the general quantum theory
After de-calibration back into the vastly more fundamental units of
The Gauss-Newton Quantum-Relativity
Einstein's General Theory becomes the Theory of Everything, which I will now call:
The
Quantum
Theory
of Relativity
(gravitational case)
GRqr.
BMJC Bieżanek, publication #25, 22nd November 2019, v1.09, 26th May 2020.
Part 1 of 3.
Lidar ranging, even for the domestic handyman. The device measures the time displacements
of the room and then converts the results into the units of classical mechanics. In qr-physics, we have nothing to say about such conversions into classical concepts developed over 350-years ago by country squires wearing long white curly powdered wigs. In qr-physics, we just believe nature and the actual real hard raw range data, as mother nature faithfully reports that to us in nanoseconds.
MUST READ THIS FIRST; CONCERNING THE PHYSICS OF ENTANGLED QUANTA.
If the reader is unaware that there is currently no explanation, acceptable within quantum-entanglement-physics, for light slowing in glass and other transparent media, then the reader needs to become aware of that prior lack of quantum-entanglement-physics credible explanation, before proceeding any further with his or her study into:
The
Quantum
Theory of Relativity (gravitational case)
GRqr.
Moving the mind into thinking in quantum-time
is the simplest mathematical move ever made in the long evolution of our understanding of theoretical physics. Making this simple move reconciles all of respectable
(footnote 5)
physics theory instantly into a totally unified and complete intellectual entity. That this intellectual breakout was never made before the moment of this publication, tells us something about the way that our minds work. Once one has made the move, one's only remaining puzzlement is as to why the possibility of this simple mind-state-alteration was never seen before.
Quantum-time
is what Newtonian-thinkers have called space. Space must be measured in time, that is the transit-time of free-quanta of light. So, in quantum-time coordinate-space, one classical metre of vacuum-space becomes 3.335... nanoseconds of quantum-time. Once one measures space in quantum-time, one will be left puzzled as to the nature of what we currently think of as our observed time-progression that is independent of any spatial displacement. Here we need the work of Carl Friedrich Gauss to aid us.
In (classical) quantum-time
coordinate-space, we must refer to the history of an individual mass-frame as representing imaginary-times-past, which one can also refer to as Gaussian-lateral-space. In 1831, Gauss suggested that we should drop the "imaginary"
label for the i-numbers in favour of his suggested "lateral"
label; no action was ever taken about this. In other words, since 1831, we have all been learning our higher arithmetic nomenclature, not from the master scientific applied-mathematician, but from silly impractical people.
All numbers on the complete two-dimensional number plane are just as real or just as imaginary as one needs them to be. By declaring that the kindergarten numbers have the superior status of being real, these contra-Gaussian number theorists declared to others that any number not lying upon the kindergarten counting axis must be thought of as not-real. With his mind thus doomed to work only upon the kindergarten numerical axis, it is a fabulous wonder that our great theoretical physics hero, Albert Einstein, made any sensible progress for us at all, let alone his excellent classical view of gravitational relativity, his so-called General Theory.
One can simply invert the logic of quantum-time
by multiplying the entire (3-d) quantum-time + (1-d) history framework by +1i. Multiplying our (classical QtCS) space-time model framework by +1i can be formally desribed as making a +pi/2 rotational transform of space-time. This gives us what I will call inverted quantum-time. The workings, within quantum-time coordinate-space, of all of reasonable and verifiable physics, perform perfectly in both quantum-time
and in inverted quantum-time. The attribution of the Gaussian lateral numerical axis
to either space or history turns out, for for all practical and explanatory gravitational and relative motion purposes, to be entirely semantic.
I personally think in classical-QtCS, but within my key introductory chapter, "The Last Tango of the Finite Graviton"
I teach The General Quantum Theory
or GRq
in the inverted-QtCS form because in that form it is a little more amenable to a person trained in classical physics and Newtonian apparently natural philosophy. The difference is in any case rather semantic, but the classical-QtCS method actually helps to better explain time, which is in fact an illusion created by imagining a past that actually no longer exists, but as if it were still there lying in the i-plane of space. Once one understands classical-QtCS, one will not wish to return to regarding space as imaginary-time, as one does with the inverted-QtCS form, because space is much more immediate to us than the continuous passage of all events falling away from us down into the bottomless gravitational voids of history.
