AWT and principle of uncertainty principle

This post was motivated by recent confrontation between Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. and Cambridge cops, who were condemned last night by President Barack Obama for acting "stupidly" in arresting the African-American scholar. I personally found the stance of all people involved as somewhat unlucky, because it illustrates emergent character of many serious situations, resultig from high number of small, if not predictable mistakes. By AWT every object of reality is composed of nested density fluctuations and it has a fuzzy character, so we can always observe and interpret things from at least two perspectives: the inner (insintric) and outer (exsintric) one. This is why we are saying, there are two sides to every story and the truth often lies somewhere in between...

For example, we can observe gravitational lensing from outside from place, where space-time is flat, so you will see the path of light curved and Lorentz symmetry violated (quantum mechanics perspective). Or when we stay inside of gravity lens or in Lagrange point, we will become bended by gravity field together with space-time, so you will see the path of light straight and the space-time curved, instead - this is general relativity perspective. It's evident, these perspectives are mutually exclusive, so we can never reconcile relativity with quantum mechanics by using of formal approach, which combines postulates of both theories (like string theory or quantum gravity) and to save money of tax payers for its development.



The main source of uncertainty here is, with compare to above picture every gravity field / lens has a fuzzy boundary, so we can never see the gravitational lensing from single perspective only and your observation remains fuzzy as well. Only pin-point observer can see all things from exsintric (outer) perspective only. Because every real observer is of finite size and it suffers by quantum delocalization, he can observe the same effect or artifact both from inside, both from outside perspective. The mixture of both these perspectives results into insintric uncertainty of every reality observation.



We can use surface wave analogy here, which is more convenient with Aether concept of particle environment. At the water surface every information always comes in two parallel ways: in form of longitudinal (underwater) waves and surface waves, which are of transversal nature. The pure transversal waves are called capillary waves, these pure longitudinal waves are called gravity waves (do not confuse it with gravitational waves, which are of longitudinal character too, but they're spreading through vacuum).

In real case, the surface waves are always of mixed character, which we are calling Rayleigh or Love waves, depending on whether longitudinal or transversal character of the wave prevails. Despite the weakness of underwater waves, this results in quantum uncertainty of every information, which comes to observer at water surface in two independent ways: via surface and underwater waves.

Despite of their insintric character, we cannot exclude surface wave from observation so easily, because energy is spreading in slowest speed at the inflexion point of (water) density gradient, which is forming water surface, thus defining the largest space-time possible ("a cosmic space") for observer, so he can exists in it. As we can see, uncertainty principle is direct manifestation of Lorentz symmetry violation, hidden dimensions and multiple time arrows. Here's no need to spend another money in expensive, but silly (re)search of these artifacts, until we are convenient with existence of quantum uncertainty and AWT approach. AWT can save a lotta money for tax payers here again - but from the very same reason scientists involved aren't very happy about it, because from their insintric perspective such search still has a good meaning.

We can met with uncertainty principle in many places of everyday reality at the moment, when insintric perspective remains mixed with insintric one, as expressed in many proverbs and fables (Mark Twain: "There are two sides of every coin"). When someone describes an accident in real life, he always describes it from perspective of person, which was involved in it, or from perspective of independent remote observer. At the moment, when some persons was both reason, both victim of this accident, their stance becomes fuzzy undeniably.

For example, Germans or Soviet Union nations were both reasons, both victims of WWW II, so their stance to this even remains fuzzy and controversial. As the result, both Russia, both Germany are claiming, the weakest country involved in conflict, i.e. Poland was the true reason of WWW II, which is simply ridiculous - but it illustrates the way, in which uncertainty principle manifest itself in human society.

Here exists an insintric duality between most general and most exact views of reality. Currently it seems, AWT is most general one - but definitely not the best, when it goes to exact numbers. From the same reason, we don't use quantum mechanics for computation of boiling point of water under reduced pressure, but we are using a more specific extrapolations based on thermodynamics. Not because the quantum mechanics couldn't handle it in ab-initio calculations, but because such calculation would be more tedious and sensitive to introductory parameters. Due the uncertainty principle we cannot expect true "theory of everything" and every theory has it's own applicability scope, corresponding to observable part of Universe.

