A NEW PHYSICS THEORY
and
HUMAN SIGNIFICANCE
James A. Putnam
© 2009
A new physics theory based upon the premise that all
theory should be reducible to empirical properties.
The two empirical properties from which all mechanical
knowledge is gained are distance and time.
The fundamentals of theoretical physics are redefined to
reflect this premise.
The essays, in order, form an explanation of the existence
of human free will.
The physics theory, as should be expected, supports the
explanation.
THEORY CONTENTS (htm) (pdf) COMPLETE THEORY (pdf)
THEORY PAGE GROUPS
1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 101-120 121-140 141-End (htm)
1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 101-120 121-140 141-End (pdf)
PLEASE USE YOUR BACK ARROW TO RETURN HERE
ESSAYS: PHYSICS, LIFE and INTELLIGENCE
INTRODUCTION
.
This theory is almost completely different from current theoretical
physics. For example the theory includes a new definition of electric
charge. This definition has an effect that reaches into all areas of
physics theory. It helps toward achieving unity at the fundamental level.
The theory
offers new definitions for many fundamental properties. These definitions lead
to new interpretations inconsistent with popular theoretical ideas. Rather than
coin new words and names causing unnecessary difficulty in communication, I
borrow common physics terminology.
My approach
to introducing the theory is to move, step by step, away from accepted
fundamental theoretical interpretations. I feel it is best to carry along
familiar concepts as long as is practical. I think this method reduces
the uncomfortable feeling that often accompanies first impressions of radical
changes. In addition, this gives me the opportunity to demonstrate it is
possible to combine ideas from standard accepted concepts with new ideas that
bring sweeping changes.
Even in
radical change, there is compatibility between opposing theoretical models that
adhere closely to empirical evidence. The impermanence of theoretical
interpretations is made clear when useful equations can be formed from
combinations of competing interpretations. I then progressively move away
from the inclusion of previous theory. As a result of following this practice,
my claim of having achieved unity beginning at the fundamental level is not
fully supported until the derivation of the new theory is complete.
I refer to
theoretical physics as being mechanical. I use this term in a broad sense not
limiting it to macroscopic examples of machinery type operations. The
mechanical concept I use is one of inanimate, unthinking actions supposedly
resulting from one or more of the theoretical fundamental forces of nature. It
is the material universe as defined by theoretical physics. It is dead and yet
is full of useful action. It does not include properties of awareness and
intelligent purpose. It is a universe described as being the opposite of
intelligent life. It is what causes us to feel isolated, alone and
insignificant.
It is awkward to write at length and repeat the word electromagnetism
over and over. It lends itself to dull reading. Poets write about light, but
not about electromagnetism. This special status is often taken advantage of in
discussions about electromagnetism. The word light remains attractive even when
repeated. It substitutes very nicely as a pronoun for electromagnetism. This is
the way I use it. Therefore, light is visible light only when it is referred to
as visible light.
For introductory reading about why physics theory should be
challenged, I have included several essays. In some of these essays I
challenge the basic weaknesses of theoretical physics. In others I reach
for a different interpretation of the operation of the universe. They
form a series leading toward a conclusion. Each has a purpose. There is some
redundancy in the contents of the essays. I accept this as a necessity,
because I want each essay to be sufficient to stand alone as much as
possible. However, they remain quite interdependent.
Some of what I include in the essays is taken from the body of the new
theory. I wish to provide some relatively easy reading that will help
introduce a few important new ideas from the main theory. These ideas are
indicated and not developed in the essays. They are used to illuminate
weaknesses of theoretical physics. In the essays, I sometimes speak
uncritically of ideas from current theoretical physics. My discussions of these
ideas do not represent my acceptance of them. My approach to physics theory is
made clear in my own theoretical work. The differences are profound. However,
my intent is generally the same as the reader. We are each in pursuit of
scientific learning.
