6. SURe of Quantum Physics

New Physics / SURe shows that all quantum effects are classical effects which can be described and explained like all other observations by general classical physical rules (Universal Principles/CBD-mechanism). SURe shows that physical rules are valid for all physical units independently from size: for the smallest elementary particle up to the largest celestial body.

The general rules of the universe (Universal Principles/ CBD-mechanism), derived by scientific method on basis of unbiased observations replace all quantum theories and by this eliminate complete quantum physics.

This does not mean that quantum physicist were no great scientists. Of course their theoretical work was outstanding and extreme difficult. Quantum physics is a step of the evolution of science and by this the evolution of mankind. No one will laugh about the era of quantum physics, but everyone would laugh at physicists who would now continue to do scientific work on basis of the antiscience of quantum physics. Every quantum physicists has the intellectual capability to revise any quantum theory by knowledge of New Physics/ SURe and thus convert it to classical physical reality.

6.2 The ERROR of QUANTIZED ENERGIES

Background:

The first observations, which got biased interpretations and thus led to quantum physics, were the observations that atoms absorb and emit radiation of specific energies which are characteristic for a type of atom (element).

Biased interpretation (quantum theory):

Particles like atoms, atomic electrons and atomic nuclei occupy discrete states of energies.

Radiation are matter-less waves which are generated when a state of energy of an atom/electron changes to a lower state of energy.

The change of energy occurs momentarily by a change of position of an electron and is called quantum loop.

Discrete energies of radiation refer to specific and discrete differences of energetic states of electrons

New Physics/ SURe:

No PU (physical unit) occupies or has different states of energy. New Physics proves that each PU in universe is a specific amount of energy, which is a quantum of energy. This includes atoms, electrons, nuclei and radiation (RNs).

Every PU in universe has a specific well defined vector of kinetic energy. This is given by the sum of average spin energy and the vibration energy of all bondings of the PU. The energy of a PU is constant as long as the PU does not interact. By interactions the energy of a PU can be changed to any natural amount of a specific range. There are no discrete (quantized) energies. The change of energy is always a continuous transfer of average spin energy to vibration energy or vice versa from one particle to the other. Thus an interacting group of PUs have always a continuous range of energies. This is verified by spectral analysis. Neither transferred collision energy, nor vibration energy is restricted to specific values (quantized).

There are neither matter-less waves, nor other waves, nor changes of energetic states, nor energetic states. Radiation (RNs) is the product of a normal reaction, which obeys scientific principles of chemical reactions and works always by CBD-mechanism. The emitted RNs are the main parts of the structure of atoms (see 6.2). When an atom emits an RN it remains the same type of atom but is not identical to the atom before emission. The rule for nominations of particles is that the type of particle is determined by structure of internal bondings and is independent from number of bondings to neutrinos.

There is not any specific physical rule for radiation. New Physics proves in Vol.6 that all observations concerning radiation are due to the universal CBD-mechanism, which is valid for all PUs. Energies of PUs are never restricted to discrete values..

RNs (radiation) can be reaction product of all PUs but are mostly generated by reactions of atoms, because atoms consists of an extreme high number of BNs.

All energies in universe are energies of movements of particles. All changes of movements in universe are done continuously even when changes are very quick. There is no single observation in universe where energies are changed momentarily by discrete levels (step wise). There is no mechanism in universe which can explain an instantaneous change of energy.

Energies of radiation refers to kinetic energies of emitted RNs. RNs are emitted when a bonding of an BN is activated to a vibration which exceeds maximal possible vibration amplitude. As each type of atom has BNs with specific maximal vibration energies of BNs, each atom emits RNs with a specific kinetic energies. with a specific maximal intensity and a range of continuous kinetic energies around the maximal intensity. There are never discrete energies, which means that there is not any restriction for the amount of energy. All natural numbers of energy are allowed. The specific maxima of kinetic energies of radiation are due to specific maximal bonding energies of BNs in atoms.

This process is the origin of observation of specific energies of spectral data. The theory that these are discrete energies is no reality.

The most important tool to analyze radiation are spectroscopic measurements, which mean the measurements of concentration of emitted or absorbed RNs (= intensities of absorbed or emitted radiation) in correlation to activation energies. All spectral data clearly show that there are always more or less broad bands of continuous energies and never discrete energies.

6.3 Saving quantized Energies by additional irrealistic Theories

Theory of quantized emitted energies by changes of energetic states of electrons was falsified by the fact that most of the observed emitted energies could not be explained by “quantum loops” of electrons. Instead of searching for reality physicists created many additional irrealistic theories:

In order to explain emitted energies below visible light quantum physicist postulated that these refer to discrete energetic states of vibrations of atomic bondings in molecules. When this hypothesis was falsified by low emitted energies which are generated by atoms (without atomic bondings) they had to postulate that these refer to discrete energetic states of rotation and spin. Emitted energies higher than UV were observed by transformations of subatomic particles, by high energetic movements of particles and by annihilation. Also for these irrealistic explanations were created. So there are at least 7 completely different explanations for the same physical phenomenon. This is extremely illogical, which means absurd. There should be significant gaps of energetic levels between the complete different hypotheses of generation. But this is not the case. Besides this the theories do not explain quantization. It is inconceivable and has never been observed that there are discrete levels and instantaneous changes of any vibrations or rotations in universe.

New Physics/ SURe:

Emitted energies of radiations are neutrinos which are reaction products, which can have a broad range of kinetic energy from micro radiation as lowest energy to gamma rays as highest possible energy. So there is one explanation for all different emitted energies of radiation.. There is exclusively one single mechanism for generation of RNs: CBD-mechanism. Different energies of radiation refer to different maximal vibration energies of bondings of the neutrinos which are emitted. As omnipresent matter neutrinos are bound to all PUs in universe. So interactions of all matter can ganerate RNs.

