Most of nature is not hard to understand using the right approach. Understanding involves correlating data in a different way. Information (N) is defined by the negative natural logarithm of probability (N= - ln P) but the key equation is a new relationship between energy and information. The equation is E=e0*exp(N) where e0 is an energy constant and exp(N) stands for the natural number 2.718 to the power N. N values are found from data gathered by high energy labs. This paper describes how nature originates from these values. Nature repeatedly uses an operation involving separation of some information from other information. But there are important properties that are maintained and thought to be initial conditions. One property is probability one and another is zero energy. Separation occurs between N for the mass and N for field energy in a neutron. This causes an individual neutron to very improbable. But probability one is maintained by the creation of a huge number of neutrons. A mass model of the neutron was developed using information values that represent its components. The model is based on information separation between components of the neutron. Zero net energy is maintained. Mass with kinetic energy is positive balanced by negative field energy. It will be shown that the model contains energy values that unify nature’s four fundamental interactions. An information value associated with the electromagnetic field is of interest to biology. Combined with a quantum mechanical equation for light absorption multiples of this value can be used to model our human color vision system. This links internal observations with information and is a clue regarding signaling and response in our brain’s neural networks. Specifically the author proposes that there may be molecular level storage and interaction involved in perception. There are observations in physics that require explanation beyond physical networks. The dual slit experiment, instantaneous action at a distance (EPR) and collapse of a wave-function can be explained if perception is information gain occurring at the quantum level in a zero based system (zero energy and probability one). Four types of time are involved. Frequency is associated with fundamental particles and field energy. Time that repeats around a quantum orbit is defined by mass with kinetic energy attracted to field energy. A third kind of time repeats and moves forward. It is related to an information operation that underlies gravitation and cosmological space and time. Nature positions particles in space by giving them kinetic energy to expand. The freedom to move is due to time dilation associated with kinetic energy. Expansion is another separation process. As particles expand, groups of particles form clusters, galaxies, stars and planets under the influence of gravity, then form chemicals under the influence of electromagnetic fields. Overall, separation leads to components that fit together, similar to a picture puzzle and its individual pieces.
Most of nature is not hard to understand using the right approach. Understanding involves correlating data in a different way. Information (N) is defined by the negative natural logarithm of probability (N= - ln P) but the key equation is a new relationship between energy and information. The equation is E=e0*exp(N) where e0 is an energy constant and exp(N) stands for the natural number 2.718 to the power N. N values are found from data gathered by high energy labs. This paper describes how nature originates from these values. Nature repeatedly uses an operation involving separation of some information from other information. But there are important properties that are maintained and thought to be initial conditions. One property is probability one and another is zero energy. Separation occurs between N for the mass and N for field energy in a neutron. This causes an individual neutron to very improbable. But probability one is maintained by the creation of a huge number of neutrons. A mass model of the neutron was developed using information values that represent its components. The model is based on information separation between components of the neutron. Zero net energy is maintained. Mass with kinetic energy is positive balanced by negative field energy. It will be shown that the model contains energy values that unify nature’s four fundamental interactions. An information value associated with the electromagnetic field is of interest to biology. Combined with a quantum mechanical equation for light absorption multiples of this value can be used to model our human color vision system. This links internal observations with information and is a clue regarding signaling and response in our brain’s neural networks. Specifically the author proposes that there may be molecular level storage and interaction involved in perception. There are observations in physics that require explanation beyond physical networks. The dual slit experiment, instantaneous action at a distance (EPR) and collapse of a wave-function can be explained if perception is information gain occurring at the quantum level in a zero based system (zero energy and probability one). Four types of time are involved. Frequency is associated with fundamental particles and field energy. Time that repeats around a quantum orbit is defined by mass with kinetic energy attracted to field energy. A third kind of time repeats and moves forward. It is related to an information operation that underlies gravitation and cosmological space and time. Nature positions particles in space by giving them kinetic energy to expand. The freedom to move is due to time dilation associated with kinetic energy. Expansion is another separation process. As particles expand, groups of particles form clusters, galaxies, stars and planets under the influence of gravity, then form chemicals under the influence of electromagnetic fields. Overall, separation leads to components that fit together, similar to a picture puzzle and its individual pieces.