* * *
The Quantum
(theory of)
Relativity and Meta-Determinism.
An optional extra read, not important for understanding the Quantum (theory of) Relativity in itself, but some people are blocked by the false assumption that the Universe is a random dice thrower, the Universe does indeed pretend to be a random dice thrower, so this is an easy one to get wrong. I have nothing to say about Meta-Determinism in relation to your existence, only in relation to my own.
QR and Meta-Determinism
* * *
The Quantum
(theory of)
Relativity and Super-Symmetry.
Super-Symmetry is a well-known and respectable physics theory. It its fullest possible extension the Gauss-Newton Quantum-Relativity is fully supportive of this super-symmetrical concept. Super-Symmetrical Gauss-Newton Quantum-Relativity goes one step further and shows how the entire Universe would be nothing more than nonsense without the super-symmetrical reality of it. However, as there are no base level GNQR empowered thinkers to share SSGNQR with and I am 71-years old, there seems to be more chance of pigs flying than of me ever finding anyone to explain the Super-Symmetrical Gauss-Newton Quantum-Relativity to.
QR and Super-Symmetry
go to part 2 of 3
Super-Symmetry is a well-known and respectable physics theory. It its fullest possible extension the Gauss-Newton Quantum-Relativity is fully supportive of this super-symmetrical concept. Super-Symmetrical Gauss-Newton Quantum-Relativity goes one step further and shows how the entire Universe would be nothing more than nonsense without the super-symmetrical reality of it. However, as there are no base level GNQR empowered thinkers to share SSGNQR with and I am 71-years old, there seems to be more chance of pigs flying than of me ever finding anyone to explain the Super-Symmetrical Gauss-Newton Quantum-Relativity to.
* * *
Footnotes to part 1
1) Help with learning quantum-time coordinate-space.
It is slightly easier, only for the first few years of one's experience, to use the inverted form of QtCS because that is closest to one's existing language and we just replace the metre with the Gaussian-lateral-time (i-time). The difference between the classical and inverted forms of QtCS are neurolinguistic, they only affect what we call space and time. So long as one knows that one must have a coordinate reference frame system within which the relationship between space and time is "times +1i" (or the relationship between time and space is "times -1i"), all will be fine, and that is true for both neurolinguistic naming or labeling conventions. In the inverted form it is easy to spot that the "speed-of-light" is +1i, in the classical form we note that the "speed-of-light" is 1/-1i (which equals +1i).
One can refer back to the basic proof shown on this page of my web
site
to see that 1/-1i is derived directly from the quantum physics, so this is not quite perfectly semantic, 1/-1i is actually the superior way to regard the "speed-of-light", or the classical-QtCS language is actually the superior language because it preserves the Euler and Gauss conventions for rotational ratio-metric arithmetic. In other words, the Newtonian construction of real-time is nonsense, what we actually experience is history moving back off into an imagined past, while spatial displacement is always and everywhere a "real" (non-rotational) phenomenon.
By the time that one has absorbed quantum-relativity, one will never say "real" in number theory ever again. A so-called "real" solution actually just means a non-rotational solution. Nature is full of rotating things like atoms. Perhaps you will end up mirroring my own irritation with so called "pure" so-called "mathematicians" who introduced the "real" language to describe what are actually just the kindergarten numbers. Apparently, and quite unlike Maxwell, poor old Einstein completely missed out on his Gauss.
Einstein described our mathematics as "reality-deficient", but he missed his guiding star, Carl Friedrich Gauss.
2) qr-physics and Special Relativity, why introduce GRq
first and SRq
second?
The Special Quantum Theory of Relativity, SR(q)
go to part 2 of 3
The GR to GRq
conversion process is much easier to make than the SR to SRq
process. This is because GRq
provides answers that people actually need, whereas with SR to SRq, who cares? Understanding SRq
does not lead to any real benefits, SR as it stands is useful and provides useful and correct answers. GRq
does lead to incredibly useful insights. Once one has mastered GRq, one will not need any help from me to make the simple SRq
conversion, but I have added below a link to a note on this subject for the case that one would prefer to tackle The Special Quantum Theory
of Relativity
or SRq
first. If you follow that link, you will find the SRq
almost impossible to grasp, one's mind can only "see" the SRq
if one already knows the GRq, so good luck to you if you do ignore my advice. This was far too hard for Albert Einstein, so my advice to you is this; do not even try to jump ahead like this.
