Nuclear and Atomic Physics

   

The Rope Hypothesis

Authors: Bill Gaede

The wave model of light was born in the 17th Century and was quickly abandoned in favor of the old Corpuscular Hypothesis on the strength of Newton’s authority. It flourished again in the 19th Century only to be eclipsed once again by the Corpuscular Hypothesis at the turn of the century. The participants at the 5th Solvay Conference reached a compromise in 1926 and finally merged the wave and the corpuscle into an unfathomable concoction known as ‘wave-packet’. This is the official model today, but now it rests on the authority of Niels Bohr. However, the Wave-Packet Hypothesis is not about architecture. The mathematical establishment has turned the argument upside down and incongruously states that light ‘behaves’ as a wave or as a particle depending on the circumstances. There is, therefore, no formal physical configuration of light in Mathematical Physics that a theorist can challenge. Many in the establishment even argue that a mediator is unnecessary and dispose of one entirely in their talks. We compare the wave, particle, field, and wave-packet models championed by Classical Mechanics, Quantum Mechanics, and General Relativity against the Rope Hypothesis to underscore that a new paradigm has emerged in the centuries-old debate.

Comments: 14 Pages.

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2017-05-21 15:22:44

Unique-IP document downloads: 51 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus