Every discussion of quantum computing starts with wave-particle duality, to explain how qubits differ from bits. But what if wave-particle duality were wrong? How would we explain quantum computing then? A little-known science called the Theory of Elementary Waves (TEW) says that quantum particles follow zero-energy waves backwards. Wave-particle duality cannot be true if waves and particles travel in opposite directions. This article proposes the first-ever TEW theory of quantum circuits. Elementary waves emanate from measuring devices and travel backwards through the circuits, whereas qubits move forwards through the wires and gates following those waves backwards. Quantum computers are known to be reversible. After we present that way-of-thinking, we will explain some of the evidence that TEW is valid. There is a mountain of empirical evidence from outside information technology. TEW is a maverick theory, out-of-step with the consensus about how quantum computers work. At first TEW sounds counterintuitive. Its advantage is Occam’s Razor: we present a simpler explanation of quantum circuits. We will present the quantum computer equivalent of saying that before the box is open Schrödinger’s cat is already dead or alive, but not both. Observing the cat simply tells us what was already true before we looked.
Every discussion of quantum computing starts with wave-particle duality, to explain how qubits differ from bits. But what if wave-particle duality were wrong? How would we explain quantum computing then? A little-known science called the Theory of Elementary Waves (TEW) says that quantum particles follow zero-energy waves backwards. Wave-particle duality cannot be true if waves and particles travel in opposite directions. This article proposes the first-ever TEW theory of quantum circuits. Elementary waves emanate from measuring devices and travel backwards through the circuits, whereas qubits move forwards through the wires and gates following those waves backwards. Quantum computers are known to be reversible. After we present that way-of-thinking, we will explain some of the evidence that TEW is valid. There is a mountain of empirical evidence from outside information technology. TEW is a maverick theory, out-of-step with the consensus about how quantum computers work. At first TEW sounds counterintuitive. Its advantage is Occam’s Razor: we present a simpler explanation of quantum circuits. We will present the quantum computer equivalent of saying that before the box is open Schrödinger’s cat is already dead or alive, but not both. Observing the cat simply tells us what was already true before we looked.
Wave particle duality is a mistake. Another option was neither conceived nor debated, which is a better foundation for quantum mechanics. The Theory of Elementary Waves (TEW) is based on the idea that particles follow zero energy waves backwards. A particle cannot be identical with its wave if they travel in opposite directions. TEW is the only form of local realism that is consistent with the results of the experiment by Aspect, Dalibard and Roger (1982). Here we show that 1. although QM teaches that complementarity in a double slit experiment cannot be logically explained, TEW explains it logically, without wave function collapse, and 2. gives an unconventional explanation of the Davisson Germer experiment. 3. There is empirical evidence for countervailing waves and particles and 4. zero energy waves. 5. TEW clarifies our understanding of probability amplitudes and supports quantum math. 6. There is an untested experiment for which TEW and wave particle duality predict different outcomes. If TEW is valid, then wave particle duality is not necessary for quantum math, which is the most accurate and productive science ever. With a more solid foundation, new vistas of science open, such as the study of elementary waves.
The quantum world is allegedly strange. But is it? What if there’s a simple mathematical explanation, and a simple solution? The success of quantum mechanics (QM) arises from the accuracy of its probability predictions, which are obtained by squaring amplitudes (the Born rule). Suppose for a moment that nature uses the negative of QM’s equations. When squared they would yield the same probabilities, confirmed by the same experiments and technological triumphs. If that were true, if nature uses the negative of QM’s equations, then the quantum world would become transparent, easy to understand. No more Schrödinger’s-cat. No quantum-eraser. No backwards-in-time cause-and-effect. No paradoxes nor enigmas. But, what’s a negative quantum equation? It could mean that particles follow zero-energy waves backwards, instead of forwards. That’s still an eccentric idea, a residual strangeness. Overall, it’s a bargain. We could swap one odd idea for another, because wave-particle duality is odd. We are accustomed to wave-particle duality. But we’ll show that experiments support the other arrangement: quantum particles follow zero-energy waves backwards. How could that possibly be true? We present substantial experimental evidence, new mathematics, and six dozen colorful illustrations. This is the Theory of Elementary Waves (TEW).
