Mike Harney: First Post on Matter Wave Theory and WSM

[mharney]

Hello All,

My name is Michael Harney and I am really excited to find your forum. I am thoroughly impressed with what I have read so far about the WSM group. I have been on the verge of madness looking for researchers who believe as we do, as there seems to be incredible evidence for matter-wave theory every where but a huge lack of research in the area.

I believe this is the only way to unite quantum and relativity theories and I know through experiment these concepts will be proven. The discovery of relativistic transformations in spherical matter wave theory by Milo Wolff is astounding. I hope I can add further encouragement in this field.

I became convinced that matter-waves produce gravitational potentials after some pondering on Mach's principle, see;
(http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Articles/5-6/sh1.pdf)
and a formula a physics mentor demonstrated to me 18 years ago started me thinking (the famous Mach rest-energy equation).

I would like to offer some further encouragement on the subject of general relativity, in which the numerical results of the Schwarzschild solution can be produced with an equivalent formula by assuming standing matter waves and that the compression of the spacetime fabric is what creates matter see;
http://www.signaldisplay.com/debroglie.html
and the last comment in;
(http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Comments/c6-5.pdf).

There is also evidence here that Schrodinger's results are not a probability density function but a real standing wave that controls matter.

I wish you all the best in this research and I hope I can add to your excitement.

Mike

[RVB]

Hello, Mike...

I skimmed your links and hope to spend more time with the material.... I'm a layman and would rather be a physicist. Too old... But I hope we see a shake-up in established scientific thought. Science is not that different from religion... everybody can get stuck in the mud....

[mharney]

Hi RVB,

Your right - science and religion can both get stuck in the mud. But that also means you can be a physicist just as much as somebody who went to school for years to learn how to spin their wheels in that same mud! Your theories are just as valuable as the "trained theorist" because training doesn't seem to be improving the situation, and in fact might be part of the problem. So welcome to the world of physics and here is your honary doctorate granted by USOMT (Uinversity of Open Minded Thinkers)! When somebody is stuck in the mud, it usually takes somebody else (like us) to come and help them get out of it. Layman are welcome here - I certainly consider myself one. Thanks for the thought.

Mike

[RVB]

Mike,
Cool. I'd like to thank the university....

Anyway, I need to learn more but I'll always be thinking!!

[haselhurst]

Hi Mike, RVB,

I have put brackets around links to make them non active. People can just copy and paste URL into browser.
We are enforcing a policy that we only have active links to websites that link to us. (I have left Mike's website as an active link since his work is very important to the WSM - and i hope that in time he will link back to his work on this forum).

I am sorry to do that but to maintain a forum that ranks well in Google it is necessary (so in the long term those genuine about working on the WSM will get benefits from this policy).

I have read all your work once. I find you very logical and sensible and have high hopes that over time you can do some great work on the Wave Structure of Matter. I am very impressed.
Will reply in detail over next week.
Geoff

PS - This guff about links is not just for you, but others who read these posts! I hope i don't sound too pedantic - I just know how important this is over time if we want to get seen on Internet and have some influence!

PPS - Mike, can you register so that i can add you as a moderator. I have changed forum setup, only moderators can post in main sections of forum now (am trying to maintain good quality posts and i was getting a bit of religious nonsense / abuse being posted).

[mharney]

Hi Geoff,

Hope your vacation went well. I appreciate your comments and I have been pondering WSM and redshift in a lot of detaiil lately. It's very interesting. Thanks for your comments - I think you have helped me to see the universe from a different perspective and this is sometimes what we need to move forward. I am working on some ideas based on the density of matter waves as a function of distance from the center of the Hubble sphere - I think it looks promising. I will let you know when I get it complete and in the meantime I am reading up on some of these papers. The forum is great and I can see why you want to keep it at the top of the list on the search engines - it's a good place to find information. I will also register as a user. Thanks for your thoughts.