6.4 Lots of Falsifications of ORBITING ELECTRONS

Physicists realized that their hypotheses about generation of quantized energies by orbiting electrons can’t be valid as there are lots of inconsistencies:

Atomic electrons are the origin of bondings in molecules, which prove that electrons have specific locations in molecules.

Orbital movements of electrons should generate continuously radiation.

According to hypotheses of Einstein energies depend on mass and kinetic energy. When orbiting atomic electrons “fall” to a lower energetic state of movement, they have to jump to an increased distance to nucleus and not to a decreased distance to nucleus.

If Einstein’s postulate is not valid and there would be also a “potential electromagnetic energy”, the sum of kinetic and potential electromagnetic energy is identical at all distances, so a jump to another orbital can’t release energy.

Orbital movements of atomic electrons should generate magnetic fields. Experiments proved that this is not the case.

Instead of accepting that atomic electrons do no orbital movements quantum physics postulated that electrons are no particles but wave functions (see next chapter).

6.5 The Collapse of Physics: WAVE FUNCTIONS

By the postulate of wave functions physicists tried to describe physical observations by non-physical mathematics. By this it has been rejected that physics is a natural science. By postulate of wave functions physics worked with at least three completely different hypotheses to describe particles:

Particles are no particles but wave functions which convert exclusively to particles when observed.

Particles are no particles but waves, which convert to particles when observed. Wave functions describe waves.

Particles are particles. Wave functions describe probabilities of position of particles, particularly of positions of electrons in atomic orbitals.

Despite having now 3 possibilities to explain physical phenomenons of atomic radiation, none of the possibilities are capable to explain the specific energies of radiation.

The hypothesis of wave functions which should explain the “fixed” positions of electrons between atoms in molecules failed to describe the tetrahedral arrangement of atoms in some molecules with 5 atoms like CH4 and the planar trigonal arrangement of atoms in molecules. For this it was postulated that there is a linear superposition of p- and s-orbitals.. But this would cause octaedric arrangements. Authors of New Physics/ SURe are also not aware of wave functions which describe the postulated orbitals besides the symmetric s-orbitals.

But the postulate of wave functions is adequate to explain the observation that the emitted energies of atoms are not discrete but are continuous within a specific range, because the postulated characteristics of wave functions are that not only the position but also other properties of “particles” are undefined and just can be described by a probability.

Overall the hypotheses of wave function are neither conform to reality nor conform to origin of quantum physics.

Physicists are not allowed to mention that postulate of wave functions is contradictory to postulate of quantized energies.

Besides the explanations of continuous energies wave functions can’t be used to explain any mechanism of observed phenomenons of atoms and atomic radiation.

Wave functions are mainly known for describing electrons in atoms. But it is not clear how they describe changes of energetic states, particularly for vibrations and rotations.

Quantum physics does not solve inconsistencies of Bohr's model of orbiting electrons but makes it much worse by adding irrealistic postulates like wave functions with non-locality and creating lots of additional questions and inconsistencies than answers. The main intention of creation of theory of wave function seemed to be to confuse the public so that all the inconsistencies of physics are not discovered.

New Physics/ SURe can show, that all stated verifications or explanations of theories by mathematics are fallacies by circular reasoning.

6.6 Nothing more than Numbers: QUANTUM NUMBERS

Physicists tried to define a systematic correlation of observed specific energies of atomic radiation by definition of quantum numbers. Due to the wrong understanding of the origin of specific energies of radiation this was not possible and failed. Energies can have any value, so it does not make sense to describe energies by discrete numbers. Quantum numbers strongly deteriorate understanding of physics and have to be eliminated. There are no discrete energetic states of electrons, of vibration, of rotation or of spin.

Each spectral line refers to a specific bonding energy of a bound neutrino in an atom. Bonding energy differs by position of BN in the structure of an atom. This explains that by spectral lines you can get information about the structure of particles. The high variety of spectral lines show the high variety and complexity of atomic structures. It will take some time until in future each spectral line can be assigned to a specific position of a BN in a specific atom.

6.7 FRANCK-HERTZ EXPERIMENT falsifies Quantum Physics

Background:

The experiment of James Franck and Gustav Hertz from 1914 is regarded by physicists as the first experiment which verified the hypotheses of quantum physics concerning the absorption and emission of discrete energy quanta by atoms. New Physics/ SURe shows in Vol.6that the Franck-Hertz experiment falsifies quantum physics and verifies SURe. Below only some aspects are covered.

Observation:

Collisions of accelerated electrons with mercury atoms cause emission of RNs as soon as the electrons have a specific level of kinetic energy.

Current hypotheses:

Collisions occur between accelerated electron and a specific orbiting atomic electron in outer electronic shell of atom.

Emissions of RNs occur, when discrete quanta of energy is transferred from the accelerated electron to the atom.

Transferred quanta of energy causes the elevation of the specific atomic electron to an excited energy level.

New Physics/ SURe:

Collisions occur between accelerated electron and chains of inner-atomic BNs of mercury, which fill the space between nuclear center and atomic electrons.

Falsifications of hypotheses No 1

1a) The probability that the accelerated electrons collide to specific atomic electrons is extremely low so that electron/electron collisions can be excluded. The size of electrons can be neglected compared to size of atom.

1b) According to modern physics atomic electrons are waves or wave functions without locality. So there can't be collisions.

1c) If there would be orbiting atomic electrons, there would be no specific energy but a broad range of energies , because activation of interaction depends on collision energy which varies by direction of orbital movements.

1d) It is well known by photo effect and Compton effect that by collisions of accelerated particles to atomic electrons emission of atomic electrons occur (mostly besides emission of RNs), which means that atoms decay to ions and electrons. This is not observed in Franck-Hertz experiment.