Principle of uncertainty manifests by duality between quantitative and qualitative understanding of reality. Exact theories (like string theory or LQG theory) are poorly conditioned, so they lead into fuzzy landscapes of althernative solutions, whereas these qualitative ones (like AWT) doesn't suffer internal inconsistencies, but they can predict phenomena with limited exactness at the price.

Aesop: "Every truth has two sides; it is as well to look at both, before we commit ourselves to either".

AWT and particle model of quantum mechanics

By AWT Schrödinger equation describes elastic string (red line on the animation bellow), the mass density of which (blue line on the animation bellow) is proportional to energy density of string in each space/time interval (i.e. the Hamiltonian distribution) by mass-energy equivalence principle. Therefore many quantum phenomena can be illustrated by nonlinear elastic liquids, the supercritical fluid at multiple Lifshitz point or soap foam in particular. The inertia and elastic properties of water are subtle, but we can still observe macroscopic analogy of double slit experiment and quantum mechanic behavior at the case of tiny droplets, bouncing on undulating water surface. The direct connection of Newtonian mechanics to quantum mechanics (i.e. a correspondence principle) can be illustrated with computer simulations of elastic fluid composed of repulsing particles. Computing power of contemporary GPU's and parallel processors is sufficient to run such simulations of 300.000+ particles in real time.

On the simulation example bellow the density scale of resulting density fluctuations is exaggerated - so we can see clearly, how underwater density wave follows surface waves like so called probability function solution of time dependent Schrödinger equation. The underwater sound wave corresponds the gravitational wave in vacuum analogy, whereas the transversal surface wave corresponds the photon wave. We can see, the underwater wave spreads in much higher speed, then the surface waves, because of higher number of dimensions involved and they're behaving like dispersive tachyons of negative rest mass. The longitudinal character of underwater wave results in fast dispersion, though, so that such waves can mediate only short distance range interactions (Casimir force and weak nuclear force in particular).

The density fluctuations of underwater waves correspond wave packets at the water surface, where energy spreads in lower speed, so that the probability of surface waves occurrence increases here. In this way, underwater density fluctuations can model the probability function of quantum wave and as such they can serve as a model of photons. We can see, density of water layers increases with thickness, i.e. with potential energy content and it depends on kinetic energy of surface wave (i.e. the frequency) as well, i.e. by the same way, like Hamiltonian term of Schrödinger equation.

At the real situation, the density fluctuations of water are subtle, so that only surface wave can be observed here. Under relativistic situation, when we are forced to observe the water by its own waves exclusively (which is situation, analogous to observation in vacuum), then the surface waves would be unobservable for us via surface waves due the Bose-Einstein distribution of waves, which are penetrating mutually like ghosts (compare the picture above). So that everything, what we would be allowed to see are just the nondispersive wave packets, i.e. solitons, refracting and bouncing from inner walls of underwater density fluctuations like tiny gravitational lenses (wave particle duality). The actual state of surface waves would remain unachievable for us, from this the indeterministic and probabilistic character of quantum mechanics follows.

These connections are all quite simple and trivial - so that only deep misunderstanding of Michelson-Morley experiment and strong disbelief in Aether model has prohibited the mainstream science in recognition of emergent character of quantum mechanics before many years already.

AWT and mechanical models of entanglement

By AWT explanation of quantum entanglement is closely related to wave function collapse. Try to imagine, you're a sailor, who is staying at night on the end of floating wharf, to which some boat is attached. Because night sea is stormy, everything (both sailor, wharf and boat) are wobbling up and down, but in different phases. From the perspective of sailor this boat sways randomly.

The observation of quantum particle is analogous to situation, when sailor touches the boat for a moment, thus exchanging some kinetic energy with it. What will happen, after then? The wharf and boat will begin to oscillate at phase. It means, the sailor will keep his relative position with respect to boat, so he cannot detect any boat wobbling anymore, because he moves by the same way. We can say, the wave motion/function of boat has collapsed from local perspective of that sailor. It still remains undulating from perspective of another observer, though - this is the moment, when relativity takes place in quantum mechanics.

