This report investigates the flawed foundations of standard quantum theory based on a misunderstanding of the role of measurement. The report is major part of a research programme (UET) based on a new theory of the electromagnetism (EM), centered exclusively on the interaction between electrons. All the previous papers to date in this series have presented a realistic view of the dynamics of two or more electrons as they interact only between themselves. This paper now posits a theory of how this microscopic activity is perceived by human beings in attempting to extract information about atomic systems. The standard theory of quantum mechanics (QM) is constructed on only how the micro-world appears to macro measurements - as such, it cannot offer any view of how the foundations of the world are acting when humans are not observing it (the vast majority of the time) - this has generated almost 100 years of confusion and contradiction at the very heart of physics. All human beings (and all our instruments) are vast collections of electrons, our information about atomic-scale can only be obtained destructively and statistically. This theory now extends the realistic model of digital electrons by adding an explicit measurement model of how our macro instruments interfere with nature's micro-systems when such attempts result in human-scale information. The focus here is on the connection between the micro-world (when left to itself) and our mental models of this sphere of material reality, via the mechanism of atomic measurements. The mathematics of quantum mechanics reflects the eigenvalues of the combined target system plus equipment used for measurement together. Therefore, QM has constructed a theory that inseparably conflates the ontological and epistemological views of nature. This standard approach fails to examine isolated target systems alone. It is metaphysically deficient. This investigation concludes that the Quantum State function (Ψ) is not a representation of physical reality, within a single atom, but a generator function for producing the average statistical results on many atoms of this type. In contrast, the present theory builds on the physical reality of micro-states of single atoms, where (in the case of hydrogen), a single electron executes a series of fixed segments (corresponding to the micro-states) across the atom between a finite number of discrete interactions between the electron and one of the positrons in the nucleus. The set of serial segments form closed trajectories with real temporal periods, contra to Heisenberg’s ‘papal’ decree banning such reality because of his need to measure position and momentum at all times. This is the first paper in the multi-paper series (UET7n), which is dedicated to analyzing, criticizing and replacing existing theories of quantum mechanics.
Introduction It is believed that the basic physical building blocks forming the world we live in may be categorized into particles of matter and carriers of force between matter. All known elementary constituents of matter and transmitters of force are quantized. For example, energy, momentum, and angular momentum take on discrete quantized values. The electron is an example of an elementary particle of matter, and the photon is an example of a transmitter of force. Neutrons, protons, and atoms are composite particles made up of elementary particles of matter and transmitters of force. These composite particles are also quantized. Because classical mechanics is unable to explain quantization, we must learn quantum mechanics in order to understand the microscopic properties of atoms – which, for example, make up solids such as crystalline semiconductors. Historically, the laws of quantum mechanics have been established by experiment. The most important early experiments involved light. Long before it was realized that light waves are quantized into particles called photons, key experiments on the wave properties of light were performed. For example, it was established that the color of visible light is associated with different wavelengths of light. Table 2.1 shows the range of wavelengths corresponding to different colors. The connection between optical and electrical phenomena was established by Maxwell in 1864. This extended the concept of light to include the complete electromagnetic spectrum. A great deal of effort was, and continues to be, spent gathering information on the behavior of light.