Mike

[haselhurst]

Hi Mike,
Was just reading some of your work for the third time. Will reply in detail over next few days (had a few problems with stupid adware virus that took 3 days to get off computer - real pain!). But computer is clean now and I have about 6 different programs protecting it!.
As soon as you register I will add you as moderator so you can post in relevant sections below. Really look forward to discussing things.
Great to hear from you.
Geoff

[haselhurst]

Hi Mike,
Thanks for registering, you are now a moderator so you can post / edit anywhere in forum.
I have replied to some of your questions in your other post in general physics section.

And with respect to links / Google, I believe that the current peer review system is very corrupt, and is often a censorship system that maintains a lot of the absurdity inherent in current Physics & Philosophy. To a certain extent this has always been the case, new ideas are generally ridiculed or ignored at the beginning (many of the famous philosophers have remarked on this aspect of human nature).

I think that getting pages in top ten of Google is the best chance we have of getting new knowledge out into the world. I have good knowledge of how Google works (have experimented a lot with pages / link structure over past 18 months) so I am confident that over next 2 to 5 years we can really start to have a big impact.

Unfortunately, this 'stupid' phpBB forum software (which is great in many ways) had an appalling link structure, and for every post by someone it created about 30 different versions of the page (hard to believe but true - there are currently 3,650 forum pages Google has spidered into its database (was 5,000 last week), yet there are only several hundred posts in forum). Google toolbar is good for finding this info - and if you want to succeed on Internet it is necessary to understand how internet / Google works (obviously). And Google likes unique fresh content, not 30 different versions of the same page!! See;

(http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-12,GGLD:en&q=site:www%2Ephysics%2Dphilosophy%2Dmetaphysics%2Ecom+%2E)

So over past month i have learnt about mods to remove all these junk pages (and hide links to pages you don't want Google to see using robots.txt file). While the mods have worked well, Google only shows correct pages now (the rest just show as links, no text, and will be dropped in time), unfortunately Google thinks that i have put up 5,000 very similar pages then taken down 4,800 of them - so now this forum is being penalised (pages don't come up well in search results).

Even more frustrating for me, is that Google (which is pretty smart) treats this Forum and my spaceandmotion.com website as one big website (because they each link to one another from every page). So a week ago my spaceandmotion.com website also got hit with this penalty and pages that used to come up in top ten now come up between 60 and 600 (which is typical penalty system for Google). As a result the spaceandmotion website has dropped from 10,000 visitors (20,000 page views) per day to half that.

This has happened to me before when i put up 200 experimental pages then took them down (I like to experiment, find it useful for understanding / confirming how things work). Last time it took 2 months for Google to drop this history from database and move on, and search results returned to normal.

The point of my ramble - things will be slow here for a while (even at the best of times there are few people with good knowledge that will want to discuss WSM) but in time I hope that our work here and on our respective websites will rank very well. I am confident that we can get pages in top ten search results (which account for about 90% of what people see) for most of the major search terms in Physics and Philosophy over next 2 years (I was in top 30 for main terms of Quantum Physics, Einstein's relativity and Big bang / Cosmology up until last week!!).

Indeed, life is frustrating at times! But I am serious both about the importance / truth of this work, and getting it seen by the world. Thus explains my obsessive / pedantic nature of using links and keywords that people actually search!

My little Polemic on Google!
Will hopefully reply to more of your work tomorrow. (I enjoy it!)
Cheers,
Geoff

PS - I should add to above that getting work into wikipedia is also very important, they are in top 100 websites on Internet (must get several million visitors a day I think). Have made a small start on this with help from Milo Wolff. Importantly we now have a link on their main physics page (under 'fringe theories'). See;
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics)
and WSM content in;
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_Structure_Matter)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Wave_Structure_of_Matter)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milo_Wolff)

Over next 12 months I plan on adding stuff to 100+ pages there with links back to WSM page. As a natural philosopher who has studied a lot of physics and metaphysics I have better knowledge than most people who edit there, so despite the fact that I got a bit of flak for putting up these pages, I was able to justify their inclusion and they have been there for several weeks now without any further complaints (so we have a foot in the door - a good start at least). I hope in time you will help with this process, the fact that you have published work (I don't) is a big plus in your favour. (They have a 'no original research' policy, but Milo has been able to publish enough in minor journals, and published a book, to satisfy their criteria).
I plan on writing a book in a few years, but want to wait till work is better written up on website, and my writing skills / knowledge foundations are better.

