Jump to
animations menu
Jump to
contents and animations menu
Approach the principle of a solution found by a random process
Goal being that the atom is an essential part of our universe
Method of a random process
Scientific method
2 Notes 3 Rationale 4 Overview 5 Atom walk through
Return to top
The Simple Universe
Solution found by a random process
The Standard model of particle physics and quantum field theory are scientific theories that model the subatomic particles mathematically
This makes it difficult to visualise what the subatomic particles are
Perhaps an alternative, non mathematical approach could help
Consider for example, an approach that uses first principles
Consider for example the principle of a solution found by a random process
That is, any problem that is solved using a random process, the random process will tend to repeat the random discovery of the simple solutions, more often than repeating the random discovery of the complex solutions
If our universe was created by a random process, then the principle should apply to our universe
That is, out of all the randomly created universes that have life, the simplest one could perhaps be created more often than any of the other ones
If our universe was created by a random process, then the principle suggests that our universe could perhaps be one of the simple universes that has life
Applying the principle of a solution found by a random process to our universe
The atom, electric fields and gravity appear to be essential for life to form in our universe, but what about something like relativity, perhaps life would still be able to form in our universe if relativity was not present
If so, this suggests that relativity could perhaps be present because it is a by-product of something else, a something else that is essential
And a similar question, what if light did not move at a constant speed? This in itself does not seem to be essential for life to form
So this too could perhaps suggest that the reason for the constant speed of light is a by-product of a something else, a something else that is essential
And what about quantum fields
It is believed that the atomic world consists of quantum fields, but perhaps atoms may also be possible in a universe that consists of particles
Return to top
Essential part of our universe
The goal of the Simple Universe model, is to model the atom using particles
If a universe with particles were to be easier to come into existence than a universe that has quantum fields, then it could perhaps be that our universe would be more likely to be a universe that has particles
And by the same logic, a simple universe that has one type of elementary particle and one type of force carrier particle, could perhaps be easier to come into existence than a complex universe that has seventeen types of elementary particles and thirteen types of force carrier particles
The first attempt to understand the atom using particles, failed, because at that time, the particle approach appeared to lead to an unstable atom
For reference, here is a YouTube video (2020) of the Physics Explained channel discussing the Rutherford and Bohr early ideas of the atom
These ideas were then enhanced by Louis de Broglie, leading to the modern day quantum mechanical interpretation of the atom
Discussion on the Bohr model of the atom
0 minutes : the Bohr model
1 minutes : Thomson's model
2 minutes : alpha particle scattering
3 minutes : Rutherford's nuclear model
4 minutes : problem's with the nuclear model
6 minutes : Bohr's postulates
11 minutes : combining classical and quantum
14 minutes : electron shells
17 minutes : hydrogen emission spectrum
25 minutes : questions that led to quantum mechanics
Return to top
Random processes find simple solutions
Method of a random process
The Simple Universe model is based on the principle of a solution found by a random process
That is, a random process will naturally discover simple solutions more frequently than complex solutions
Where possible, the model replaces a complex concept with a simpler version of that concept
2) universal reference frame instead of special relativity
3) particles instead of quantum fields
4) absolute position instead of uncertainty principle
5) one elementary particle instead of many
6) one elementary interaction instead of many
8) gravity without general relativity
11) atomic nuclei without gluons
12) atoms without quantum fields
13) tunnelling without quantum fields
14) double-slit experiment without quantum fields
15) variation in the reflection of light without quantum fields
16) Stern-Gerlach experiment without fields
Method of a random process
As a suggestion, the Simple Universe model consists of three dimensional space, whose outer edge expands as three dimensional space from a central point
Within the model's increasing volume of space, the yardsticks of speed, length and rate of time, are constant yardsticks and absolute
As a suggestion, the model uses a static universal reference frame for the motion of its elementary strand shaped particle, through the three dimensional space
As a suggestion, the head and tail of the elementary strand shaped particle, move at continuous constant speeds, through the three dimensional space