In AWT both particles of observer, both particles of observed object are formed by dense nested clusters of another undulating particles, recursively. At the moment, when observed object exchanges some energy with particles of observer during process of observation, the undulations of both systems aren't independent anymore: their internal fluctuations will undulate at phase, too. Briefly speaking, the observer will get entangled with the particle observed. As the particle doesn't undulate independently from this moment, the corresponding part of their mutual undulations will disappear from observation, because the internal motion of both systems has been synchronized.

This is what we are calling a collapse of wave function during process of observation. The observer and object are now undulating like single body - the common center of mass of both objects is forming a private reference frame, a sort of independent island of reality inside of wave ocean - from this idea the concept of many worlds follows. This state isn't permanent, indeed - due the omnipresent random undulations of environment a process called quantum decoherence will take place, thus breaking the entanglement state and synchronization of observer and observed object.

A more close and natural mechanical analogy of entanglement can be demonstrated for undulating droplets levitating in low gravity conditions (i.e. oil droplets inside of lava lamp or water droplets under diamagnetic levitation, for example). When we split such undulating droplet into two halves by thin wire, the resulting parts will remain undulate at phase with respect to the center of their common mass. The smaller droplets will therefore "remember" the state of original droplet in certain extent, so they can serve as a quabit memory. Such pair will create their own "inertial reference frame" and/or "local universe" by many worlds interpretation. But as we can see - nothing "spooky" is on such entanglement, in fact.

Note that even though we can combine the different droplet pairs with the same surface amplitude or even frequency, such reconnection will not restore the surface wave of original droplet, until the phase of the surface waves of both droplets will not remain exactly the same - from this the quantum cryptography follows. We can see, while this model is very trivial and natural, only common disbelief in Aether models prohibited scientists to consider it a long time ago in explanation of various quantum mechanics phenomena.

Do particles have a free will?

Mathematicians John H. Conway (inventor of the cellular automaton Game of Life, between many other) and Simon Kochen of Princeton University have proven that if human experimenters demonstrate 'free will' in choosing what measurements to take on a particle, then the axioms of quantum mechanics require that the free will property be available to the particles measured, or to the universe as a whole. It means, that if humans have even the tiniest amount of free will, then atoms themselves must also behave unpredictably. Standard interpretations of quantum mechanics, of course, embrace unpredictability, but many physicists aren't comfortable with that, and are working to develop deterministic interpretations of quantum mechanics. Conway and Kochen's proof argues, that these efforts will be fruitless — unless one is willing to give up human free will, in a very strong sense. Mr. Conway is giving a series of lectures on the 'Free Will Theorem' (ArXiv preprint) and its ramifications over the next month at Princeton. A followup article strengthening the theory (PDF) was published last month in Notices of the AMS.

By AWT every massive particle exhibits insintric unpredictable behavior, because it's always formed by many smaller particles - or at least appears so from human perspective. Every density gradient is realized by density change of many smaller gradients. Therefore the behavior and motion of surface gradient always hides a complexity of particle interior, thus rendering it less or more unpredictable in our eyes. Every particle formed by density gradients can interact only with another object arranged by same way in causal way (simila similibus affectur). The objects, which differs very much in their arrangement mass/energy or space-time distance scale cannot interact mutually in causal way (they're simply "too small" or "too large"). The largest objects which we can observe in causal way are therefore formed by large clusters of particles of the same size, shape and composition, which exhibits an unification and quantization of their behavior. From sufficiently distant/global perspective the behavior of both particles, both their observer becomes easily predictable by the same way, so we cannot separate the free will of particles from free will of their observer - which is n basic logic hidden beneath free will theorem.

AWT interprets the motion of particles in gravity fields as a sort of diffusion, which enables particle to follow the straightest path of mass/energy density gradient of their environment by the same way, like bacteria or protozoa are following the density gradients of chemical energy concentration. By this way, every particle exhibits a traits of consciouses behavior. Note that following of density gradients leads to dissipation of them and "death" of particle undeniably - every manifestation of "life" is always connected to it's "death" in less or distant perspective, therefore the stability criterion leads always to symmetric orbiting paths, i.e. to sort of adaptation of object against its premature evaporation via gravitational waves.