Emission of RNs occurs by all collision energies which are above activation energy. Collision energies are fully transferred to vibration energy of bondings of atomic neutrinos. If the transferred collision energy exceeds maximal vibration energy of a bound neutrino the bonding breaks and the neutrino is emitted (which is called generation of radiation). Each reaction in universe has to be induced by a minimal activation energy.

Falsification of hypotheses No 2:

You just have to generate various fixed kinetic energies of electrons, which are above activation energy of observed reaction. In all cases the reaction will occur (in this case emissions of RNs). It can be assumed that this test has been checked by physicists as it is key for good scientific practice and in addition it is very easy to perform. So there is an extreme high probabiliy that physicists have already falsified the basic theory of quantum physics. This again shows that physicists ignore falsifications of their theories and don’t report falsifications to public.

All experiments in universe prove that particles can have continuous levels of energy from minimum to a specific maximum energy. All observations and experiments show that particles do continuous changes of energies. Stepwise changes of energies are impossible. There is no observation or experiment that energies or changes of energies of particles are restricted to discrete quanta. Even Franck-Hertz experiment verifies that the kinetic energy of the accelerated electrons increase continuously by acceleration. This is valid for all particles in universe, so also for atoms and ONs.

Atomic electrons are not involved in the reaction process of generation of RNs. There are no different states of energy of atomic electrons. Not any particle in universe has a ground state or excited states. Every particle is a specific energetic state but can change its energy within a broad continuous range (only by collisions).

Falsifications of hypotheses No 3:

a) A change of position of atomic electron does not explain change of energy.

b)There are no relevant changes of size of atoms or distances between atoms in bondings.

c) If electrons would do orbital movements, all electrons would have same energy independent from distance to nucleus.

6.8 The first scientifically sound ATOMIC MODEL

A scientifically sound atomic model has to be explain all characteristics and all interactions of all atoms, particularly all data of periodic table of elements. The atomic model of New Physics has been derived by S.O.Vogel. As a chemist he had personal interests to solve all the uncountable inconsistencies and open questions of current models because chemistry is the natural science about interactions of atoms. He had to realize that it was an extreme challenging task to define the structure of atoms although he had already defined nearly all other structures of particles. He needed about 30 significant revisions of his derived models until in September 2019 he defined a model which explains most of the characteristics and interactions of atoms. Some details of structures are still missing and will be included in next update. The detailed structures of atoms can be verified, resp. determined by computer simulations.

The basic findings by Mew Physics/SURe are:

Atoms are particles (=bound FPs), which means they do not consists of other particles like nuclei, protons, neutrons and electrons. This is verified by the fact that atoms with non-planar nuclei (above atomic number 3, AN3) cannot be generated out of protons and neutrons, that protons, neutrons and electrons cannot be observed as particles of atoms and that protons are no decay products of atoms.

Decay products of atoms are mainly RNs (neutrinos) but also smaller atoms, alpha-particles, neutrons and electrons. This shows that structure of protons consists mainly out of structures of bound neutrinos, but also of structures of bound neutrons and bound alpha-particles.

Structure of non-planar nuclear units of atoms have the same basic structure as neutronium which can be described as 3-dimensional cyclic structures of bound neutrons. This is conform to the fact that atoms above an atomic number of 3 are decay products of neutronium, which means can exclusively be generated by supernovae.

The specific characteristics of neutronium is that the bondings between neutrons (attached hexagons) are not necessarily in a plane but may have an angle to the spin axes of FPs, which enables extensions to a all 3 dimensions.

The loss of stability of non-planar bondings is compensated by formation of two or more bondings between neutrons and by formation of ring structures.

The specific cyclic structures of atomic nuclei explain following observations:

Relative large and specific stabilities of atoms.

Cyclic atomic structures cannot be generated by nuclear fusion of protons and neutrons

Cyclic atomic structures can exclusively be generated by decay of neutronium (supernovae)

High number of fundamental particles of atomic nuclei.

Relative low bonding energies of BNs and thus relative low kinetic energies of emitted RNs

Large variety of specific bonding energies of BNs and thus spectral lines (=energies of emitted RNs)..

The phenomenon of non-planar cyclic bondings is also observed for neutrinium and magnetic fields (3-dimensional rod-like structures of BNs).

A link of cyclic structure is mostly a deuterium unit but can also be a tritium unit.

A deuterium is an atomic nuclear unit called deuteron, which is a neutron bound to a proton by two bondings and thus forms 6 attached hexagons of FPs. The deuteron is bound to a chain of bound neutrinos with an electron as end particle of the chain of BNs.

A tritium unit is the same except that there is another neutron unit which is bound to the deuteron and thus forms 9 hexagons of FPs.

Deuterium and tritium units have a relative high stability by formation of an electron pair with highest possible bonding energy. As atoms with atomic numbers below units have a

Cyclic units are combined by planar helium units.

Helium units are stabilized by formation of an electron pair

Examples:

Neon consists of two cyclic units with 8 deuterium links attached to a helium unit (2 deuterium units).

Oxygen consists of a helium unit bound to a cyclic unit with 6 deuterium links.

The deuterium units have a chain of BNs in alternating opposite directions with electrons as end particles of chains. This is verified by the fixed positions of atomic electrons.

Atomic electrons are stabilized by bondings to other atomic electrons, which can be of preferably of same atom. For specific atomic electrons it is favorable or the only possibility to do bondings to atomic electrons to other atoms, by which molecules are generated. This explains that oxygen can only do 2 internal bondings of pairs of electrons and 2 electron bondings to other atoms like hydrogen.

