Dear Stellan,

Assuming you know relativity well (which I suspect is the problem), could you summarize why you think is it wrong?

Sergio Garcia Chimeno

Well, I can't say more than I already said in the video. You can also read the (almost) corresponding text in "https://daontheory.com"

JES

I'll try to summarise as short as possible; I show that the special relativity theory's use of inertial reference frame dis-agrees with the associated wave of the electron and I follow up with the consequences of this fact.

JES

Dear Stellan,

That is not a valid reason, you are mixing relativity with quantum. In principle they are not compatible (they really are, but hey, that's another story).

It is as if I said that the wave associated with the electron is wrong because special relativity does not allow it

Dear Sergio Garcia Chimeno ,

Your last phrase; this is exactly what I say, but the other way around.

The special relativity theory is wrong because the associated wave of any particle doesn't allow it to be right.

JES

I have watched your video and I am trying to work out exactly where the logic of the analysis breaks down. I have been working on a new approach to fundamental physics called the Spacetime Wave theory:

Preprint The Space Time Wave Theory (August 2021)

Data Prerecording of Conference Presentation on the Unification of Physics

Data Prerecording of Conference Presentation on Dark Matter and Dark Energy

I think if you follow the paper and video links above you will see a couple of points:

1. The idea of the electron momentum as being mass x velocity is not a good model because the electron is not a mass with a probability distribution but instead is a looped wave in spacetime. The momentum is spread out equally throughout the loop. The velocity of the wave in the loop is c and when the electron is moving with velocity v relative to any frame of reference then in parts of the loop the velocity of the wave will be c + v = c and in other parts of the loop the velocity will be c - v = c (using SR rules for the addition of velocities). I think this implies that the length contraction proposed by SR is a real physical effect altering the size of the atom in the direction of motion.

2. I do think that there is a unique frame of reference in the universe which is the CMB rest frame. This unique frame of reference is also the centre with respect to the boundary of the finite universe. It is also the frame of reference in which instantaneous quantum entanglement effects take place. Even though we assert the existence of a unique frame of reference we can still assert the equivalence of moving frames of reference as proposed by Special Relativity.

So I think with this model of the electron we can retain the results of Special Relativity and do not require the existence of a kind of aether being dragged along with the planets.

As I am not totally sure that I have understood your arguments, could you take a look at the Spacetime Wave Theory and see if it resolves your concerns about SR?

A very interesting and thought provoking idea in your YouTube video.

Best regards

Richard

Dear Richard Lewis

I had a look at your spacetime wave theory;

I realize that you have been working hard on it, there are some interesting ideas, but I'm myself working on a Theory of Everything which is more or less finished.

The two theories are incompatible: I believe mine is the correct one because it is much simpler, leading to a total understanding of fundamental physics, I can't say the same about yours.

Sorry,

JES

I look forward to seeing the finished papers and presentations.

Best wishes

Richard

Richard Lewis

I'm working on the presentation at the moment, but I'm a novice. I'll do my be 10 videos for youtube under the channel name "the daon theory", whereas the underlying papers will be presented on the site "daontheory.com". But, at the moment it's all under preparation, it will probably take around a year to finish everything.

JES

Stellan Gustafsson

With respect sir , In one of your texts you have talked about neutral potential having 1/r dependence what distance is this r from and why is the neutral potential having this kind of dependence cause if I think about homogeneity and isotropy of the universe on the large scale then we must have an equipotential space time and I do agree with sir Richard Lewis about electron being a loop in space time wave theory and the similar nature of fermions can also be described using super string theory wherein the oscillation modes are represented primarily via NS and R sectors .

And in case of electron collisions how can we be so sure about the nature of virtual particles being charged it can very well be the case that there is a virtual photon which has transverse polarization with respect to the line connecting centers of 2 electron clouds.This scenario does satisfy ward identity so i think it is a pretty strong possibility.

Please to correct me if I am wrong somewhere.

Dear Divyansh Baranwal

After reading your comment I must say that I think you are wrong everywhere.

But, don't discourage physics is much simpler than what you believe.

I'll put around 10 videos on youtube explaining everything. They will be associated with a channel called "the daon theory", if you are interested in physics, this channel can give you some new ideas, I hope.

sincerely yours JES