Quantum Mechanics is a fools paradise?
As with webPage General Relativity is a turkey?, the comments herein are VASTLY incomplete! They would be far better (still vastly incomplete) if I could find extensive old notes.
Rather than repeating it here, please refer to the introduction of my webPage "General Relativity is a turkey?"
Quantum Mechanics is a fools paradise?
- Lack of a ?[solid, coherent? physical model
- Murky causation? - much less than satisfactory
- Synchrotron radiation from electrons in [Bohr, QM] model of atom
-
- Structure of [atom, chemicals] - In spite of recent advances and longtime claims, QM is an extremely IN-effective theory for [explaining, calculating] chemical structures. I get the sense that recent improvements are based more on convenient assumptions and [accomodating statistics, SWUFA] than on the theories themselves.
- Alternative CLASSICAL physics concepts - [much simpler, far fewer parameters, more intuitive, structual physics, physically solid, explain more, less inconsistent, fewer arbitrary assumptions]
- Bill Lucas - Universal Force - Based on previous work by [Thomas Barnes, ?Berger?]
- Randell Mills fractional quantm levels of e
- SAFIRE project - an electrical model of the Sun. Experimental proof of transmutation under a vacuum and at low temperature (5-80k Celsius). Well, I'm sure that band-aids will cover butts, but this pretty well kills QM in its modern form for me. My guess is that they just won't be able to come up with excuses to convince me, butt maybe they will...
-
The speed of light in a vacuum (c) has gone down ~1.5% over ~300 years?
In ?1977>, the physics community simply SET the value of c, and ongoing experimental determinations are simply not reported and discussed! We are currently in a period of an "flat" trend of c with time that is perhaps predictable from the trend over past 3 centuries, but this may not be the case over the oncoming [decades, century]?
As this issue is already covered in my webPage "General Relativity is a turkey?", please refer to it.
If correct, this data KILLS General relativity (GR) AND Quantum Mechanics (QM)!!! I have every confidence that "convoluted band-aid [mathematics, concepts]" can easily patch over the problem, as has consistently been done in the past, but that probably won't rescue the theories for me.
References :
While involving only rare [scientists, amateurs, writers], there is a very substantial base and serious of criticism of GR & QM. I certainly don't expect all of these to be solid, and perhaps none are. But they do THINK about the anomalies in the [data, experiments, concepts, theories,
- Bill Lucas "Universal Force" - From ?Thomas Agassiz? - relativity is entirely derivable from classical natural philosophy (pre-1900 physics). Note that I am not quite there yett in my re-derivations (on hold for a few of years as of ~2018?).
- Randel Mills (Brett Hoverstott "")
- Randel Mills "??"
- Edwin Kaal - a far better phenomenical model of the [atom, molecules]?
-
- German websites?
-
-