It took me five years of failed teaching experience with several very bright subjects, to learn that I must not try to lead any proof or explanation of quantum-relativity physics with special relativity. I found this very hard to get my head around, but for me it was all far too easy because I converted to SRq
in 1964, within a few minutes of being shown Einstein's SR solution for the first time.
My work with the theories of Bohr and Maxwell from 1957 through to 1962, occasioned by my boyhood passion in radio theory and practice, had drawn me to the conclusion that the speed of light was the equivalent of +1i. This was aided by the author of my favorite work on Maxwell warning me that Einstein’s special relativity equations were complete nonsense and that I must pay no attention to Einstein. Everybody (except for myself) grew up in awe of Einstein, where as I was accidently self-taught to be in contempt of his special theory. In other words, in 1964 I rejected Einstein's SR solution on first sight and never learnt it. The unlearning process for people who have lived with Einstein's faulty SR solution for five generations, is vastly tougher on people than I had at first thought it could be.
I feel like Galileo must have done tearing his hair out trying to get people to "see" his twenty odd proofs of the heliocentric view. Many generations of learning nonsense lead to hypnotic depths of mass collective mind zombification that are very tough to understand from a position outside of the mass hypnotic trance state. Of course, from the inside, the very possibility of a mass hypnotic trance is utterly invisible. The breakthrough is achieved by a logical show down, either Galileo is insane or everybody else is. Reading my work is so uncomfortable for people, that not one in a thousand will even try it. I need a sanity anchor, I have about twenty, but my favorite is that I can explain quantum entanglement instant timing and feel very comfortable with it, everybody else must think of it as some kind of spooky mystery. There are no spooky mysteries, but there definitely is a mass hypnotic trance state with special relativity.
3) Formal proof
There is a formal proof in quantum mechanics that the relationship between spatial displacement and history is +1i or that the "speed-of-light" is 1/-1i (or +1i, however one prefers it). For the record, here is a link to my formal proof of this.
4) Quantum entanglement and light passing through glass:
detailed discussion
One can hear a wave explanation for light slowing within a transparent media, but it is quite frankly nonsense. While they remain undetected, the quanta are not active within the matter field. While the quanta remain undetected, the waves of light that we so fondly imagine are not actually present. The wave is only observed into existence by forced detection. The quanta are obviously undetected within the matter field; we know this from work on the timing of effects observed with entangled quanta. This instant quantum timing effect was first noted by Clauser and Freedman in 1972 already, and yet still the myth prevails that we "know" what we are talking about; quite frankly, we do not.
The Quantum Theory
of Relativity
(gravitational case) GRq
working together with The Quantum Theory
of Relativity
(special case) SRq, seamlessly joins the world of the entangled quanta into the world that we actually see and feel, or what one might call the "real world", there is nothing "real" about it of course, any quantum physicist knows that, nevertheless, we might as well at least understand it a bit better.
5) We deeply regret to inform you that your dear friend "cosmology" passed away in the night.
Our existing orthodox cosmology is found, under The Quantum Theory
of Relativity, to lack any kind of respectability at all, that becomes abandoned and is instantly replaced by the vastly more credible and exciting qr-cosmology. The subject of qr-cosmology flows naturally from The Quantum Theory of Relativity, but actually qr-cosmology was discovered first and The Quantum Theory of Relativity only emerged from that revised understanding of the Cosmos. At this time, one is perhaps between two and fifty years from reaching a study of the subject of qr-cosmology and one will only ever get there at all, if one starts with the basics, for example; understanding how one's own eye lenses perform their job. In order to breakthrough into at least properly understanding how one's own eye lenses work, one will first need to become immersed in The Quantum Theory of Relativity. Do not even think about cosmology at all again, until one is well-grounded in The Quantum Theory
of Relativity.
The Gauss-Newton Quantum-Relativity