[mharney]

Hi Geoff,

What you have done to get WSM into the mainstream is exciting and brilliant! I commend you for working Google and getting these pages posted closer to the top. I actually had to do this as apart of my business several years back - my competitors and I were in a dead heat to be at the top of the then big search engine Yahoo (which still isn't too bad). We fought like mad - each of us changing our site a little each month to get updates and stay in the top ten. The business was worth it and as big as my competitors were (much bigger than me) they were furious when I bounced a head of them!

Geoff - Glad you appreciate the importance of this. For me it has 'cost' a lot of 'wasted' time in experimenting, making mistakes and then fixing them up. But having read a lot of philosophy, and being outside the academic system, I realised that it was my only chance of getting this knowledge known in my lifetime (I am 45, I first thought of the WSM 8 years ago, found Milo Wolff on Internet 7 years ago, spent 5 years reading philosophy physics and metaphysics and thinking!, and only started to put up work on website 2 years ago.)
Most of the website is hastily written (which frustrates me, as it is not a true reflection of me / my knowledge of WSM), as it was part of my experiment to see how to get pages to rank well in Google. I then spent a year starting / moderating WSM Yahoo group only to learn that it did not rank well and mainly attracted people wanting to promote their own ideas. Thus explaining why this forum is fairly stringent in its rules.
But at the end of the day I enjoy the challenge, get a buzz out of getting pages in top ten of Google (e.g. until we got penalised last week our 'Educational Philosophy' page was #2 out of 36 million results for that search term - which amuses me as I studied Education (B.Ed.), both my parents lectured in Education, and I think of all the academic papers on the subject by 'professors' that are never seen on internet because they know nothing about how Google works).

Mike - It's even more important to do this with science. The big thing now are scientists who don't get published (even though they have credentials from a university and a research post, many journals refuse to publish certain subjects). So the big thing I have heard about is getting into arxiv.org (such as this article that can discuss neutrino mass where Physical review was probably reluctant to touch it at the time until further evidence was in;
(http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9902462).

Geoff - The following is an interesting article by Brian Josephson (who I believe is a Nobel Prize winner in Physics). Even he had troubles with censorship at arxiv. Very disturbing. And this is why I like Internet / Google as it is hard to censor.

(http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/archivefreedom/main.html)

Mike - Many scientists put their bread and butter papers that barely stretch the current standard model into the Physical review or gravitation letters or whatever, and then send their real theories to these posting sites like arxiv.org where you only need validation from two other publishers on this site to get your work published. Bingo - eliminate the peer review that aren't really your peers!! I guess I mention this because what you are doing is perfect for this - you are on an even playing field with what really gets published and read by at least 50% of academia (Dr. Siepmann of the Journal of Theoretics estimated a 40% academic readership at one point based on the subscriptions that were requested). The people we are trying to convince are in fact mostly convinced behind closed doors that something new is needed and many of them moonlight on websites but don't submit it in their CVs to universities when they look for research positions. I also know this because I have spoken with some of them and they have shown me their articles - both professional and after hours (and they emphasis the two must remain separate). Crazy, eh?!! With your good coverage on the search engines, though, you are right up there with the best of them and getting into online encyclopedias is just great!

Geoff - It is disturbing. reminds me of a quote from Schopenhauer (may have posted this before to you, but it is worth repeating, and Schopenhauer had a lovely scathing wit!)

