Your question delves into a complex area of theoretical physics, intertwining concepts of Skyrmion topology, quantum entanglement, electromagnetism, gravitation, and quantum gravity. Let's break down the key points:

1. Skyrmion Topology and Quantum Superposition: Skyrmions, in the context of physics, refer to a type of topological soliton. A soliton is a self-reinforcing solitary wave that maintains its shape while moving at a constant speed. In two-dimensional Skyrmion topology, as you mentioned, there's a possibility of quantizing these structures to form quantum superpositions. This could theoretically involve entities like baryons (which are composite particles made of three quarks, such as protons and neutrons) and various vibrational resonance states.

2. Quantum Entanglement and Topology: Quantum entanglement is a phenomenon where particles become interconnected in such a way that the state of one particle instantly influences the state of the other, regardless of distance. The idea that entanglement is linked to topology would be highly speculative suggesting a deep-rooted connection between quantum mechanics and the mathematical study of shapes and spaces.

3. Photon-Graviton Unification Hypothesis: George Yuri Rainich's 1925 paper, along with Einstein's 1919 paper, hinted at a relationship between gravitation and electromagnetism. Your hypothesis takes this further, proposing that not just two photons, but potentially all photons (particles of light) in space-time could be united with gravitons (hypothetical particles associated with the force of gravity). This idea suggests a unification of forces and particles on a cosmic scale.

4. Gravitational-Electromagnetic Interaction and Elementary Particles: The concept that gravitational-electromagnetic interaction could account for the masses and spins of various bosons, including those related to the nuclear forces and the Higgs boson, is a significant extension of traditional models. Typically, these properties are explained through the Standard Model of particle physics, but your approach suggest a deeper and more fundamental connection. This will need to be unpacked further...

Dear Harri Shore can you describe QM in layman?

The whole standard modeling of atom is just a theory...Nothing inside of atom (proton/neutron .electron) never been observed to this date.

Then what is QM?

Article The Mythos of Gravity Or (Newtonian and Einsteinian Gravity is a Myth)

Article Intelligent Atom

Please read new thing for more information

Regards

Hi Javad, let’s give it a try.

Quantum mechanics (QM) is a fundamental theory in physics that describes the behavior of the smallest particles in the universe, like atoms and subatomic particles (electrons, protons, and neutrons). It differs significantly from classical mechanics, which describes the motion of larger objects we see in everyday life.

it remains the most successful scientific theory human beings have, it never failed an experiment and has tremendous predictability.

In layman's terms, here are some key ideas of quantum mechanics:

1. Wave-Particle Duality: Particles at the quantum level, like electrons, can behave both like particles and waves. This means they can have particle-like properties (like being in a specific place) and wave-like properties (like being spread out over space).

2. Quantum Superposition: Quantum particles can exist in multiple states at once. For example, an electron in an atom can be in multiple places or energy levels simultaneously, until it's observed or measured.

3. Uncertainty Principle: This principle, proposed by Werner Heisenberg, states that you can't precisely know both the position and the momentum of a quantum particle at the same time. The more accurately you know one, the less accurately you can know the other.

4. Quantum Entanglement: Particles can become entangled, meaning the state of one particle is directly related to the state of another, no matter how far apart they are. This leads to instantaneous connections between particles across vast distances.

Regarding your statement about the atomic model and the observation of subatomic particles, it's important to clarify a few points:

- While it's true that we can't observe subatomic particles like electrons with our eyes in the way we see larger objects, scientists have developed various ways to detect and measure their properties indirectly through experiments. For instance, cloud chambers and bubble chambers have historically been used to visualize the paths of these particles.

- The behavior of subatomic particles has been observed and measured through numerous experiments. The predictions made by quantum mechanics have been confirmed with a very high degree of accuracy.

- It's correct that the models we use, like the Bohr model of the atom or the more complex quantum mechanical models, are theoretical. However, they are based on extensive experimental evidence and mathematical frameworks. They are continually tested and refined based on new experimental data.

In science, a theory is not just a guess; it's a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. The atomic theory, and quantum mechanics as a whole, fall under this category.

hope this helps and let me know if you have further question.

he inquisitive, that’s what science is all about.

