nstansbury

Absolutely! If you can't explain & predict: Why the speed of light has the value it has Why the universal gravitational constant has the value it has Why particles have the properties they do Or indeed why the Universe has any of the other myriad of (apparently) finely tuned values it has If you can't, you don't have a "Theory of Everything". You have a "Theory of Something", that itself will need explaining by a yet another (no doubt) grander theory. Unless of course you are happy to suggest - here is the "Theory of Everything" that fully explains and links together all known physical phenomena, but by the way God started it all. The consequences of a true "Theory of Everything" are much, much more than just the unification of the fundamental forces.

Hmm...post moved into "Pseudo-science" - damned by faint praise. Yes absolutely, and one reason I've tried to be very careful in what I suggest. However, the "why" is nonetheless a question that any "Theory of Everything" must be prepared to answer, unless you accept a Deity - which I don't. Light can be slowed in any transparent medium (which is all EIT is) - but BEC and EIT are fundamentally different. BEC is relevant to my proposal because at absolute zero atoms stop behaving as discrete elements and behave more like waves, hence my suggestion that this is consequence of a more fundamental level of matter. That wasn't intentional - I'm certainly not suggesting that these waves need any "medium" through which to propagate. Space-Time is mathematical construct that falls out of Special Relativity, I'm not suggesting SPAT Waves are anything more than that, though at hither to un-described "energy" levels.

As this is my first post here, hi to all - thanks for having me. I have for a while, no doubt like many, been absolutely fascinated by the above question, not just for the Physics involved, but the implied philosophy as well. So, a while ago I started "seriously" pondering the consequences that a "Theory of this Everything" must be able to resolve, and was especially bothered by how "contrived" String/M Theory seemed to me to be. An idea took root that I've sat on pretty much until last month, when I wrote a small paper on my ideas and passed it to a Physicist colleague who'd trained in Quantum Mechanics. "Wow!" was his first response along with lots of suggestions, ideas and terminology clean ups. At his suggestion, I am posting this revised paper here, as frankly, I will never (understandably) get it peer reviewed. This proposal is based on my (fairly advanced) knowledge of Physics, and doesn't contradict any Laws that I know of. More interestingly, it appears to sit very comfortably with Special Relativity & Quantum Mechanics, and supports observations made in both fields. The really fascinating part, and the bit that keeps me awake at night is this "appears" to explain: 1. Why, perhaps we don't actually need a "Theory of Everything" 2. Why Gravity and Time exist 3. What actually causes Gravity 4. Why the Universe is "apparently" expanding exponentially 5. Why the distribution of matter in the early Universe was so even 6. What Dark Matter/Dark Energy might actually be 7. Why Hydrogen & Helium are not only the most abundant elements but also the lightest 8. Why every particle has the properties it does - including anti-particles. 9. What causes Quantum Wave-Particle duality 10. What causes Quantum Entanglement ..and a few others. So, forgive me - I am an Engineer first and a Physicist second. I would love to be able to work the mathematical proofs of my idea, alas I have neither the talent nor ability to do so, and I fully appreciate the arrogance of suggesting I might have some of the answers to a question like this. Your responses, thoughts and ideas are very much welcomed - though please don't just post a long unintelligible Quantum equation with "ha see - you're an idiot!", because frankly without an explanation with it, I just won't understand it! So here goes... Thanks for any insights Neil SPAT Waves.pdf