visualize and describe by the language. He invented mathematical Quantum Theory to circumvent visualization and inadequacy of language. But mathematics too is a language to supplement description. He used it to superimpose hidden concepts leading to the Uncertainty Principle. In Unified Theory the wave & particle aspects of electromagnetic radiation and moving material particle coexist blended together as wave-quantum UNITY. This is also supported by experiments. The wave-or-quantum DUALITIES of Quantum Theory appear due to experimental limitations to observe only one and not both of the two aspects simultaneously. Conservation of mass & momentum are inviolable. Matter‘s creation from, or dissolution into, ‘nothing’ is unrealistic. So the Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle is rejected as unrealistic and new Principle of Null Action with universal applications is introduced. The Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Theory is reappraised critically. This paper will bring out and rectify the unreality of Heisenberg-Bohr [1] approach and also explain from sharmon medium of the Unified Theory [2], the Wave-Quantum 'unity' appearing as Wave-or-Quantum 'duality', which the Quantum Theory was all about but could not explain satisfactorily. The Uncertainty Principle will be rejected as unrealistic and a new Principle of Null Action with universal applications introduced. The Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Theory will be critically reappraised. 1. The objective reality exists irrespective of the observer We observe an object through the signals, emanating or reflected from it, received by our senses and interpreted by the brain/mind. The human senses and intellect have their own limitations and the mediating signals themselves introduce some distortion or uncertainty of observation. It turns precise objective reality into imprecise subjective appearance. Heisenberg [1] made the subjective imprecision as the very nature of things and based his Quantum Theory on the observer's imprecise view of the intrinsically precise physical reality. But the physical objects, phenomena and events, which their theories purport to describe, do not actually need any observer for their existence and are, in fact, governed by NOT the observed but actual magnitudes of their physical parameters like energy, momentum, time, length etc. For instance, the moon or distant galaxies or invisible submicroscopic particles exist not only during the attention of the viewer but also without an observer. In order to formulate physical laws in terms of the observed or measured magnitudes, the Quantum Theory is erroneously based on “what can be known”, instead of on “what actually there is”, in the objective reality. That is on the observed, and not on the actual magnitudes, putting the observer's imprecise view super-most in derogation of the inherent precision in the observed objective reality. 2. Wave-or-Quantum duality of matter & radiation in Quantum Theory Heisenberg [1] noted with scientific curiosity and concern that the -rays emitted from radioactive elements showed definite tracks in Wilson photographs like fast moving particles.

Aug 1, 20090 citations