The dual (invariant to R-1/R transform) character or general relativity (GR) and quantum mechanics (QM) was expressed in 1997 in form of so called Maldacena duality, based on AdS-CFT correspondence (1). This duality is based on fact, every relativity phenomena can be perceived as quantum mechanics phenomena, when observing from exsintric perspective instead of insintric one. As a classical example can serve the gravitational lens phenomena, which appears like relativistic aberration from perspective of internal observer, while it manifests itself like quantum uncertainty phenomena violating Lorentz symmetry postulate from outside perspective (1, 2).

It can be demonstrated easily, QM is dual to relativity via duality of gravity to omnidirectional universe expansion. It's not so well known (mainstream science covers it), quantum mechanics suffers serious experimental problem in general, because it predicts, every free particle should expand into infinite volume by solution of time dependent Schrödinger equation. This discrepancy can be explained by potential of gravity field, which keeps the particle "at place". The problem is, gravity itself cannot be derived from QM by any way. The omnidirectional collapse of space-time would have the very same effect, though.

GR suffers the very dual problem, as the J.A.Wheeler has demonstrated by geon concept (1) of geometrodynamics. Geon is hypothetical closed artifact, formed just by gravity waves spreading by graviton field. Every particle or black hole can be considered a geon from certain perspective. Albeit from GR follows, such geon should collapse into singularity by its own gravity, which can be prevented by omnidirectional space-time expansion. By such way, validity of GR can be saved by concept of space-time expansion by the same way, like validity of QM depends on space-time collapse.

This apparent paradox can be reconciled by concept of black hole/gravastar (i.e. graviton or "dark energy" star), forming our Universe generation. The gravitational collapse of such object is followed by gradual increasing of its internal density, which manifest itself as a omnidirectional space-time expansion from internal observer perspective, i.e. perspective of observer, which is formed by standing waves of such environment. The single concept can therefore explain the conceptual problems of both GR, both QM at the same moment.

By such way, we can understand the gravity action as an acceleration force in terms of omnidirectional expansion inside of Aether density gradient. Such gradient makes a gradient of expansion speed, i.e. the gravity force. Such approach has even it's own testable predictions, for example in slowing of speed of light or by gradual expansion and dissolving of kilogram/meter prototypes from long-term perspective (1, 2, 3) and its closely related to dark matter and dark energy phenomena.

Now we can understand as well, why numeric prediction of cosmological constant by GR differs by two hundreds orders of magnitude from those predicted by QM. QM follows the model of collapsing universe, while GR considers the concept of expanding universe on background.

Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously.

OdpovědětVymazatThe theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing them. It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.

A typical problem with theoretical physicists is that they think that by presenting an alternative interpretation of a contradiction one can remove the contradiction.

OdpovědětVymazatNew Quantum Theory Separates Gravitational and Inertial Mass

Equations of quantum theory cannot describe gravity at all - on the contrary. By Schrödinger equation all wave packets of free particles should expand into infinity, not to collapse by gravity. You cannot switch 1 = 1 to 1 = -1 by any causal math because quantum theory reverses time arrow of general relativity. It describes the intrinsic reality from extrinsic perspective.

Physicist Sean Caroll and technowriter Jennifer Ouellette are disputing the particle-wave duality, too.

OdpovědětVymazatIt's not surprising, Sean as a man and mathematician is a proponent of wave concept (which I personally consider more formal and abstract), whereas holistic an less formal thinking about particle condensation may be more accessible for girls.

Anyway, we should get the very same results with using of both particle collision simulations and wave interference simulations in many dimensions.

Is dense vacuum physically correct denomination? A vacuum, by definition, would be the absense of density (i.e. volume without mass).

OdpovědětVymazatWatter surface is empty and invisible for surface waves, too. This doesn't mean, it's mass/energy density has no physical meaning. Wheeler and Misner in their Geometrodynamics estimated mass density of vacuum to inverted value, i.e. some third power of Planck constant, 10E+93 grams per cubic centimeter.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.1846

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/vacuum.html

In dense aether theory vacuum depends on observational perspective, which explains so called the vacuum catastrophe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_catastrophe