Regards,

Harri

Dear Harri From 1-4 your statement, you answered your own in continuation paragraph statement.

Mr. Bohr standard model of atom is just a theory to this date. He never seen electron, and up to date electron never been observed, yet.

As matter of fact also, proton/neutron never been observed yet either.

All the statements you mention are result of probability which probability outcome is not science.

To my two decades research , there is no single evidence exist to describe electron, proton, neutron, quarks...etc. they are theory over standard theory.

Science believe our mechanical physics can collapse into smaller entity, while I proved atoms are the smallest complete entity in our universe that it is impossible to describe atom mathematically. Because atom use energy (temperature) and pressure simultaneously without friction, while our classical physics, or modern physics act mechanically.

please read these two article above and make judgment, because our knowing an atom is the same as 2000 years ago.

regards

“Extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence “

…..Thank you for sharing your perspective. However, there are several fundamental misunderstandings in your argument that need to be addressed.

1. Observation of Subatomic Particles

Contrary to your statement, electrons, protons, and neutrons have indeed been observed and measured with high precision. For instance, electron properties like charge and mass have been measured through experiments like the oil-drop experiment by Millikan, and more sophisticated methods have been used in modern physics. Protons and neutrons have been observed through scattering experiments and particle accelerators.

there’s quite a large one called CERN, you may have heard of it…. just by way of one place that currently peers into subatomic structures as matter of course.

2. Nature of Scientific Theorie

The term ‘theory’ in science does not imply uncertainty or speculation as it might in everyday language. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. Niels Bohr’s model was an early step in atomic theory, and while it has been superseded by more accurate quantum models, it was an essential step in our understanding of atomic structure.

3. Probability in Science

The role of probability in quantum mechanics (and other areas of science) does not undermine its scientific validity. On the contrary, probabilistic models have been extremely successful in providing accurate predictions and understanding phenomena at the quantum level.

4. The Nature of Atoms and Subatomic Particles

Current scientific understanding, supported by extensive experimental evidence, shows that atoms are not the smallest entities. They consist of smaller particles like protons, neutrons, and electrons. Furthermore, protons and neutrons are made up of quarks. This is not just theoretical but has been confirmed through high-energy physics experiments (as per previous).

5. Mathematical Descriptions of Atoms

Atoms and their components can indeed be described mathematically with great precision. Quantum mechanics and quantum field theory provide a highly accurate mathematical framework for understanding the behavior of particles at these scales.

6. Advancements in Atomic Understanding

Our understanding of atoms has advanced significantly over the past 2000 years. From the early philosophical concept of indivisible particles to the complex quantum mechanical models of today, our knowledge of atomic structure has become more detailed and precise By orders of magnitudes .

and let’s not forget…

I'd like to address the concept of the splitting of the atom, which is a significant historical and scientific milestone contradicting the notion that atoms are the smallest indivisible entities.

1. Discovery of Nuclear Fission: The splitting of the atom, known as nuclear fission, was first achieved and understood in the late 1930s. Scientists like Otto Hahn, Lise Meitner, and Fritz Strassmann demonstrated that when a uranium atom is bombarded with neutrons, it can split into smaller, lighter elements, releasing a considerable amount of energy in the process. This discovery was monumental in understanding the structure of the atom and the forces at play in the nucleus.

2. Implications for Atomic Theory: The ability to split the atom provided conclusive evidence that atoms are not indivisible. It also revealed the immense energy stored in atomic nuclei, leading to both the development of nuclear power and nuclear weapons.

3. Progress in Physics: The splitting of the atom marked a significant advancement in physics, leading to the development of quantum mechanics and particle physics. These fields have deepened our understanding of the fundamental constituents of matter and the forces governing their interactions.

The splitting of the atom is not just a theoretical concept but a practical demonstration that has had profound implications for science and society. It underscores the importance of empirical evidence and experimental validation in the scientific process.

I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these scientific concepts. It's crucial to base our understanding on empirical evidence and the scientific method, which has been a powerful tool in uncovering the mysteries of the natural world.

Best regards,

Harri