From AWT perspective human consciousness is an emergent effect, i.e. sort of condensate of conscious behavior of many particles, forming the observable universe by the same way, like the black hole can be interpreted as a condensate of spin properties of many particles at distance. While various particle properties and behavior compensate mutually (their mutual transversal motion, for example), some others (like rotation / surface spin or their ability to follow the most advantage path) are cumulative and they manifest itself at macroscopic scale, like black holes or intelligent organism. The living objects are behaving by the same way, being able to follow very weak and long distance interactions, which is interpreted as a "conscious behavior" from macroscopic perspective. But technically it just means, these objects have evolved for sufficient time (during travelling accross sufficiently large density gradient / space-time brane), so that random components of their motion have compensated mutually. By this way, every large object falling into even larger black hole has a chance to become sufficiently clever, until it dissolve completelly at its very end. We are perceiving increasing density of vacuum as an omnidirectional space-time expansion.

We can compare this interpretation of free will to the motion of tent roof, which is hiding dance of many persons behind it. Because every person affect the motion of tent roof in very subtle way, the motion of tent appears unpredictable from this perspective. Apparently chaotic behavior of water surface or human civilization as a whole is the effect of the same category. The motion of components inside of every large system can be interpreted like motion in hidden dimensions with respect to space-time defined by surface of this large system. For example the nuclear force violates the inverse square law for gravity, because it's represented by chaotic motion of nucleons inside of atom nuclei, so that only subtle causal portion of that motion manifest itself at distance. Just the common disbelief in Aether concept prohibited the mainstream science to interpret the probabilistic character of quantum mechanics by this easy and natural way,

Is reality classical?

This post is a reflection of recent analysis of Marco Frasca named "Ballentine and the decoherence program", where he disputes the question of "environmental decoherence".

Aether Wave Theory interprets a reality by nested density fluctuations of hypothetical Boltzmann gas, i.e. the Aether. It's a neoclassical local view consistent with neighboring reality, from which follows, when sighting along time dimension into past (cosmic scale) or future (Planck scale) a relativity or quantum mechanics phenomena will emerge. General relativity perspective has its Aether background in correspondence of Einstein's field equation and thermodynamic state equation ΔQ=TdS , which was proven by T.A. Jacobson. For example, AWT intepretes a 1st Newton inertia law and relativistic motion along geodesics in gravity field as a sort of diffusion and gravitational lensing as an optical lensing phenomena.



In dual way, quantum mechanics perspective has its background in Thomas-Fermi approximation, which recovers the semi-classical limit for large QM systems. Hamilton–Jacobi equations for this Hamiltonian are then the same as the geodesics on the Riemann manifold, Hamiltonian flow can be intepreted as a diffusive motion along geodesics as well. In accordance with this, most of quantum mechanics phenomena (like the result of double slit experiment) can be intepreted easily by semi-classical models by AWT, quantum entanglement is no exception.



What we know already, every combination of these two theories (the string theory and quantum gravity theory in particular) leads to landscape of infinite number of solutions, thus reflecting insintric randomness of Aether reality anyway. No relativity, no quantum mechanics based on empirically ad-hoced postulates has it's own intersubjectivelly accepted interpretation with exception of famous dictum “Shut up and calculate” (attributed to Feynman by mistake probably), which basically replaces the understanding of reality by its numeric regression. Does it mean, reality is non-classical, just because it can be described in distant and rare cases by two (or more) mutually inconsistent boundary theories too? Should we ignore paralellistic and holistic approach to reality understanding just because multicomponent systems cannot be handled by consecutive logics of formal math well? Should we replace the local description or reality by its description from distant past or future perspective? Is principal limitation of formal language supposed to become a crucial problem in general understanding? Is the transversal wave motion along single time arrow the only way of information spreading?

Well, I don't think so - nevertheless this question still has a great significance for formally thinking individuals, who doesn't care about consistent description of reality, until it doesn't fit their pet theory. What they're afraiding for is their social credit and further grant support of their theories like ultra-conservative proponents of Holy Church of medieval era. This is by my opinion the main problem of mainstream science with Aether concept as a whole. For the purpose of such people, lack of general & transparent understanding of reality is highly welcomed on background - every deeper understanding may reveal their theories ad-hoced naively and inconsistent.

