Are scientific theories like the winks of a firefly? Even if each wink might take a couple of centuries of Earth-time … …!
The following is an extract from a website titled ‘Aether Vibrations: a wave-based universe’
“Quantum physics that has been around for some hundred odd years now is still mainstream physics’ most accepted physics.
Although quantum science has revealed the presence of the zero point field with all its virtual subatomic particles and photons that jump into existence from apparently nowhere to return to oblivion nanoseconds later, there is still no reasonable explanation as to how and why particles and photons can appear and disappear just like that.
Also the quantum probability wave is still hard to grasp and visualize. Quantum physics may have proven to be a mathematically correct science; for lay people the wave-particle duality of quantum science it is still very hard to understand. How do we visualize particles that are both waves and solid little marbles?
Another difficult thing to grasp is the atom model presented by Niels Bohr where electrons fly in well-defined shells around the nucleus. Since electrons continuously radiate energy they should eventually collapse into the nucleus, but they don’t!
The question is where does this radiating energy actually come from and how is it replenished?
Quantum science has accepted the quantum states of the electrons (distinct shell within the atom) for a fact, but is unable to answer the question why the electrons only occur in discrete shells within the atom and why they don’t eventually crash into the nucleus.
Even three hundred years after the discovery of gravity by Newton, science still has no theoretical explanation for it.
This is exactly why science is moving forward to find new theories that can better explain the anomalies of quantum science. Today mainstream science’s best shot is the string theory. However, a small group of scientists are now taking a radical new view, and their thinking is taking them back to insights from ancient history. … … “
Comment: Promises to be interesting – if I can understand it all. More to follow.
RAJA ARASA RATNAM 