Most of nature is not hard to understand using the right approach. Understanding involves correlating data in a different way. Information (N) is defined by the negative natural logarithm of probability (N= - ln P) but the key equation is a new relationship between energy and information. The equation is E=e0*exp(N) where e0 is an energy constant and exp(N) stands for the natural number 2.718 to the power N. N values are found from data gathered by high energy labs. This paper describes how nature originates from these values. Nature repeatedly uses an operation involving separation of some information from other information. But there are important properties that are maintained and thought to be initial conditions. One property is probability one and another is zero energy. Separation occurs between N for the mass and N for field energy in a neutron. This causes an individual neutron to very improbable. But probability one is maintained by the creation of a huge number of neutrons. A mass model of the neutron was developed using information values that represent its components. The model is based on information separation between components of the neutron. Zero net energy is maintained. Mass with kinetic energy is positive balanced by negative field energy. It will be shown that the model contains energy values that unify nature’s four fundamental interactions.An information value associated with the electromagnetic field is of interest to biology. Combined with a quantum mechanical equation for light absorption multiples of this value can be used to model our human color vision system. This links internal observations with information and is a clue regarding signaling and response in our brain’s neural networks. Specifically, the author proposes that there may be molecular level storage and interaction involved in perception. There are observations in physics that require explanation beyond physical networks. The dual slit experiment, instantaneous action at a distance (EPR) and collapse of a wave-function can be explained if perception is information gain occurring at the quantum level in a zero based system (zero energy and probability one).
Revised December 2017 Abstract for Part 1 Schrodinger Fundamentals Practitioners of quantum mechanics (QM) have known for some time that observations are probability based and that consciousness is involved [18][3]. Our mind is very good at creating an internal model of the information it receives from reality. Schrodinger’s equation helps understand the relationship between reality, our internal model, energy and time. I believe in physical reality but also believe that consciousness is a fundamental characteristic of nature. Evidence will be presented that consciousness created physical nature and provides structure that allows consciousness to re-emerge. Over centuries physical nature has been well characterized in terms of particles, fields, etc. It is not difficult to characterize these with information models. We will show energy components for neutrons, protons and electrons and their associated probabilities. Nature is based on quantum circles but they can be real or information based. The difference is important and leads to clues regarding nature’s enduring questions. Part 2 of this document presents details that support the part 1 concepts.
The solution to a Schrodinger equation is the basis of a broad theory. The Dirac equation superseded the Schrodinger equation because it is relativistic and has 4 components that accurately represent half spin particles like the electron and quarks. This paper presents a way of making the Schrodinger equation relativistic. It has many components and is complex enough to represent the neutron, proton and electron but is general enough to help us understand nature. Our goal is to find clues related to creation. The Schrodinger equation described by MIT as unitary evolution [20] has a simple solution: Probability P=1 in the left hand side (LHS) of the Schrodinger equation is equal to the multiple of complex conjugate terms exp(iEt/H)*exp(-iEt/H) in the right hand side (RHS) where i is the imaginary number, H=Planck’s constant, E is field energy and time t is the time around a quantum circle at velocity C. (exp(iEt/H) stands for the natural number e to power iEt/H). Observation is fundamental to quantum mechanics and the Copenhagen interpretation indicates that we can only describe the probability of an event within certain limits. Shannon’s definition [9] of information (information = -natural logarithm(probability) will be used to explore the relationship between information and energy. Has something been separated in the multiple exp(iEt/H)*exp(-iEt/H)=1? The number 1 has been separated into two expressions that represent waves, but it is a dynamic separation; it repeatedly comes back to 1 as time moves forward. The idea that nature originates as a series of separations is an old idea, for example, recall that Genesis contains the words “So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the ... as Genesis 1:7 ends with the phrase 'from the water above it [the expanse]'. Another phrase from Genesis is “in the beginning was the word”. Consider a beginning with zero energy. This avoids the endless argument that things are made of other things, ad infinitum. Meaningful equal and opposite energy pairs come into existence at the same time but represent zero overall. Also consider probability one as a beginning condition. It simply means the universe exists.
This paper reviews humanity's understanding of the photon, the evolution of quantum mechanics and quantum electrodynamics (QED), and analyzes their physical interpretations and philosophical implications. It seeks to elucidate the true nature of the photon by examining the possibility of hidden variables in the double-slit experiment. The wave-particle duality of the photon, as posited by quantum mechanics, appears to me to be less than entirely convincing. By designing a thought experiment involving a photon double-slit setup, I aim to refute the notion that photons generate Coherence, or so-called wave-function superposition, within the light field between the slits and the screen. This endeavour aims to demonstrate the pure particle nature of photons. Furthermore, by examining the wavelength of electromagnetic waves, this paper explores the intrinsic relationship between electromagnetic waves and photons, positing that electromagnetic waves are fundamentally pure particle-waves. Analysis of QED elucidates the potential influence of photon momentum on photon interactions, an effect that may profoundly impact quantum information transmission. To comprehensively describe the mathematical model of photon queues, this paper introduces the concept of a photon train. This metaphor likens photons travelling through space to a train in motion. The distance between carriages is denoted by (d), representing the wavelength of the photon。 Within the "particle train" model of the photon queue, the wavelength λ is defined as the distance d between adjacent photons. This yields a structural equivalence between wavelength and photon spacing: ; . The longer the wavelength (smaller f), the greater the distance d between photons (corresponding to radio waves, where photons are "sparsely" dispersed). The shorter the wavelength (larger f), the closer the distance d between photons (corresponding to X-rays or γ-rays, where photons are "focused"). f represents the frequency of light. In standard physics, frequency is typically defined as the number of oscillations of an electromagnetic field per unit time, expressed by the relationship: . This is directly linked to the energy of a photon. However, although mathematically and experimentally complete, this definition obscures the intuitive informational structure of frequency. In this paper, we introduce a longitudinally structured interpretation: viewing frequency as the manifestation of "front-to-back density" or "longitudinal spacing" of light quanta along their propagation direction. This understanding does not replace the standard physical definition but operates in parallel to reveal frequency's deeper significance in energy transmission and information organization. For simplicity, we denote this approach as the "photon queue/longitudinal serialization (PQ/LS) model". PQ/LS denotes the theoretical framework of the photon queue model. A thought experiment on the conversion rate of quantum information into biological information reveals that, under identical light intensity (equivalent total energy input), the response of living systems is not solely determined by the 𝐼, but strongly depends on the spatial arrangement of the photon queue (where λ approximates the inter-photon distance).Bacterial-level matching of visible-light queues achieves the highest information-transmission efficiency (maximum mutual information and signal-to-noise ratio), thereby enabling dual optimization of energy utilization and rhythmic synchronization. This constitutes the core prediction of the model (PQ/LS): frequency (queue spacing), rather than total power (𝐼) alone, determines the conversion efficiency of quantum information into biological information. The paper explores the non-wave-particle duality of photons through double-slit experiments and double-slit observer experiments. The essence of photons is purely particle-like. The thought experiment of the photon double-slit is pivotal in demonstrating that photons, like other particles such as electrons, atoms, and macromolecules, are purely particle-like. In space, photons can interfere with each other's paths based on their momentum. This can simultaneously alter the trajectory and even the velocity of photons. That is, a photon beam with higher momentum may carry a portion with lower momentum, allowing it to propagate over vast distances. The wavelength of a light wave is fundamentally the distance between consecutive photons as they propagate through space. The longer the wavelength of a light wave, the greater the distance between successive photons, causing them to diverge more widely in space, as observed with radio waves. Conversely, shorter wavelengths result in closer distances between photons, leading to denser emission and highly directional propagation, exemplified by gamma rays. Photons within the visible-light spectrum may occasionally transmit information that carries specific content. This information, conveyed through light quanta, can propagate over distances ranging from several metres to thousands of kilometres. The essence of light quanta: particle queues (PQ/LS) and the profound meaning of frequency: light is fundamentally a sequence of light quanta (photons) advancing in spatial order. Regardless of whether the propagation path is straight or curved, the propagation maintains this queued formation, akin to a continuous jet of water. Within this model (PQ/LS), the wavelength λ of light observed macroscopically fundamentally represents the average distance between successive light quanta. The frequency f (or ν) is inversely proportional to this distance: the closer two light quanta are, the higher the frequency f; the greater the distance, the lower the frequency f. It can be expressed through the classical wave velocity formula: c=fλ. Within the visible spectrum, λ≈0.5×10⁻⁶ metres (500 nanometres). Remarkably, this distance corresponds precisely to the typical dimensions of bacteria (approximately 0.5–5 micrometres). The evolutionary tree of life takes bacteria as its root, while the wavelength of visible light—the fundamental scale for human vision and quantum information interaction—aligns exactly with this root-level dimension. As the product of billions of years of bacterial evolution, our human perception, communication, and even consciousness may possess an intrinsic connection to this "bacterial-scale" queue distance of light quanta. Philosophically, this unification reveals a grander picture: the frequency-distance relationship of the light quantum queue (PQ/LS) not only determines the magnitude of