Such approach is nothing very new in human history, indeed. Scientists are behaving like priests or medicinmanns of modern era from this perspective - adherence on their incomprehensible formal models brings them meritocracy, social respect, safe jobs separated from public control and helps them survive more easily in human society. As the result, contemporary learning system has many connections to novitiate of sectarian communities - high school novices are purposely trained in formal thinking with minimal connection to underlying physical models and they're not allowed to publish, until they don't pass various tests of "compatibility in thinking".

Please note, that this stance is of emergent nature: with exception of rare individuals most of scientists are people, who are "rather" opened further progress in "another" areas, at least proclamativelly. But their competitive behavior and bias toward formal description of reality cumulates through society, thus making a driving force, which becomes a solid brake of the further understanding at large scales. For those, who knows, how slowly magnetic field penetrates the superconductor (Meissner-Ochsenfeld effect) may be understandable, why I consider every rigid sectarian community a boson condensate and/or black hole, as being observed/interacted from outside.

William James: "A great many people think they're thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."

AWT and Bohmian mechanics

This post is a reaction to recent L. Motl's comments (1, 2, reactions) concerning the Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics (QM), the concept of Louis de Broglie pilot wave in particular (implicate/explicate order is disputed here). Bohm's holistic approach (he was proponent of marxistic ideas) enabled him to see general consequences of this concept a way deeper, the aristocratic origin of de Broglie. It's not surprising, Bohm's interpretation has a firm place in AWT interpretations of various concepts, causual topology of implications and famous double slit experiment in particular. After all, we have a mechanical analogy of double slit experiment (DSE) presented already (videos), therefore it’s evident, QM can be interpreted by classical wave mechanics without problem..



AWT considers pilot wave as an analogy of Kelvin waves formed during object motion through particle environment. Original AWT explanation of double slit experiment is, every fast moving particle creates an undulations of vacuum foam around it by the same way, like fish flowing beneath water surface in analogy to de Broglie wave.



These undulations are oriented perpendicular to the particle motion direction and they can interfere with both slits, whenever particle passes through one of them. Aether foam gets more dense under shaking temporarily, thus mimicking mass/energy equivalence of relativity and probability density function of quantum mechanics at the same moment. The constructive interference makes a flabelliform paths of more dense vacuum foam, which the particle wave follows preferably, being focused by more dense environment, thus creating a interference patterns at the target.

By AWT the de Broglie wave or even quantum wave itself are real physical artifacts. The fact, they cannot be observed directly by the using of light wave follows from Bose statistics: the surface waves are penetrating mutually, so they cannot be observed mutually. But by Hardy's theorem weak (gravitational or photon coupling) measurement of object location without violating of uncertainty principle is possible. What we can observe is just a gravitational lensing effect of density gradients (as described by probability function), induced by these waves in vacuum foam by thickening effect during shaking.

Other thing is, whether pilot wave concept supplies a deeper insight or even other testable predictions, then for example time dependent Schrödinger equation does. By my opinion it doesn't, or it's even subset of information contained in classical QM formalism. This doesn't mean, in certain situations pilot wave formalism cannot supply an useful shortcut for formal solution (by the same way, like for example Bohr's atom model) - whereas in others cases it can become more difficult to apply, then other interpretations.

AWT, emergence and Hardy's paradox

Recently, the fundamental experimental evidence of Hardy's paradox was given, which basically means, quantum mechanics isn't pure statistics based theory following Bell inequalities anymore. The non-formal understanding of this paradox is easy: if every combination of mutually commutable quantities cannot be measured with certainty, how can we be sure about it? Whether some combination exists, which violates such uncertainty? By such way, uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics violates itself on background, thus enabling so called "weak" measurements.

This was demonstrated recently for the case of entangled photon pairs - it can serve as an evidence, even the photons have a distinct "shape", which is the manifestation of the rest mass of photon. This is because the explicit formulation of quantum mechanics neglects the gravity phenomena and the rest mass concept on background: by Schrödinger equation every particle should dissolve into whole Universe gradually - which violates the everyday observations, indeed. Such behavior is effectively prohibited by acceleration following from omni-directional Universe expansion i.e. the gravity potential, so that every locatable particle has a nonzero surface curvature and its conditionally stable at the human scale. From nested character of Aether fluctuations follows, not only single level of "weak" measurement should be achievable here. After all, the fact we can interact with another people and object without complete entanglement can serve as an evidence, the "weak" observation is very common at the human scale.