Scientific learning in its pure form consists of the observation of the
operation of life, intelligence and the rest of the universe. However, in
practice it moves beyond the natural protection of pure knowledge about nature
and includes the impermanent ideas of philosophical interpretation. In
theoretical physics the nature of the universe is presented as being
mechanical. It knows nothing about life and intelligence. A mechanical
interpretation is unjustified speculation. It doesn’t fit with reality. Reality
is about you and I and our significance in the
universe.
Mechanical
theory offers us no understanding by which the fundamental properties of
particles of matter coalesce into forms of great complexity with feelings of
love and thoughts of fancy. Mechanical theory is devoid of life and
intelligence. It is devoid of understanding about the properties that must be
there, of particulate matter that include the fundamental properties of life
and intelligence. Mechanical analysis is the lowest level of scientific
learning. It is limited to observing patterns in the motion of matter. The real
universe rises far above this kind of activity. What is the source of our
intelligence? What are the real fundamental properties of this universe that
gave birth to us?
“Scientific learning is
composed of two opposites which nonetheless meet each other. The first is the
natural ignorance that is man’s lot at birth. The second is represented by
those great minds that have investigated all knowledge accumulated by man only
to discover at the end that in fact they know nothing. Thus they return to the
same fundamental ignorance they had thought to leave. Yet this ignorance they
have now discovered is an intellectual achievement. It is those who have
departed from their original condition of ignorance but have been incapable of
completing the full cycle of learning who offer us a smattering of scientific
knowledge and pass sweeping judgments. These are the mischief makers, the false
prophets.” ___Pascal
Unity is the foundation of
the design of the universe. To this end I pursue unity as something having a
constant nature. I do not follow the practice of achieving unity in stages. It
is not gained or lost by changing levels of energy or any other property of the
universe. Unity must be clearly seen even in the theoretical isolation of each
of these properties. Real unity includes both the universe and us in one
nature. It joins together physics, life and intelligence. Either this is true
or the cause of life and intelligence must be introduced arbitrarily after the
origin of the universe. The lack of unity of these three wonders is positive
evidence that our current theories of physics are missing the true
understanding that is possible. It is essential for a unified mechanical theory
to provide at least a basis for making the theoretical transition from
mechanics to life and intelligence.
The
existence of unity in the universe should be sought in the properties of
subatomic particles. Since everything material is built up from combinations of
these particles, it is scientific to consider that the properties of all
complex material bodies are the result of the complex combinations of the
properties of subatomic particles. Life and intelligence appear to be attached
to complex combinations of subatomic particles. They should, therefore, be
traceable to subatomic properties. It is no stranger for everything to
originate there than it is for intelligence to appear piecemeal as needed.
Our scientific
analysis of the universe appears to be confined by a wall of impenetrable
ignorance. We are not intelligent enough to comprehend the nature of primary
causes. We have not been intelligent enough to comprehend the relationship
between life and matter. We have been trying to define an intelligent universe
through the use of dumb particles. Such unknowing particles can only teach us
about a mechanical universe. I submit that the wall of ignorance is of our own
making.
We need to learn the means
for demonstrating that the, as yet unknown, true single primary cause of motion
is also the cause of life and intelligence. A division in theory of any parts
of the universe is human in origin. While keeping this first law of universal
understanding in mind, the theory I present here is only another mechanical
interpretation of the universe. That is the nature of theoretical physics. I
do, however, hold firm that a sure and logical connection must be maintained
through all mechanical theory.
In any explanation of the
fundamentals of physics, unity must be obvious or a unified theory is not
possible. This unity will be recognizable partly because there will be only one
primary cause of action. As more theory is developed it should demonstrate the
continuity of unity as established by the fundamentals. A complete physics
theory should at least indicate how it might begin to be transformed into a far
fuller explanation as to the operation of the universe. I attempt to begin this
process. This website offers a new adventure in analyzing the
operation of the universe.
James A. Putnam