physical energy but also bridges the quantum realm with the origins of life. The evolution of human vision, which aligns precisely with this "bacterial-scale" dimension, suggests that our perceptual systems are rooted in life's most primordial mode of information exchange. As an information carrier, light transforms energy (E = hf) into biological signals, genetic expression, and even the emergence of consciousness—from photons stimulating retinal cells to potential quantum biological processes (such as quantum coherence in photosynthesis or brain microtubules), light weaves an information network between the microscopic and macroscopic realms. Bacterial circadian rhythms, particularly the KaiABC system in cyanobacteria, function as living fossils: they document how visible light quantum queues (PQ/LS) were transformed into ordered biological information programmes during life's earliest stages. This experimental finding not only validates the functional significance of scale consistency but illuminates the earliest step in the evolutionary path from light to meaning—within the unicellular world, light ceased to be mere energy, becoming instead the language of time and the rhythm of information. The relatively poor correlation between archaea and most bacteria in circadian rhythms and responses to visible light, from another perspective, suggests that archaea and bacteria did not originate on Earth but rather within protoplanetary discs or planetesimals. These archaea and bacteria can survive in the harshest natural environments, unaffected by Earth's 24-hour circadian rhythms or visible light. It further substantiates my published theory that life did not originate on Earth. From the bacterial scale to the scale of consciousness: information density remains operative. Within the Photon Quantum Queue Model (PQ/LS), the wavelength of visible light (~0.5 μm interphoton spacing) aligns remarkably with the bacterial scale, suggesting that the informational "foundation" of life's origin is set by the interphoton spacing. As we ascend from single-celled bacteria (scale 0.5–5 μm) to multicellular organisms, nervous systems, and ultimately human consciousness (neuronal scale ~10–100 μm, brain as a whole ~0.1 m), a central question emerges: does this information density, originating from the photon quantum distance, continue to operate at higher scales, bridging microscopic origins with macroscopic awareness? From bacteria to conscious scales: Implications of information density for SETI and the search for extraterrestrial life. An intuitive interpretation of light's nature: Mainstream quantum electrodynamics (QED) views photons as quantum field excitations, where wavelength λ represents the phase oscillation scale associated with a single photon, not the physical distance between multiple photons. This theory deliberately adopts a semi-classical "particle queue" image, directly correlating λ with the average distance between adjacent photons. While not strictly valid in weak-light or single-photon experiments, the theory challenges the orthodoxy that "wavelength is solely a property of individual photons." The theory's stance can be summarized as one of maximizing continuity and wholeness within strict scientific boundaries. Our challenge lies in rejecting the compartmentalization of the quantum realm, the origins of life,
The notion of entropy originates historically in classical physics and is intertwined with thermodynamics. Shannon’s entropy: - Sum over i P(i) ln(P(i)), where P(i) is the probability for i, however, seems to apply to any probability, but in quantum mechanics appears to be particularly linked to spatial and momentum entropy (1) i.e. - Integral dx W*(x)W(x) ln[ W*(x)W(x)] and - Sum over p a*(p)a(p) ln[ a*(p)a(p) ] where W(x)= wavefunction = Sum over p a(p) exp(ipx). In this note we speculate that one may create an entropy from the real part of exp(ipx) i.e. cos(px) as this term is associated with probability within a wavelength even though the “center of mass” of the particle may be moving uniformly at v=x/t=constant and W*(x)W(x)=1 or a constant. The latter implies an entropy independent of p but there is uncertainty in a free particle due to its wavelength which is experimentally manifested. We argue there is no reason to limit entropy to x or p considerations. For a bound state, a pattern of crests and troughs of different lengths and heights may be produced and so again there is a pattern of unnormalized probability distributions with different weights. The absolute value may be taken so negative wavefunction values are not an issue. For both the free particle and the bound state two features emerge. First the shape of the distributions is linked to the curvature which in turn is associated with the kinetic energy. Thus the probability distributions which describe the quantum system are governed by kinetic energy. Secondly, a pattern of distributions, both negative and positive, ensures that exp(ipx) is perpendicular to other exp(ip1 x) functions and Wn(x) is perpendicular to other Wn1(x)’s. In other words energy identifies the statistical state which exists throughout space and one cannot confuse the identity of one state with another. Thus they are orthogonal throughout space and probability distributions (linked to entropy) seem to enforce this. The inner product of W*(x) and W(x) is like an inner product of a product probability of a state and its time reversed state. We suggest one should be able to define a Shannon’s entropy expression for both |cos(px)|/C1 from exp(ipx) over a half wavelength where C1 is a normalization factor and |W(x)|/C2 roughly over the length over which it has humps i.e. roughly the classical turning points for an oscillator for example. This entropy is not additive and does not map to classical entropy in the large n (energy level) limit. Furthermore it may not be linked to thermodynamics because it is not linked to x or p. Nevertheless, it might be used to describe uncertainty within the quantity system and equilibrium/stable scenarios which are observed in nature. For example, different Wn(x) states are statistically stable states, but one may knock out the particle and it will be in an exp(ipx) state which is also stable. Furthermore, a photon may excite Wn1(x) to Wn2(x), thus this new entropy seems to be linked to stable states allowed in nature. The “price to pay”, however, seems to be uncertainty in wavelength regions for a free particle and the crest/trough regions for a bound state. We also consider some properties of a similar entropy for bound states.