The preferred number of links of cyclic structures explains the preferred atomic numbers (“magic numbers”)

6.9 The Mythology of PARTICLE-WAVE-DUALITY

As physicists had no allowance to withdraw the hypothesis of electromagnetic waves despite falsifications by many experiments (examples: photoelectric effect, Compton effect), physicists had to create the hypothesis of particle-wave duality, which was extended by quantum physics to a particle- wave- wave function “triality”. This is much more fanciful than the human-animal hybrids of the Greek mythology or the Jekyll and Hyde story. These hybrids remain physical systems whereas the hybrids of physicists change from different non-physical system (matterless waves and wave functions) to different physical system (particles with known locations and particles with unknown locations (only probabilities of locations are known). So physicists have lots of descriptions of same phenomenon which is highly unscientific.

Only one description can be physical reality. Wave functions are no physical reality by definition, because of the postulate of non-locality.

Waves are physical reality when waves are generated by matter. All observations of waves refer to waves of particles. New Physics / SURe shows in Vol.6 that following characteristics for waves have been observed for real waves like radio waves but never for radiation:

Amplitudes, wavelengths and frequencies of waves

Energy depends on amplitude of waves

Interference (superposition of amplitudes / energies)

Propagation by Fresnel-Huygens principle (= deflection by edges and slits to all directions)

Two- or three-dimensional propagation

New Physics/ SURe:

Radio waves and micro waves are real waves, which are generated by a sequence of RNs which have wave-like changes of kinetic energy

Radiation including micro radiation (CMB)

Radiation are moving RNs in a group to same direction.

Micro radiation (CMB) are low- energetic mainly randomly moving RNs.

RNs (radiation) obey same classical physical rules than all other PUs in universe.

All specific theories about optics have to be eliminated.

E = h * frequency = kinetic energy of RNs and has nothing to do with frequencies.

Planck constant h is a man-made normalization constant to convert “frequency” to kinetic energy, but no natural constant.

Interference patterns of radiation are not generated by interference (see next chapter)

Interferometers do not measure frequencies but depending on type either differences of kinetic energies of RNs or differences of vibration phases of RNs.

Polarization is adjustment of particles like RNs to same orientation of their plane structure.

RNs with highest kinetic energy are called gamma-rays, RNs with lowest kinetic energy are called micro radiation.

All currently called optical effects like diffraction, refraction, reflection, all types of scattering, dispersion, interference, aberration, polarization, shifts of frequencies are caused by collisions of RNs and interaction by classical CBD-mechanism. Details are described in Vol.6

It is not possible to explain optical effects by waves without creating lots of inconsistencies.

As quantum physicists know and accept that observations are not conform to their theories they postulate that the theories of quantum physics about physical phenomenons are exclusively valid when the phenomenons are not observed. By this quantum physicists can do any hypothesis and by this quantum physicists dsclare quantum physcists consciously that quantum physics is antiscience.

6.10 Interference Patterns are not generated by INTERFERENCE

Generally accepted definition of interference:

Superposition of waves, by which amplitudes of waves are added. Amplitudes of waves determine the energy of waves. This means that by interference energies of waves are reduced (destructive interference) or increased (constructive interference).

Observations:

Interference is observed for all waves of particles.

Interference has never been observed for radiation.

Falsifications of interference for radiation (just two examples of many):

Photoelectrical effect.

Interference patterns of monochromatic radiation (RNs with identical energy) show identical energies at all positions/directions.

Example: Interference patterns of red laser light show no other than red patterns.

New Physics/ SURe:

Origin of observed interference patterns of radiation are deflections of RNs. Therefore interference patterns of radiation are called deflection patterns by New Physics/ SURe.

All changes of movement like deflections of RNs occur by CBD-mechanism. In most cases RNs are deflected by collisions to chains of BNs. Chains of BNs (= electric or magnetic fields) are for example generated by ordinary matter rectangular to surface. Deflections by electric fields on surface of bodies are currently known as reflection, scattering, refraction, diffraction and dispersion.

Deflection by slits:

Within slits the electric fields go from one side to the other side of the slit. RNs which collide to the middle part of the chain can react by CBD – mechanism with one of the both sides of the chain. Each collision causes a deflection of RN to one side of the chain. If there are many chains of BNs deflections to a specific side are mostly canceled out. If there just few possibilities for collisions as it is the case in slits overall the collisions will lead to a set of specific directions. Number of RNs are decreasing with angle of deflection. This is the origin of the observed deflection pattern, which currently are erroneously called interference patterns. Deflection patterns are already generated by one slit. New Physics/ SURe shows that the currently postulated mechanism by electromagnetic waves is impossible. For one slit it is obvious that explanation by electromagnetic waves does not work, for two slits the inconsistencies are more difficult to detect. Therefore the wrong explanation of interference is mostly done by two slits instead of one slit. In addition for one slit the same physical phenomenon got an extra term: diffraction.

Besides the invalid explanation of interference patterns there is an invalid explanation of interferometers. The valid description and explanation is presented in Vol. 6. Of course it is not possible to measure wavelength and frequencies of radiation by interferometers, as there are no waves and frequencies.

6.11 Shit happens! DOUBLE SLIT is double Shit

Background of title:

The double slit experiment is the experiment with the highest negative impact on physics due to misinterpretation. Misinterpretation of double slit experiment caused lots of irrealistic hypotheses. The invention of quantum physics is mainly influenced by misinterpretation of double slit experiment. This starts with the irrealistic postulate that for double slit there are different hypotheses than for single slit, although the observation of radiation patterns is identical. It is completely illogical to differentiate between single slit and double slit. Physicists are aware of this but don’t communicate this clearly to the public, as they fear that the public realizes all the inconsistencies of their theories.

Observation:

When double slit experiment is done by single photons (=RNs) these show same interference patterns after a while as by traveling as bulk of a beam.

Besides RNs there are other particles, which show interference patterns: electron, proton, fullerene

Comment:

At the latest by these observations physicists should have realized the physical reality that photons are particles and do interactions like other particles. But instead of the logical conclusions they created additional hypotheses contrary to known scientific rules:

Current hypotheses:

A particle is a wave function without locality and without defined properties, instead there is a superposition of properties. The wave function converts to a particle by a “collapse” exclusively when observed. At the same time the undefined property converts to a defined property.

For double slit experiment this means that instead of separate particles which go either through the first or through the second slit there are wave functions which go parallel to both slits. By this physicists try to explain that also a single particle can interfere. But they do not tell us how wave function without locality can travel through slits with locality, and how the two parts of wave functions without defined properties can do interference, for which well defined properties are required. We also get no information about the mechanism of observation, how a non-physical object (no location) can be observed how undefined properties can get exactly those properties which are expected by classical physics and how the mechanism for this transformation works. The main basis for natural science is that exclusively real physical phenomenons can be observed. A wave function is no physical object.

Each observation at all positions of experiment (right after emission, directly in front of slits, within slits, directly behind slits and on detector screen) show that particles are particles. Physicists don’t need to do experiments when they do not accept what they observe. For quantum physicists it is reality what they think and not what they observe. Quantum physicists know the generally accepted definition of antiscience, so they consciously postulated antiscientific theories.

Example for concealment of physical reality:

It is reported that electrons, protons, neutrons and even huge molecules like fullerene show “interference patterns“ by double slit experiments. The logical conclusion of these reports is that the huge majority of particles do not create “interference patterns“, otherwise this would have been reported. This shows that the generation of deflection patterns does not require that the particle is small but that it has to have a symmetric structure. According to quantum physics particles are wave functions without locality when travelling through slits and are superposing to create interference. This has to work independently from structure of particle, which means that all particles including molecules have to create interference. It can be assumed that many particles have been tested, where there were no deflection patterns. But physicists were not allowed to report these “negative” findings as this would falsify theories of quantum physics. It is typical for modern physics that only “positive“ results of experiments with conformity to postulates are reported and no “negative“ results although this has much higher scientific relevance. This shows how strong physicist are under control of the autocratic system which makes scientific work impossible.

6.12 The basic Action in Universe: SPINNING

Current hypotheses:

Spin is no self-rotation but a quantum state.

Every particle has a spin.

Spin of particles has two discrete states of energy which differ by Planck constant.

Pairs of electrons have opposite orientations of spin.

New Physics/ SURe:

Spin is a classical self-rotation of a FP. The term “quantum state” has to be eliminated as there is nothing in the universe which has or can be described by a discrete energy (= quantum state).

Self rotation of a bound particle is a quite different physical phenomenon than spin of a spherical FP. New Physics/ SURe uses the term spin exclusively for self-rotation of FPs. Therefore the spin energy of a particle is the sum of spin energies of FPs. Self rotation of bound particles are caused by specific constellations of vibration energies of bondings. Normally these are possible for bodies and not for separate particles.

Spin orientations are random and have identical energies. The Planck constant has nothing to do with spin. There is neither an explanation nor a scientific basis for above hypotheses concerning Planck constant. Random spin orientations with identical energies have been verified by Stern-Gerlach experiment.

All FPs of basic particles like a pair of electrons have same orientations of spin. This is a requirement for generation of bondings. It can be verified by deflection in magnetic fields that decaying electrons of an electron pair have always same directions of spin. For the test you have to apply the “right-hand rule” for interactions with magnetic fields. Probably the cause for the wrong hypothesis was the omission of the right-hand rule.

6.13 Spin does not generate MAGNETIC MOMENTS

Current hypothesis:

Spin of particles generate magnetic moments and thus magnetic fields *).

Orientations of spin can be measured by magnetic fields.

New Physics/ SURe:

Spin is a movement, which does neither generate magnetic moments nor magnetic fields. Electromagnetic fields are exclusively generated by movements of particles which lead to collisions to neutrinos. (For example movements of electrons). By this RNs are emitted which agglomerate to the chains of BNs (=electromagnetic fields).

Orientation of spin can’t be measured by magnetic fields. Current spin measurements do not measure spin orientations but adjust these to orientations of magnetic fields. If orientations of bonding options are more to the parallel side of magnetic field these are adjusted to parallel side otherwise to the antiparallel side. This explains that a random distribution is adjusted in equal parts parallel and antiparallel (or spin up and spin down).

This is verified by following observation:

If you sort out the particles with spin up in z direction and you measure these again in y direction these will be adjusted 50% in spin up and 50% in spin down in y direction. If you sort out spin up particles and you measure again in z direction (already done and sorted out) there will be again 50 up and 50 % down.

*) many force fields, which currently are called magnetic fields, have according to New Physics / SURe all characteristics of electric fields. As the differences are not relevant, New Physics/ SURe uses electromagnetic fields for both.

6.14 STERN-GERLACH-experiment falsifies Quantum Physics

Background:

The Stern-Gerlach-experiment is regarded as important experiment, which verifies quantum physics. But again the apparent verification is due to a biased observation. Reality is that Stern-Gerlach experiment verifies New Physics/ SURe and falsifies quantum physics.

Experiment:

Stern and Gerlach generated silver atoms by decay of bound metallic silver and led these travel as a beam of atoms through an in homogeneous elecrtromagnetic field.

Information: Silver atoms have an unpaired electron in an atomic s- shell.

Observation:

The beam of atoms is split into two parts with equal intensities by deflection to opposite directions parallel to applied force field.

Hypotheses of quantum physics:

1. Spins of particles generally have two discrete energy levels depending on spin orientation.

2. Observed deflections are two discrete grades of deflection to same direction.

3. Two distinct grades of deflection are caused by effects of two distinct spin energies in an inhomogeneous magnetic field.

4. Most electrons in atoms are pairs of electrons with anti-parallel spins which cancel out energetic effects. Just atoms with single atomic electrons count for overall spin orientation and thus distinct energetic states.

5. By the two different energy levels of the single atomic electron the silver atom gets two different magnitudes of deflection in an inhomogenous magnetic field.

6. For the observed effect it is essential that the magnetic field is inhomogeneous..

7. Modern physics has no explanation why atoms split to same numbers of atoms with high spin energy than with low spin energy.

8. As there is not any energetic contribution by orbital movements of unpaired atomic electron: Atomic electrons in s-orbital do not do orbital movements.

9. Modern physics has not realized analog situations for all kind of deflections of particles.

New Physics/ SURe:

1. Atomic electrons (= FPs) of freely moving atoms have all kind of different (various) orientations of spin axes and thus spin orientations. Energy levels are independent from spin orientation. There are neither different nor discrete energies by different spin orientations.

2. Hypothesis is not conform to observation: The silver atoms are deflected clearly to opposite directions.

3. Observed deflections are not caused by distinct spin energies but by opposite orientations of structure. Orientation of bonding options determine to which side of the magnetic field the atomic particle can bind. Deflections are caused by collisions of atoms with particles of magnetic field (=BNs) according to classical CBD-mechanism .

4. Atomic electrons do always two bondings to the atomic nucleus via two bondings to the hexagonic chain of BNs. This means every atomic electron has one remaining bonding option. This free bonding option is preferably used to do a bonding to another atomic electron. This is the origin of bound electron pairs. Only if there is a single atomic electron this can doCBD- interactions to BNs of electromagnetic fields.

5. Deflections of particles by an electromagnetic field work by CBD-mechanism. The bondings to an force field are either parallel or anti-parallel to direction of electromagnetic field. Therefore the particles are emitted to a direction which is the result of the merge of kinetic energy (vibration direction) of the atom and the vibration direction of force field. Force fields have relative rigid structures and are only little effected by the decay momentum.

6. The observed deflections occur also in homogeneous magnetic fields. This can be easily tested and is already verified by deflections of decaying particles at collision experiments.

7. Atoms have random orientations of bonding options /spin. By CBD-mechanism orientations of bondings are adjusted 1:1 parallel or anti-parallel to force fields.

8. No atomic electron does orbital movements.

Mechanism of deflection of particles in electric and magnetic fields are shown in SURe Vol. 5. According to definition of SURe the used electromagnetic field of Stern-Gerlach experiment was an electric field.

9. Mechanisms of deflection are identical for all deflections of particles in universe. Real magnetic fields have rod-like hexagonic structures. Therefore magnetic fields are causing the spiral shaped deflections which is verified by many experiments.

6.15 The spooky Explanation for classical ENTANGLEMENT

Quantum entanglement is an example where a well-known classical explanation of a daily observed physical phenomenon has been replaced without any need by an irrealistic theory, which is according to Einstein rather “spooky”.

Definition:

Entanglement of particles is the physical phenomenon that particles which result by an interaction (collision) have interdepending properties (entangled properties) .

Classical explanation of entanglement:

Entanglement is due to classical scientific principle of conservation of energy and momentum. After a collision of two particles they have to have same total energy as before collision. Conservation of kinetic energy (= momentum) is restricted to elastic collisions. Conservation of momentum is the origin of entangled spin and polarization. Conservation of total energy causes that particles created by inelastic collisions are entangled. The technology of laser is based on this classical principle of entanglement. By uncountable centered collisions of RNs a huge number of entangled particles are generated, which all have the same kinetic energy and the same orientation of polarization. This can be explained by CBD-mechanism. Particle physics know the principle of classical entanglement by Compton effect and many other observations. The principle of entanglement is not only valid for particles but also for bodies which is for example well known by collisions of billiard balls.

The characteristics of entangled particles is obvious and not spooky: When one measures the value of an entangled property of one entangled particle one gets immediately knowledge of the values of all other particles of the entangled group. So if you measure the kinetic energy or orientation of polarization of one RN of a laser beam, you automatically know the kinetic energy and orientation of polarization of all RNs of the laser. However there is one problem for classical entanglement: Entanglement might change to a new entanglement by collisions. It has to be taken care that there are no relevant interactions between generation and measurement of entangled particles.

Overall entanglement of particles can be regarded as determinism according to the scientific principle of cause and effect: Each cause has a specific effect. By this all particles in universe are entangled particles.

Explanation of entanglement by quantum physics

Quantum physicists have a problem because they have to save the hypothesis that particles are wave functions without locality and without defined properties. By this they can’t argue with interdepending well defined properties which are stable from generation till observation. So they created following postulates: instead of entangled particles there is one single wave function, which has no locality. Although all the parts of a wave function have no locality the locations of the entangled wave functions are well known and they can be send from one specific location to another specific location. When one part of a wave function is observed at a specific position where a classical particle should be, then the wave function transforms to all the particles of the entangled group. At the same time all entangled particles get exactly the values of properties which they should have according to classical physics.

So by quantum physics the knowledge of scientific reality of entanglement is replaced by an irrealistic hypothesis of entanglement.

The advantage of the non-observable hypotheses of quantum physics is that one can postulate many fascinating spooky issues without taking care of scientific principles, and this can’t be falsified by the postulate that the irrealistic hypotheses turn to natural science when observed.

6.16 BELL’S THEOREM verifies New Physics/ SURe

After 1930 there was a long lasting debate of the contrary situation between quantum theories like non-locality, superposition and quantum entanglement (irrealism) and classical realism like locality and classical entanglement by scientific principles.

