The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle Versus "Characterization"

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle asserts that the position of fast moving particles cannot be measured accurately. According to quantum mechanics, the more precisely the determination of the position of a particle, the less precisely its momentum is, or vice versa. As a result, the quantum mechanics model of the hydrogen atom offers only an approximation of the position of the electron. Is this principle always valid, or is the Heisenberg Principle flawed?

Communications between atoms:

5, 2006. 1:51 pm (Reuters).Old News! To learn how the atom transmits and sends information, see "Secrets of the Atom" (1999), page 126 and Chap.XI.

You have reached the website of New and Real Science

and the presentation of new and unique theories with proofs based on real world measurements

New data: QED prediction incorrect a flaw in the theory is discovered by measurement

2012 CiSE article presents a new electromagnetic model of the atom that is compatible with QED and measurements

Quantum physics has no answer as to the secret of gravity. I solved this problem 20 years ago using an electromagnetic model, similar to Planck's model of the atom (introduced in the year 1900), but I was not allowed to present it. The famous "Bohr Atom" extended that concept, which formed the basis of the original quantum physics, but it is an abstract model. Modern quantum mechanics is a mechanical concept that is still based on the Bohr model, along with its problems. So I published my first book, The Secret of Gravity in 1997, and it was based on a modern electronic model of the hydrogen atom. My investigations show that the force of gravity is primarily an electric differential force that is very much lower than the internal electromagnetic forces of the atom. But that was just the beginning of my investigations. While my methods conform to reality (measurements) scientists are now finding various problems with the theorires of quantum mechanics that often contradict one another or are vague and inaccurate. Other physicists, however, are beginning to realize that the mechanical/energy models of quantum mechanics are better solved using classical electromagnetic theory. Read on.

Where else will you find a derivation of Einstein's theory E = mc^2 ? I derived it in just one short page ofmy book, "Secrets of the Atom" (page 64). How? Iused a new electromagnetic model of the atom to derive its energy. In comparison, check out the complex and confusing long drawn out mathematical derivations of quantum mechanics by doing your own Google search.

One of the most challenign problems in physics and science is the abstract Bohr radius problem. Strangely enough, this problem resulted in the invention of quantum mechanics in which energy concepts predominate. Unfortunately, quantum mechanics only produces an approximate "orbital" for the atom that is based on probabilities that does not conform to the ever increasing Bohr radii. I have discovered a solution to the Bohr problem, with an exact orbit, which is the solution to another problem never before solved.

It is true that space is not "empty" and that it has electromagnetic properties. In fact, it has viscosity, which is extremely low as I have shown in my fourth book about Planck's theory. It was shown long ago that the speed of light in a vacuum is dependent on these electromagnetic properties, which led to the aether theory. Quantum Mechanics, however, is focused on particle theory, and that is the current difficulty in that it neglects electromagnetic fields that exist everywhere. Of what is a particle made? Today's physicists are concentrating on the Higgs Boson, which they believe constitutes the hidden matter of the universe, rather than the electromagnetic properties of matter. If so, then how is it related to the speed of light and the electromagnetic constants upon which it depends? The Higgs Boson reference asserts that it "casts a shadow", which means that it impedes radiation. If it impedes radiation, then how is it that all radiation passes through a vacuum without loss? It seems that particle theory has significant difficulties and unanswared questions. My approach concentrates on the electromagnetic properties of the universe, and no such flaws have yet been found.

In my fifth book about Planck's theory, I was able to derive a dynamic portrayal of a quantum of energy that results from the change in state of an atom using a pure electromagnetic model of the atom, similar to that of Planck. I don't think you will find anything like this anywhere else that is based on substantial evidencel. My solutions are all based on real solutions and correlation to accepted data.