"Therefore the system of silence, so unanimously resorted to, is the only right one, and I can advise them to stick to it, and go on with it as long as it works - in other words, until ignoring is taken to imply ignorance; then there will still just be time to come around ..
Thus the system of ignoring and of maintaining silence can last for a good while, at any rate for the span of time that I may have yet to live; in this way much is already gained. If in the meantime an indiscrete voice here and there has allowed itself to be heard, it is soon drowned by the loud talking of the professors who, with their airs of importance, know how to entertain the public with quite different things ....
It is a ticklish question, the steering of the public, good and docile as it is on the whole. Although as a rule the absurd culminates, and it seems impossible for the voice of the individual ever to penetrate through the chorus of foolers and fooled, still there is left to the genuine works of all times a quite peculiar, silent, slow, and powerful influence; and as if by a miracle, we see them rise at last out of the turmoil like a balloon that floats up out of the thick atmosphere of this globe into purer regions. Having once arrived there, it remains at rest, and no one can any longer draw it down again." (Arthur Schopenhauer, 1818)

Mike - I was fortunate to get my articles published in the Journal of Theoretics but the journal has also been denounced by several academics (although as I mentioned, my understanding is that JOT has tracked 40% of it's email subscriptions to academia). It was denounced by several physicists when it first came out - one saying that Dr. Siepmann (who is a medical doctor by profession) had as much business publishing a journal of theoretical physics as a physicist did of doing an organ transplant. What I wanted to right back to this gentlemen and say (and I would have if the thread hadn't expired so long ago) was that organ transplants have come a lot farther in the 20th century than theoretical physics has and maybe that makes it OK for a medical doctor to comment on the field because at least he has done something right!!

Geoff - Nice argument, makes me smile. But the journal sounds good and that is 90% of the battle I think.

Mike - Anyway, enough with my soapbox - I do like what you have done with getting WSM out there and the more I look at it the more I see some important things in common with my beliefs that are hard to explain away. Such as:

1) the belief that matter is really standing quantum waves so that matter itself is really quantized, and

2) the understanding that antimatter is just a 180-degree phase-shifted version of the same matter wave so that destructive interference occurs when they meet.

Geoff - Spot on. Strange that Quantum theory, which introduced standing wave equations / resonance (Schrodinger, 1927) to explain discrete energy states of light and matter, and accepts particle / wave duality of matter (de Broglie, 1927) never really explored a pure Wave Structure of Matter to explain particle effects (which it does very sensibly). As I wrote before, it was unfortunate that Born (1928) discovered probability interpretation of waves, and because Einstein believed in continuous fields he tended to side with Born rather than Schrodinger.

Mike - This is where I believe we will really convince the world - with experimental results of these effects.

Geoff - Very important. But difficult too.
Two thoughts;

1. Shahriar Afshar and his two slit experiment that contradicts Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Physics. He believes matter is a wave structure but i think he still works using electromagnetic waves, which according to WSM are continuous approximations of many real discrete standing wave interactions.
(http://axion.physics.ubc.ca/rebel.html)

2. Carver Mead. Should read his 'Collective Electrodynamics' as he won $500,000 prize from MIT for his work, is quite famous and well respected academic, and uses his ideas of Wave Structure of Matter to design better electronics (though I think he still also works using em waves).

Milo Wolff wrote;
Prof. Carver Mead, an engineer at Cal-Tech investigated the e-m consequences of the WSM in his 2000 book "Collective Electrodynamics" [13]. He recognized that the electron is not a point particle but a wave structure, so that the approximations of Maxwell’s Equations, especially magnetism, do not work when dimensions approach quantum sizes. He used the measured effect of wave structure at low temperatures (termed the Quantum Hall-effect) that the magnetic flux f in a closed loop of current takes only quantized values: Flux = nf, where n is an integer. This is because the waves of the circulating electrons must join together in phase, otherwise they cancel each other. He derived a vector potential to correct the flawed magnetic terms of Maxwell Equations. His book, very popular in Silicon Valley, shows correct ways to solve the electromagnetics of transistor circuits. MIT awarded him two prizes. Mead has begun a new field of Natural Electrodynamics to supplement the former work-horse, Maxwell’s Equations.