In 1964 John Stewart Bell worked out a mathematical and experimental test which he claimed allowed to differentiate whether entanglement works by irrealistic magics of quantum theories or on reality of scientific principles. The test was based on prediction of properties of entangled particles.

But there were two basic misunderstandings so that physicist did not realize that the test does not work at all.

As irrealism of quantum physics turns to realism of classical physics by measurement there is of course no difference in predicted values of entangled particles. It is not possible to differentiate a theory from reality by measurements (=observations) if the theory includes the postulate that it converts to reality when it is observed. So the results of the test of Bell were conform as well to realism as to irrealism. The only difference is that classical physics has a scientifically sound explanation or the measured values whereas by quantum physics the strong correlations of entangled properties can’t be explained.

Physicists are well aware that,measurements of spin and polarization do not lead to accurate results and in some cases even to results which violate scientific principle of conservation of energy. Despite the knowledge that by this the basic requirement for Bell’s test is not met these properties were used as test for Bell’s theorem

New Physics/ SURe:

Orientation of spin and orientation of polarization are properties which are impossible to be measured. For example the claimed measurement of spin is in reality an adjustment of spin by magnetic fields. By this the random spin of particles is converted to parallel or antiparallel spin relative to direction of magnetic field depending on whether the real orientation is nearer to parallel or to antiparallel orientation of magnetic field. By this it is impossible to predict the results of measurements of entangled particles by independent easurements. If the same orientation of magnetic field is used then of course you will get 100 % identical results of spin measurements although you get no information about the original spin orientation,

For orientation of polarization this is similar, as measurement of orientation of polarization is also no neasurement but an adjustment. Tests of entangled particles should always be done by kinetic energy (=momentum), which is the only property which can be directly and accurately measured.

New Physics/ SURe cannot only explain all results of measurements of entangled particles by classical CBD-mechanism but also the generation of all types of entangled particles. For entangled spin of electrons this is explained in chapter “pair production”. Entangled RNs are generated as follows: when two RNs (photons) collide these do two mutual bondings and form the dimer of a neutrino as transition state, which is called kaon. In the kaon all bondings and vibrations of bondings are aligned to same orientation, because of the endeavor to achieve minimal spin energy. If vibration energy exceeds its maximum the kaon decays again to two RNs.. By decay the energies of the broken bondings are equally converted to kinetic energy of the generated decay products. Common orientations of vibrations of bondings are taken over by RNs. Orientation of vibrations are origin of polarization.

6.17 The Show must go on: Delayed Choice QUANTUM ERASER

The shows of magic physical tricks continue. It is really interesting and fun to define the physical reality of the tricks. One of these genius tricks is:

Part 1:

Do double slit experiment with single photons* by laser light.

Generation of entangled photons by nonlinear optical crystals behind slits.

Focus one photon of each entangled pair after each slit to detector screen and don't care about the entangled photons.

Observation on screen: deflection pattern

Part 2:

Same as part 1 except:

Focus the partner photons of the entangled pairs behind one slit to a photo multiplier for Observation. By this one gets the information through which slit the photon traveled.

→ Observation on screen: No deflection pattern (= random deflection)

→ Deflection pattern apparently disappeared without any other action besides observation of entangled Photons

Part 3:

Replace the photo multiplier by a quantum eraser

Quantum eraser works by combining beam splitters so that the information of the path of photons is erased

Observation on screen: Deflection patterns

Patterns appear again apparently without any interaction of interfering entangled particles

Biased observation and hypothesis of quantum physics:

Entangled particles generate patterns by double slit experiment exclusively when there is no information about which slit these go through. The entangled particles decide to generate patterns or not before the information about „which path“ is available.

Question: Is there a spooky distant and time-independent communication between entangled particles by which they know when to do patterns and when not?

Answer by New Physics/ SURe:

No, hypotheses of quantum physics are not conform to Universal Principles (= no science).

Explanation by Universal Principles:

In all parts of the experiment a basic deflection pattern is generated.

In part 2 there is an overlay of opposite traveling non-coherent photons from „observing“ photo multiplier over the mirrors to interference screen. As number of photons from photo multiplier is much higher than laser photons, the deflection patterns from laser light can not be detected. If you detect specifically the RNs from laser on the screen there will be no change by experiment. This simply can be verified.

In part 3 opposite traveling external photons from photo multiplier are avoided by using adequate equipment. Probably this has been achieved by using beam splitters which have no transmission from backside.

New Physics/ SURe can simply be tested:

Screen will show interference in part 2 of the experiment by just changing the position of the photo multiplier behind the beam splitter, so that the light from photomultiplier can not be reflected back to the experimental set up by beam splitter.

Screen will show no interference despite using quantum eraser when you allow that photons from photo multiplier of quantum eraser can travel to the interference screen.

Verification by one slit experiment:

For generation of patterns there is no need to use two slits. Patterns are also generated by one slit despite of the fact that one has knowledge of the path of the photons. So knowledge of the slit through which the photons are traveling has no impact on physical rules. But each measurement of a particle changes the properties of the particle

*) historic term “photon” is used for RNs.

6.18 NO SIMULTANEOUS CHANGES of properties

Theory of entanglement by quantum physics is falsified by the fact that there are no simultaneous changes of properties of entangled particles, which can easily be demonstrated. According to theory of a common wave function this should occur. Again an example of concealed inconsistencies.

6.19 QUANTUM COMPUTING and Quantum Cryptography

Actually there are strong efforts to develop new technologies to improve computing. New Physics/ SURe will provide many new possibilities to improve computing. Any technology (new or old) works by CBD-mechanism and does not work by irrealistic theories. Also when you call a newly developed computer quantum computer it will be a computer which has nothing to do with the theories of quantum physics. By New Physics/ SURe you get knowledge if a technology theoretically works or not before development. Currently R&D is mostly done by trial and error. By New Physics/ SURe every scientist who is involved in this new technology can check if a quantum computer will have real advantages. The statement that a quantum computer works with quantum states, quantum entanglement or superposition can’t be true because all these issues do not exist. Entangled particles are usual physical reality, which is known for many years. So there is not a high probability that on old effect leads to a new technology, but it might be.