During these three years we focused on several topics in quantum otpics and quantum electrodynamics. A central theme in our investigations is that of the photon wave function. Can quantum optics and quantum electrodynamics experiments be described simply, in position space, with the help of a wave function describing the photon(s) featured in the experiment ? The answer to that question is not quite obvious: the usual description of photons takes place in the reciprocal space of wave vectors. But these experiments call for a wave mechanical description in the position representation, as is done in quantum mechanics textbooks in situations featuring massive particles. Moreover, in a recent experiment [1], single photon trajectories through a Young two-slit setup have been observed. In order to try and describe these trajectories formally, it is natural to build a wave mechanical formalism for photons. We therefore studied in detail the formal construction of the photon wave function, an object which was little studied until the 1990s. We also studied the properties of the photon wave function in the presence of sources.To do that, we considered several open (interacting) quantum systems. We saw that there exists in principle an infinite number of possibilities when defining the photon wave function. We emphasised several criteria on the basis of which it appears that only three choices for the wave function are interesting. One of them coincides with an object introduced and used by Glauber [2] to study light detection andthe correlations of the electromagnetic field in the quantum regime. We also saw that, in the absence of sources, the propagation equation for a single photon is formally equivalent to Maxwell’s equations. At low photon numbers, the wave function formalism can be very useful. We adapted it to interacting systems,first, to cavity quantum electrodynamics (QED) [3], in particular to the experiments carried out by Serge Haroche’s group [4]. We proposed a simple model to describe photons in QED cavities. With this model, and with the helpof the photon wave function, we studied the propagation of photons escaping a cavity. We also constructed the Lindblad master equation without introducing nonunitary quantum jumps (also see [5]). We finally investigated the spacetime evolution of a photon which is emitted during the decay of an atomic electron. After having carefully studied the dynamics of the electronic decay, especially at very short times [6, 7], we set out to describe the emitted electromagnetic field as rigorously as possible. This emitted field, surprisingly, does not evolve causally. Though this is not entirely unexpected in view of Hegerfeldt’s theorem, which states [8] that causality is impossible for quantum systems which are described by a Hamiltonian with a spectrum which is bounded by below, we identified [9] two other sources of non causality. One of them was predicted qualitatively by Shirokov [10], while the other one, which is completely new as far as we can tell, is still to be better understood
Chapter 4 deals with Quantum Mechanical (QM) phenomena. The first section describes the first attempts at quantization of energy, momentum, angular momentum, etc. We start with Plank's solution to the black-body problem, introducing the concept of photons: discrete packets of electromagnetic energy. We show how Plank's description of black-body radiation is perfectly fit by the cosmic microwave radiation, providing the strongest evidence for the Big-Bang at the origin of the Universe. We then describe Bohr's solution to the paradoxical stability of atoms, introducing quantization of angular momentum (or action) and correctly predicting the energy levels of the hydrogen atom. We show how Einstein used Plank's idea to explain the photo-electric effect (an effect exploited in CCD cameras and solar cells) and how he used Bohr's understanding of energy levels in atoms to provide an intuitive explanation of Plank's law. Einstein insight opened the way to the field of spectroscopy and the development of the laser. In the second section, following the lead of Dirac, we show that QM is equivalent to Linear Algebra in the space of complex functions (which describe the state of the system). We show that Schrödinger's equation is a natural consequence of that description, once the relation between energy and frequency established by Plank (for photons) and de Broglie (for particles) is taken into account. In the context of the chiral ammonia molecule we discuss the queerness of QM which describes physical systems as superposition of states (such as left and right chirality state of a molecule, dead and alive cat). We show that this queerness is nonetheless supported by experiments and is behind much of our technology: masers and lasers, atomic clocks, semiconductors (diodes, transistors, etc.). In the following section we introduce the representation of operators in QM (the equivalent of matrices in linear algebra): momentum, position, energy, etc. which correspond to measurements on the system. We show that the non-commutability of some operators (common with matrix operations) leads to Heisenberg uncertainty principle: the position and momentum of a particle cannot be determined with absolute precision. We discuss the solution of Schrödinger's equation for free particles demonstrating their equivalence with EM phenomena: particles undergo refraction and diffraction, exemplifying the particle/wave duality inherent to QM systems. We discuss QM tunneling and its use in the Scanning Tunneling Microscope. In the following section we study Dirac's equation: the successful attempt by Dirac to unify QM with Einstein's relativity, with the resulting prediction of anti-particles and spin. We then solve for the energy levels of electrons in the hydrogen atom (from Schrödinger's equation) and show that the existence of spin profoundly affects the behavior of electrons in an atom: they cannot share the same energy level, a rule known as Pauli's exclusion principle. Pauli's principle is central to the understanding of the chemical properties of atoms and fully explains Mendeleev's periodic table of the elements. In the next section we discuss along with two exactly soluble systems (diatomic rotational and vibrational levels), various approximations used to study systems (e.g. molecules) for which there are no analytical solutions. In particular, we introduce Pauling's variational approach, Hückel molecular orbital theory and time independent perturbation theory. We apply those approaches to determine the energy levels in alkenes, in multi-electron atoms and in systems under constant electric or magnetic field (such as in Magnetic Resonance Imaging). In the last section we discuss time dependent perturbation theory. We use it to establish the rules allowing for transitions between energy levels and revisit Einstein description of absorption/emission phenomena.