As a suggestion, the constant speed of the head of the strand shaped particle, is greater than the constant speed of its tail
This causes the strand shaped particle to continuously extend itself, with the head of the strand shaped particle eventually breaking free, leaving the strand shaped particle with a new head that repeats the process
Each parent strand shaped particle produces a continuous stream of child strand shaped particles
The parent strand shaped particle and the child strand shaped particle have a shape, a size, and a surface, and at any one moment in time, a specific position in space, and the particles interact with one another when their surfaces touch
As opposed to a wave-like nature, or a point-like size, or at any one moment in time, an uncertain position in space, or interaction with quantum fields
Method of a random process
At the initial starting point of the Simple Universe model, there is only the elementary strand shaped particle - a particle that moves at a constant speed across a constant yardstick of distance, creating a constant rate of time
There is no concept of matter or antimatter, or of positive or negative electric charge, or of mass
There is no concept of electric fields, or of magnetic fields, or of gravitational fields
There is no concept of electrons, protons, particles of light, neutrinos, or of atoms
There is no concept of variation in rates of time, or variation in yardsticks of distance
The aim is to manufacture those concepts using the strand shaped particle
Allowing the why, the how, and the what is it, for those concepts, to be understood
That is, the aim is to use the parent strand shaped particle to construct the neutrino, particle of light, electron, positron, proton and neutron
And to use those particles to construct the atom
And the aim is to use the child strand shaped particle to produce the behaviour of fields
That is, electric fields, magnetic fields, gravitational fields
Return to top
Scientific method requirements
Amongst other things, scientific method requires observation, scepticism, and clarity of thought
In general, physics theories are validated by comparing what is calculated using the mathematics of the theory, to what is experi-mentally observed
In general, physics theories have a mathematical form, such as for example, gravity and the general theory of relativity
In the Simple Universe model, it is the shape of a particle that is important
The mathematical form of the Simple Universe model
Is a physics engine that models the behaviour, of a three dimensional strand shaped particle, that moves continuously at a single constant speed, against a static universal reference frame, in three dimensional space
The approach taken by the model, is that in general, all physics theories (including the Simple Universe model) have in some way or other, one or more assumptions to the theory
And therefore perhaps, all physics theories should be considered as suggested theories
And if assumptions are always present in physics theories, it could perhaps be that those assumptions follow through to any disproof as well
Perhaps all physics proofs and all physics disproofs should be considered as suggested proofs and suggested disproofs
Perhaps the most important thing, is to have clarity of thought
For reference, here is a YouTube video (1964) of physicist Richard Feynman discussing scientific method
Lecture on scientific method
0 minutes : make a guess, compute, and then compare to experiment
30 seconds :
if it disagrees with experiment, then it is wrong
(but note the discussion about assumptions in proofs and disproofs above)
1 minutes : can something be proved to be true
2 minutes : can only state if something is more likely or less likely to be true or false
4 minutes :
a definite theory can be disproved but not proved
(but note the discussion about assumptions in proofs and disproofs above)
5 minutes :
a vague theory cannot be disproved
(but note the discussion about assumptions in proofs and disproofs above)
7 minutes : how is a guess made
8 minutes :
a guess needs to be precise
(however, perhaps sometimes, a broad guess is also useful)
For reference, here is a YouTube video of Richard Feynman discussing how a new idea in physics may have a different philosophy to current physics
Lecture: Seeking New Laws (extract 42:56 to 48:23)
0 minutes : two competing theories use different calculations, but produce the same con-sequences
1 minutes : however, from a philosophical point of view, the two competing theories are not equivalent
2 minutes : good theoretical physcists know multiple theoretical representations for the same physics
3 minutes : philosophical ideas between competing theories can have enormous differences
4 minutes : for example, Mayan astronomy had calculations that were very accurate, when a new philosophical idea was thought of, that suggested that the same astronomy could be calculated in a completely different way
5 minutes : when a new idea cannot yet calculate answers, established theory may discourage the new idea from being discussed
The clip is taken from the "Seeking New Laws" lecture, part of a group of lectures titled "The Character of Physical Law", given by Richard Feynman at Cornell University in 1964
Return to top