Quantum Mechanics (a "particle" theory) was based on the Bohr hydrogen atom, an abstract electromagnetic model as Bohr himself admitted. In his model, the atom can reach any size, which we know is not possible. In spite of this anomaly, the Bohr atom does conform to measurements of coherent radiation from the hydrogen atom to a high degree and physicists had accepted the Bohr model. Although even Bohr admitted that his model is abstract, some physicists actually claimed to have detected such atoms! The present Quantum Mechanics atom model was based on an energy shell in order to avoid this orbit problem, so it cannot predict orbits (only inexact probable orbitals). In the new field theory presented here, not only is the size problem resolved, the precise electron orbit is also determined. This is a fundamental problem that had never before been solved. Recent evidence shows that light also does not consist of particles.

Did you know that the transverse properties of electromagnetic waves and light have never been completely defined? This fundamental problem has remained for two centuries. Were you aware that transverse electromagnetic waves travel faster than the speed of light? The electromagnetic wave of a dipole antenna moves across the antenna, while the radial wave is orthogonal to it. This discrepancy in theory has long been neglected. By using a known model of the radiation from an antenna and rewriting the equation constants in proper form, the plots of the radiating waves show transverse properties never before recognized. This new characterization of transverse wave properties has great potential for advancing the basic knowledge of physics. Note that all present physics model of radiation indicate pure spherical waves. In fact Einstein's theory of relativity is based on this flawed assumption!

How is Matter Formed in the Universe? How do an electron and a proton combine to form a hydrogen atom? For many years, it was believed that a barrier surrounds the proton in an atom which prevents the electron from crashing into it, which presents a dilemma. The amazing answer to this problem can be found by checking out that page. The electron does not move as has been assumed!

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle asserts that the position and velocity of high energy particles cannot be measured accurately in a single measurement. Although essentially true, it is indeed possible to make such measurements accurately. We know that every single measurement of each and every type and in every field of endeavor has such inaccuracies, but there are known ways to make them accurate as we apply the methods of classical electronic analysis. Learn the method that yields the "certainty" at the above link.

Dr. Vlasak spent two full years in studying Planck's quantum theory and ended up writing a book on Planck's Columbia Lectures . This is a great book for any scientist, and is well worth reading about Planck's scientific methods. See why and how Planck used the electronic oscillator as his model for the atom. This is the same approach the Dr. Vlasak used in his analysis of the gravitational force. For the first time, you will see a graphic illustration of a photon in real time as derived from Planck's rarely referenced "energy state equation" which I doubt that you will find in any other internet search. The language translation of Planck's lectures are not very clear, and Dr. Vlasak interprets the constants and variables that are so confusing for each lecture. Also check out the Planck's Units page to see why the gravitational constant is not needed (based on Planck's later writings about universal units). Planck's second lecture could be the basis of a great college chemistry course, since he derived many of the laws of physics from mainly two equations! Where have you seen that before?

Viewers may also want to begin by seeing an example of the surprising great force between electrons and protons in working out an example of the so-called weak force of atomic physics, which serves to illustrate the even weaker force of gravity. Those who try to solve the puzzle of the shape of the dynamic wave of a moving dipole will discover a new insight as to the shapes of dynamic field waves, from which it is possible to visualize these characteristics. I was quite surprised to learn how many physicists are not fully versed in being able to determine the isoclines of the electric dipole static field. Unless one knows this in detail, it is not possible to determine what happens to the field shape as the dipole moves. I challenge anyone who believes otherwise to solve this moving dipole puzzle. No one has yet offered a solution to this problem! Be the first to offer a reasonable solution and win a free book and see the precise solution that will give you a greater insight as to how transverse waves move through space. These waves are based on the well known antenna radiation equation. Too bad no one seems to have plotted the waves before or derived the eigenvector equation!

In addition to the significant accomplishments listed above, you will be able to find the method by which you can calculate the logarithm of a number without a calculator or a table of logarithms! This can be very valuable for electronic engineers, radio amateurs, etc. or anyone else working with logarithms. All you have to do is remember one number, and you can calculate any logarithm, or decibel value, to within a small degree of erro.

Proof that light is a wave?

Scientists at MIT have constructed an optiical phased array that is similar to the phased array of radar. This appears to be a contradiction to the claims of quantum mechanics that a light wave is particulate.