The same is true for quantum cryptography.

Main problem by using entangled particles is to ensure that the entanglement does not get lost by collisions.

6.20 PAIR PRODUCTION is a Decay Reaction

An often used reaction to generate entangled particles is pair production of an electron and a positron, The reality is that pair production is the decay of an electron-pair, which can also occur as second step of the decay of a neutrino:

neutrino = 2 electron-pairs

electron-pair = 2 electrons

By decay of electron pair the two electrons have free bonding options to opposite sites. (The other bonding options are occupied by BNs). A single bonding option to neutrinos is the origin of “charged particles”. By opposite orientations of the single bonding options the generated electrons are deflected to opposite sides in an electric or magnetic field. Electrons with opposite orientation of structure relative to another electron is currently called positron. By deflection one can differentiate between electric and magnetic fields. Elecric fields are linear structures of BNs whereas magnetic fields are rod like structures of BNs and thus these deflect electrons to spiral movements.

Contrary to current postulate the spin orientations of both generated electrons are identical. This proves that spin has nothing to do with magnetism. Direction of deflection is determined by orientation of structure of particles.

Minimal activation energy has not been measured or published. The postulated 1.022 MeV, which would refer to the mass of 2 electrons is no reality. All measured and reported values of energies of gamma-rays are calibrated by the irrealistic hypothesis of E = mc² and thus have no scientific basis.

6.21 ANNIHILATION is a biased Description of a Bonding Reaction

Annihilation of matter and antimatter is a fourfold biased observation and no physical reality (see Vol. 3). It is hard to believe that four errors have been done to explain one experiment. So it has to be assumed that the biased explanation has been intentionally done to verify obsolete theories.

1. Apparent annihilation by collision of an electron and a positron are in reality collisions of two electrons (or two positrons). A collision of a positron to an electron would not lead to a reaction with change of matter but would end up with same particles: electron and positron. This can easily be verified by doing real positron-electron collisions. Observed annihilation is a falsification of positron-electron collisions.

2. When two electrons collide these are bound to an electron pair, which is extremely difficult to detect. Therefore physicists think that electrons have been annihilated.

3. The new bonding between two electrons replaces two electron- neutrino bondings. So at least two BNs are emitted as RNs. Bonding energies of electron to 3 neutrinos refers to inertial mass of electron. The required minimal activation energy to activate the break of a bonding and thus initiate “annihilation” should be lower than total bonding energy (inertial mass). As physicists think that collision energy has to be equivalent to mass they do collisions with energy of expected required value. Tests with lower collision energies will verify that these lead to same result.

4. Currently it is postulated that the kinetic energy of emitted RNs refer to annihiated mass of 2 times 0,511 MeV/c². It can be proved by measurements that this is not the real value. This is just an erroneously determined value which is due to a wrong calibration on a non-scientific basis.

6.22 UNCERTAINTY of New Physics/ SURe is very small

Definition:

There are four valid definitions of certainty or uncertainty.

Certainty of a value of a measurement or determination of a property, which is the certainty that the determined value is the average of lots of measurements.

Certainty of measurement method, which is the accuracy which can be achieved by analytical method.

Certainty of reality of measured value, which is the certainty that the determined value is the real value of the observed system.

Certainty by determinism which is the certainty that a specific interaction (cause) has exactly one defined specific effect.

The definition of quantum physics is uncertain. But certain is that it is not derived on a scientifically sound basis. It is not conform to any of the valid definitions above.

There is a discrepancy between particle physicists which claim that they have determined properties of particles with extreme high certainty (=confidence) and of quantum physicists which claim that all particles are wave functions where the measured values are only one of a broad range of possible results of a wave function. One statement of quantum physics is that the uncertainty of measurement of the product of momentum and position is at least equal to Planck constant. It makes no sense that a normalization factor for energy determines an uncertainty of measurement. The Planck constant has nothing to do with uncertainty.

New Physics/ SURe:

Definitions 1 to 3 are specific for a measured property, for measurement procedure and for measurement equipment and thus are not relevant for general issues of physics. If there are ideal measurement conditions you get results with no uncertainty. This statement is not conform to current hypotheses, but it is reality. If a particle hits a sensor, which measures impact position (location) and impact strength (momentum) with 100% accuracy, you get both properties without any uncertainty. There is no valid general physical rule which results in uncertainty.

So only definition 4 is a phenomenon of physics which is of general interest and is worthwhile to discuss.

If there is deternimism there is no uncertainty and if there is no determinism there is uncertainty. All interactions run by CBD-mechanism. So one just has to check CBD-mechanism to get information of determinism. Each interaction (CBD-mechanism) starts with well definable properties (= kinetic energy of particles before interaction). In nearly all cases CBD mechanism causes exactly one well defined effect (= kinetic energy of particles after interaction). But there is one situation where there are exactly two possible effects: When a vibration of bonding is induced which exactly goes to the maximal limit of vibration, it can be assumed that there is a 50:50 chance between breaking and not breaking of bonding. Not breaking means that vibration continues. In the following cycles there is again a 50:50 chance that the bonding breaks. Overall there is a small uncertainty of the time when the bonding breaks. And this small uncertainty exist just for a very small part of interactions. The part of uncertain interactions is extreme difficult to be determined. A best guess is 1:5000.

It can be assumed that this uncertainty is not relevant for physical experiments. But New Physics/ SURe will show that this uncertainty is of extreme importance for explaining the evolution to human beings.