Quantum weirdness explained

Spiritual Man and Quantum Weirdness

In my book, ‘Spiritual Man: An Introduction to Negative Dimensions’, I try to explain one aspect of quantum weirdness, the paradox of conjugate electrons. I did this by supposing that particles, in this case, electrons, could be supposed to be a point object with two extra dimensions apart from the ‘real’ one. The additional dimensions I describe as the ‘unreal’ and the ‘imaginary’. By using these extra dimensions I showed that outcome of each experiment was predictable; that by observing one electron’s spin, the other would always be the opposite.

In my booklet, I show that by introducing these extra dimensions we can unlock the mysteries of the universe, its origin and properties, giving rise to explanations for amongst other things, human behaviour. I also showed that the universe could be accurately depicted as shown by the Dao symbol of Yin and Yang, the Taijitu.

This depiction shows the universe to be a duality as described in the world’s first book of cosmology, Genesis which states that in the beginning God created the heavens and earth. It also corresponds to Plato’s picture of a ‘Phenominal’ and ‘Noumenal’ world, the latter described by Emmanuel Kant as being ‘transcendental’.

The Taijitu clearly shows that some of each part of the universe is manifest in the other and it is this, I suggest, that gives rise to the mysteries of life. One such mystery, I submit, is that of ‘quantum weirdness’. Many famous and successful scientists have been disturbed by the implications of quantum theory, many happy to go along with it as long as experiments continue to show no deviation from its predictions. Nevertheless, many aspects leave scientists unhappy because this practice is a departure from the normal empirical demands that underpin scientific work. None more so than the premise that particles can be in two places at once, so let me begin there.

If we say that a photon (P) can be perceived as being a function of the ‘real’ photon (p), an ‘unreal’ photon (-p) and an ‘imaginary’ photon (ip) where ‘i’ is the square root of minus one then:  P = f (p, -p, ip) 

We can determine how we perceive P by the following ( trinitarian) equation, incidentally, used by Michio Kaku when introducing ‘hyperspace’ in his book of the same name:

P = ±√[p² + (-p)² + (ip) ²]

Solving this we arrive at:   P = ± p

In other words, by introducing these extra dimensions we have, not only the ‘real’ photon we can see and measure, but a second one that we cannot. Therefore, it is my contention that when experimenters see one photon there is always another, not always occupying the same space. We can use the same argument to demonstrate that the ‘two slit’ experiment will also show a diffraction or interference like pattern when experimenters believe they are firing single photons or electrons. In practice, they are not because each particle has an ‘unreal’ counterpart, suggesting that there is no need of a particle/wave duality.

Similarly, we might also explain some of the more obscure observations of the quantum era. For instance could it be that the mortality (M) of  Schrödinger’s cat can likewise be described in terms of ‘m’ (alive), ‘-m’ (dead) and imaginary, ‘im’.

By the same argument, adopted above, we can see that:  M = ± m

In other words, the cat can be either dead or alive.

In making these assertions I should say that in normal life, these extra dimensions cancel each other out and we are largely unaware of them. For this reason, science and scientists are unwilling to look at them for fear of being seen as ridiculous. I would therefore like to see some real scientists follow up these observations to see if they explain some of the enigmas of science today.

My theory explains that our dual universe emerges from the eternal and infinite ‘Pleroma’. This is the perfect nothingness that arises from the ‘zero’ balance of the ‘real’ and ‘imaginary’ terms introduced above (Please see my book for details).

Since my book was published I have considered that further to my brief incursion into quantum effects, there maybe more I can say. In particular, I now believe that the Pleroma now exists in every atom. Science today tells us that the space inside an atom is a vacuum and as far as tests are concerned, perhaps it is. But I now believe that it consists of the same material from which the universe itself came from. I believe this because Nature hates zero as much as it hates a vacuum. The taijitu teaches us that there is a part of our sister universe within our own; probably manifest in the presence of dark matter and dark energy but is there more?

What about subatomic particles? If each quark is in reality accompanied by an ‘unreal’ version how will this manifest itself? Will it explain better the fundamental forces of nature and consign string theory to the scrapheap or will it provide the impetus needed to find the ‘theory of everything’? 

Over to you, cosmologists, astrophysicists, particle physicists and other truth seekers.