@anikyte.bsky.social

It's called quantum mechanics, but when you really get down to it, it's wave mechanics. Always has been. The signs were always there. We just didn't want to see them.

Another insight: Particles are an illusion. The human brain is designed for discrete objects, so we see them every where. But really, they're more like standing waves in a pool. A weird relativistic quantum pool. And light like waves are the ripples eminating from a dropped rock. Or in our case, two standing waves colliding. Of course, they aren't really standing still, and there isn't really a medium, and the pool only exists where the ripples go, but it's kind of like that. And when you view it that way, it makes a lot of sense.

Vacuum birefringence is the aether of the modern day: an unproven theory based on (I believe) incorrect assumptions. And it breaks relativity. As for the lamb shift, it could be that self interaction of elections causes weird behavior, but I'd have to run the numbers.

My framework actually does away with zero point energy all together (of the vacuum. particles can still have it because of things like quantum harmonic oscillators). The only direct proof of ZPE is the Casimir effect and hawking radiation. The Casimir effect, assuming it is caused by quantum effects, could be caused by difference in interaction hotspots between the plates. Hawking radiation has yet to be demonstrably proven to exist. However, even if it were, I would conjecture it's possible to forcibly create particles by "severing" their wave function on something like an event horizon.

What's interesting, is even though the bulk of interactions happen in matter hotspots, the universe will expand more as it cools, as the diffuse gas of intergalactic space gets colder, it interacts more. As long as it interacts faster than density decreases, which it will since it's self limiting, the universe will continue to expand. And in the early stages of the universe, this expansion should accelerate. Depending on how cold this has gets will limit the expansion. If it can get infinitely close to zero, then it will continue accelerating forever.

My framework predicts that the energy lost from redshifting is due to the entire light wave interacting with other particles in it's travel, which explains the dichotomy. Particles, being more condensed, have much smaller waves, and interact much less. While a light wave can span light years, a particle wave is limited to nano meters. it's obvious why light like particles would do the most redshifting. But, because of the energy mass relation, even though light waves are much bigger, matter ends up doing most of the interactions responsible for expansion.

The common explanation, that redshift is caused by space stretching the waveform of the photon seems a bit odd, doesn't it? Photons don't change their frequency when they encounter gravitational curvature, their path just bends. (Well, they do, but it's from time dilation). And what about sublight particles? You would imagine this wave stretching would have an effect on them, but it doesn't. And of course, where is the energy going? A photons energy is it's frequency. In a gravity well, it's used to escape it. But what about the universe?

So you can see how simple redshift due to cosmic expansion isn't so simple.

thank u claude very cool

looks to me like a slot machine

It is interesting, gravity is extremely weak compared to the other big three, but compared to expansion of the universe, it's a heavyweight. The only reason expansion dominates is because there's so much empty space. I haven't run the exact numbers, but my napkin estimates show about a 4 order of magnitude difference in strength. If they were equal, the first stars would have never formed from diffuse gas. Perhaps there's more to it, perhaps a GUT could show how gravity tapers off while expansive force doesn't. I'm deeming it "out of scope" of my theory unless a massive revelation hits me. I'm happy enough with a quantum framework that's fully compatible and integrated with relativity, but complete unification? They might be beyond me.

And you see how it could also include gravity. If space expands less around mass clusters, and the expansion of space pushes things away, it's kind of like reverse GR. The numbers don't really work out, which is why that avenue would need more work, but it's an interesting parallel.

Firstly, I believe resolving the vacuum catastrophe is strong experimental evidence. Also, space should be expanding differently depending on local matter density and temperature, which may be observable in redshift behind large cosmic structures, such as voids and walls. Perhaps it's related to the great attractor?

It's funny, the initial thought was just, what if photons push on space gravitationally, and that's why they're redshifting, cause they're doing work. Now it's, every particle interaction creates space, which causes entropy, which creates more space, and so on.

You're correct. I mixed up amplitude and frequency. But it would be more like FM synthesis. This perhaps explains why the universe is so empty, as the conditions for forming new particles is quite rare. Finally, particles waveforms do expand at lower temperatures, for example, in Bose Einstein condensates. Further, higher energy, higher frequency, shorter wavelength. I'm still working on the formal description. Originally, I merely attempted to address dark energy, but everything else collapsed into place.