Why is quantum mathematics (QM) the only science based on probability amplitudes rather than probabilities? A paradigm shift called the Theory of Elementary Waves (TEW) posits zero energy waves traveling in the opposite direction as particles, which a particle follows backwards: like a probabilistic guidance system emanating from detectors. Probability amplitudes are the mathematical analog of these elementary rays. Although this proposal might sound like gibberish, that is the hallmark of a paradigm shift. Thomas Kuhn warns that previous paradigm shifts were rejected because they sounded like gibberish. TEW is internally coherent, explains a mountain of empirical data, and resolves insoluble problems of QM. For example, it dispenses with the need for wavefunction collapse because probability decisions are made at the particle source, not the detector. It is the only local realistic theory consistent with the Bell test experiments. That which QM calls “nonlocality,” TEW calls “elementary rays.” One term is vague, the other involves elegant mathematics. This article introduces that mathematical notation, explains complementarity in double slit experiments, and reinterprets Feynman diagrams. QM and TEW are partners that need each other. One is a science of observables; the other a science of how nature works independent of the observer.
The Theory of Elementary Waves (TEW) is based on three new Axioms that lead to a different understanding of quantum mathematics. There is a massive amount of research data that supports TEW. This article will take six well established experiments from mainstream scientific journals and re-interpret their axioms from a TEW point of view. Although it is usually asserted that QM explains all existing quantum experiments, that is only true if you can convince yourself that the quantum world is weird. If you adopt TEW axioms, suddenly the quantum world transforms itself into looking ordinary, like everyday Nature. If, for example, time only goes forwards, never backwards; if there is no such thing as a quantum eraser; if nothing is transmitted faster than the speed of light, then TEW axioms allow you to make sense of a quantum world which QM can only explain if you allow for weirdness throughout Nature. TEW consists of axioms that allow us to understand the quantum world in a way that makes sense from the viewpoint of our everyday experience.
Is science open to a new idea? Thomas Kuhn says paradigm shifts sound like gibberish to scientific leaders, and are rejected for that reason. The Theory of Elementary Waves (TEW) is such an idea: quantum particles follow waves moving in the opposite direction. Time always goes forwards. We focus on Paul Diracs 1930 book The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, applied to TEW. We keep Dirac notation and quantum math but replace the picture of how nature is organized. Wave interference and probabilistic effects occur prior to particle emission. Wave function collapse occurs at emission & there is no further interference. We have launched a successful program of teaching this form of physics in the format of YouTube music videos of five minutes duration. Some of our videos have been watched 40,000 times: within YouTube search for Jeffrey H Boyd to watch these amusing videos including one in which Yoda (from Star Wars) solves what Richard Feynman called the Fundamental Mystery of Quantum Mechanics.
This article proposes a solution to the double slit experiment of Quantum Mechanics. We attack the problem from a previously untried angle. Unsolved math problems must be attacked from unexpected angles because every conventional approach has already been tried and failed. Richard Feynman warned that the quantum world is such a strange place that humans can’t understand it. There is empirical evidence of particles following zero energy waves backwards, although that is counterintuitive. Schr˝odinger waves carry zero energy: they carry probability amplitudes instead. In our proposed model zero energy Schr˝odinger waves emanating from every point on the target screen pass backwards through the two slits, interfere at the particle gun, and a particle randomly chooses which wave to follow backwards. Once that decision is made the particle follows its wave with a probability of one, through only one slit (it doesn’t matter which slit) and inevitably strikes that point from which its wave emanates. This produces the same math and same pattern on the target screen. We propose three Axioms of the Theory of Elementary Waves (TEW) as a better platform for mathematics in this experiment than the Axioms of QM. This constitutes a paradigm shift.