This paper re-opens the debate on the failure of quantum mechanics to provide an understandable view of micro-reality. A critique is offered of the commonly accepted ‘Copenhagen Interpretation’ of a theory that is only a mathematical approach to the level of reality characterized by atoms and electrons. This critique is based on the oldest approach to thinking about nature for over 2500 years, known as Natural Philosophy. Quantum mechanics (QM) was developed over the first quarter of the 20th Century, when scientists were enthralled by a new philosophy known as Positivism, whose foundations were based on the assumption that material objects exist only when measured by humans – this central assumption conflates epistemology (knowledge) with ontology (existence). The present critique rejects this human-centered view of reality by assuming material reality has existed long before (and will persist long after) human beings (“Realism”). The defensive view that the micro-world is too different to understand using regular thinking (and only a mathematical approach is possible) is rejected totally. At least 12 earlier QM interpretations are critically analyzed, indicating the broad interest in “what does QM mean?” The standard theory of quantum mechanics is thus constructed on only how the micro-world appears to macro measurements - as such, it cannot offer any view of how the foundations of the world are acting when humans are not observing it - this has generated almost 100 years of confusion and contradiction at the very heart of physics. Significantly, we live in a world that is not being measured by scientists but is interacting with itself and with us. QM has failed to provide explanations: only recipes (meaningless equations), not insights. Physics has returned to the pre-Newtonian world of Ptolemaic phenomenology: only verifiable numbers without real understanding. The focus needs to be on an explicit linkage between the micro-world, when left to itself, and our mental models of this sphere of material reality, via the mechanism of measurement. This limits the role of measurement to confirming our mental models of reality but never confusing these with a direct image of ‘the thing in itself’. This implies a deep divide between reality and appearances, as Kant suggested. This paper includes an original analysis of several major assumptions that have been implicit in Classical Mechanics (CM) that were acceptable in the macroscopic domain of reality, demonstrated by its proven successes. Unfortunately, only a few of these assumptions were challenged by the developers of QM. We now show that these other assumptions are still generating confusions in the interpretation of QM and blocking further progress in the understanding of the microscopic domain. Several of these flawed assumptions were introduced by Newton to support the use of continuum mathematics as a model of nature. This paper proposes that it is the attempt to preserve continuum mathematics (especially calculus), which drives much of the mystery and confusion behind all attempts at understanding quantum mechanics. The introduction of discrete mathematics is proposed to help analyze the discrete interactions between the quintessential quantum objects: the electrons and their novel properties. A related paper demonstrates that it is possible to create a point-particle theory of electrons that explains all their peculiar (and ‘paradoxical’) behavior using only physical hypotheses and discrete mathematics without introducing the continuum mathematical ideas of fields or waves. Another (related) paper proves that all the known results for the hydrogen atom can also be exactly calculated from this new perspective with the discrete mathematics. * Surrey, B.C. Canada (604) 542-2299 spsi99@telus.net Version 2.015 08-05-2017 Begun 23-06-2008 {pp. 82, 70.2 Kw; 800 KB}
The photoelectric effect, the Compton effects, and now anticorrelation experiments have been claimed to prove that light consists of particles flying through a void. However the particle model is decisively falsified by the known wave qualities of electromagnetic radiation. Quantum Electrodynamics also uses spreading wave amplitudes; not flying particles. The evidence indicates that light is a wave and electrons are electromagnetic wave-structures that absorb and emit light in discrete wave-packets. These wave-quanta are emitted directionally and then spread in space in proportion to their wavelength. Their waves superposition with all other waves in space. In low intensity experiments, the waves that an electron in a photodetector absorbs come from the superpositioning of the source wave-quanta and background radiation. The importance of background radiation is evidenced by "dark counts". Treating electrons and the quanta they absorb and emit as particles when they are composed of waves is the source of all the paradoxes, unreality and confusion in Quantum Mechanics. The word "photon" should be replaced by "quantum" in the description of this particular electronic process. The conceptual model presented here explains the known phenomena without producing paradoxes and unifies quantum and classical electromagnetics.