In classical physics, a particle traveling to the right is the mirror image of one traveling to the left. In terms of a spatial density (the time spent in each constant dx), the value is the same, as is the energy. A similar notion of such a spatial invariance is in the classical conservation of energy equation for a bound particle: p(x)p(x)/2m + V(x) = E. Quantum mechanics seems to be different because exp(ipx) and exp(-ipx) are distinctly different spatial probabilities, i.e. they are dynamic. It is not just that case that a particle moves to the right for exp(ipx) and to the left for exp(-ipx). The impulse hit probabilities (represented by exp(ipx) and exp(-ipx)) are distinctly different. If one wishes to create an OR situation and write: W(x) = Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx) and use this in a conservation of energy equation, then simply including only positive or negative p values in W(x) leads to a complex average kinetic energy -1/2m d/dx dW/dx / W which cannot be used with V(x) and E. Furthermore, W_ (only negative p) and W+ (only positive p) values do not yield the same average kinetic energy. Fortunately, given that this is a statistical average for a localized object (somewhat analogous to a gas), one may combine W+ + W- and obtain a real kinetic energy. We have argued in previous notes that there exists a quantum-classical duality. For example, for a free particle one has two independent notions. One is x=vt which describes the center-of-mass of the particle. We take this to represent a state description which treats v and -v as mirror images. exp(ipx), on the other hand, represents probabilistic impulse hits and does not define the state by itself, we argue, only its interactions. Interactions are physical and define what happens in an interacting system. One may, however, measure a system, i.e interact with exp(ipx), and this should define a measurement state ( a second state ensemble average). For example, exp(ipx)exp(-ipx) = 1 which is equivalent to the constant dt in each dx associated with x=vt. Thus, the two states coincide, but exp(ipx)exp(-ipx) means that one may place the 2-slit apparatus at any x point and is not about the center-of-mass, as x=vt is. In some cases, the two states are quite different. W*(x)W(x) represents an interaction state, but vrms(x) from .5mvrms(x)vrms(x) = -1/2m d/dx dW/dx / W represents a center-of-mass state description. (Note: in these cases a state means an average state, i.e. an average over many ensemble entries.) If one takes W*(x)W(x) and integrates over x, then interference terms vanish and one obtains a classical counting of distinct p value states with their weight a*(p)a(p).This, we argue, leads to the notion of orthogonality of probabilities. In classical probability, there is no such notion, but there is the notion of AND (multiply) probabilities. Given exp(ipx) and exp(-ipx), if one multiplies one removes p, i.e. the interactions and only sees the state left. W*(x)W(x) yields a set of peaks which represent a pattern of probabilistic hits in space which define a state which one would measure in space. The interference pattern, however, must be one such that if one integrates over x, one only obtains a classical sum of probabilities a*(p)a(p)’s as mentioned above. This leads to the notion of orthogonal exp(ipx)’s (which follows mathematically anyway). If one considers different bound En states, then these two are orthogonal because W*n1(x)Wn2(x) mean n1 and n2 are associated with different energies and integrating over x cannot show a result which looks like a state result, where W*n(x)Wn(x) shows a state result. In order to achieve this orthogonality (linked directly to the notion of a state) one must have that Wn(2) usually has 0 points and is positive and negative with the possible exception of a ground state. In other words, if Wn1*(x)Wn2(x) integrated over x is not 0, one violates conservation of energy. As a result, we argue an average probability for a bound state must statistically include +p and -p contributions and must create a function which has positive and negative peaks (except possibly for the ground state), i.e. W(x) must have 0 points. This W(x) is linked to a measurement state W*(x)W(x), but this is strictly considering exp(ipx)s. We argue that there are two pieces of information for a free particle, x=vt and exp(ipx). There must also be an average state linked to x=vt and this given by KEave(x) = .5m vrms(x)vrms(x) + V(x) = E which shows that the particle may exist and have average kinetic energy even at W(x)=0 points. When measuring a system, one interacts with the exp(ipx)s and so the W*(x)W(x) state is the one which is traditionally presented, but whether one measures the center-of-mass motion or not, one also has the notion of the x=vt, i.e. vrms(x) state (average) as well, we argue.