""The quantum world is a world of waves, not particles. So we have to think of electron waves and proton waves and so on. Matter is "incoherent" when all its waves have a different wavelength, implying a different momentum. On the other hand, if you take a pure quantum system - the electrons in a superconducting magnet, or the atoms in a laser - they are all in phase with one another, and they demonstrate the wave nature of matter on a large scale. Then you can see quite visibly what matter is down at its heart." (Carver Mead Interview, American Spectator, Sep/Oct 2001, Vol. 34 Issue 7, p68)

Mike - I have been pondering an experiment where matter is phase-shifted into antimatter by "pulling" it's corresponding matter wave over in space a little bit with a high-voltage source. For instance, based on the formula mc^2 = (1/2)k(x^2), or the elastic-rest energy relation, I come up with about 19 MegaVolts to change a proton into an anti proton (the charged potential effectively compresses spacetime and then releases it but before snapping back into shape the phase is adjusted and for this time antimatter exists). Protons are 19 MV and I won't tell you what electrons require - not enough charge in my batteries for that!! The big problem is the proton is deflected based on the applied voltage, making it hard to aim at a target. This is why I am thinking about doing the experiment with a neutron source of some kind. I have a few other ideas for experiments klinking around in my head - maybe one of them will show what is really happening with WSM (and once there is evidence like this, we really don't need the attention of academia - the technological world will find uses and the free market will take over to spread the information).

Geoff - Absolutely spot on, market economics and self interest / profit are the two biggest forces controlling the evolution of human knowledge. Bring it on! But I do not have enough knowledge to comment on the above idea, though it sounds interesting / logical.

Mike - I believe that the EPR effect which is a hot item at IBM and other technological think tanks right now can be implemented with simplicity if we understand how WSM applies. For instance, if the "spooky" action at a distance that Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen describe is just lateral stretch of the spacetime fabric (i.e., not standing waves but longitudinal forces that act much faster than standing waves, i.e. faster than the speed of light), then stretching spacetime in this way allows us to modulate these signals at faster than the speed of light. Ergo, new technology. What do you think? Mike

Geoff - Not sure (always been a bit skeptical of faster than light / non-local actions, probably because i am strongly influenced by Einstein). Two thoughts;

1. EPR effect is due to assumption of particle, that with correct WSM the experiment would be understood / performed differently and would obey local actions. See Milo Wolff's thoughts on this;
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Wolff-Einstein-EPR-Experiment.htm

2. EPR effect is due to phase waves, which have velocity c^2 / v thus at low relative velocities v the phase wave (de Broglie wave) is almost instant (it is also a planar wave - interesting that two spherical waves moving relative to one another produce a planar phase wave). This is from Chris Hawkings work - but I am not sure if phase waves act on things in the same way that the real waves that cause them do.

But perhaps you are right - I don't know, just throwing up different ideas that we should keep in mind.

Mike, I have been meaning to comment on your papers today but I have now spent 10 hours just replying to emails, and posts on this forum (about half of my daily work is now taken up with correspondence, which I guess is good but it wears me down and I don't get enough time to improve my own work on website!!). Will try and reply tomorrow as I want to finalise our 'starting point' of the knowledge that we have, what we agree and disagree on.
But this is not a complaint of you. I really enjoy your thoughts, think your ideas are very important and have great potential (and i don't write this lightly either!). So thanks!
Cheers,
Geoff

[haselhurst]

Hi Mike,
I have added my comments above. (Posted this here so that forum shows that i have replied to your post!)
Geoff

[Harry Costas]

Hello All

Just reading through. This is becoming very interesting.

haselhurst is working his butt off.

Smile
Thats why he lives down under in the land of ozzzzzzz.

Maybe in time I will get my brain in tune with WSM.