By AWT every strictly causual theory violates itself in less or more distant perspective due the emergence phenomena. While the classical formulation of general relativity remains seemingly self-consistent (being strictly based on single causality arrow) - the deeper analysis reveals, derivation of Einstein field equations neglects the stress energy tensor contribution (Yilmaz, Heim, Bekenstein and others), which is the result of mass-energy equivalence. This approach makes relativity implicit and infinitely fractal theory by the same way, like the quantum mechanics (which is AdS/CFT dual theory). For example, gravitational lensing, multiple event horizons of charged black holes and/or dark matter phenomena can serve as an evidence of spontaneous symmetry breaking of time arrows and manifestation of quantum uncertainty and super-symmetry in relativity. This uncertainty leads into landscape of many solutions for every theory quantum field or quantum gravity theory, based on combination of mutually inconsistent (i.e. different) postulates.

Such behavior follows Gödel's incompleteness theorems, by which formal proof of rules valid for sufficiently large natural number sets becomes more difficult, then these rules itself - thus remaining unresolvable by their very nature. This is a consequence of emergence, which introduces a principal dispersion into observation of large causal objects and/or phenomena, which cannot be avoided, or such artifacts wouldn't observable anymore. By such way, every strictly formal (i.e. sequential logic based) proof of natural law becomes violated in less or more distant perspective and it follows "More is Different" theorem. AWT demonstrates, this emergence is followed by causal (i.e. transversal wave based) energy spreading through large system of scale invariant symmetry fluctuations (unparticles), which are behaving like soap foam with respect to light spreading and they enable to observe the universe (and all objects inside it) both from excentric, both from insintric perspective simultaneously. The mutual interference of these two perspectives leads to the quantization of observable reality, which is insintrically chaotic, exsintrically causal by its very nature.

In this connection it's useful (..and sometimes entertaining) to follow deductions of formally thinking theorists, like Lubos Motl, whose strictly formal thinking leads him to the deep contradiction/confrontation with common sense and occasionally the whole rest of world undeniably. It may appear somewhat paradoxical, just fanatic proponent of string theory - which has introduced the duality concept into physics - has so deep problem with dual/plural thinking. This paradox is still logical though, if we realize, how complex the string theory is and how strictly formal thinking it requires for its comprehension.

By such way, "emergence group" of dense Aether theory makes understanding of observable reality quite transparent and easy task at sufficiently general level. It still doesn't mean, here's not still a lotta things to understand at the deeper levels, dedicated to individual formal theories.

Duality of relativity and quantum mechanics

The dual (invariant to R-1/R transform) character or general relativity (GR) and quantum mechanics (QM) was expressed in 1997 in form of so called Maldacena duality, based on AdS-CFT correspondence (1). This duality is based on fact, every relativity phenomena can be perceived as quantum mechanics phenomena, when observing from exsintric perspective instead of insintric one. As a classical example can serve the gravitational lens phenomena, which appears like relativistic aberration from perspective of internal observer, while it manifests itself like quantum uncertainty phenomena violating Lorentz symmetry postulate from outside perspective (1, 2).



It can be demonstrated easily, QM is dual to relativity via duality of gravity to omnidirectional universe expansion. It's not so well known (mainstream science covers it), quantum mechanics suffers serious experimental problem in general, because it predicts, every free particle should expand into infinite volume by solution of time dependent Schrödinger equation. This discrepancy can be explained by potential of gravity field, which keeps the particle "at place". The problem is, gravity itself cannot be derived from QM by any way. The omnidirectional collapse of space-time would have the very same effect, though.


GR suffers the very dual problem, as the J.A.Wheeler has demonstrated by geon concept (1) of geometrodynamics. Geon is hypothetical closed artifact, formed just by gravity waves spreading by graviton field. Every particle or black hole can be considered a geon from certain perspective. Albeit from GR follows, such geon should collapse into singularity by its own gravity, which can be prevented by omnidirectional space-time expansion. By such way, validity of GR can be saved by concept of space-time expansion by the same way, like validity of QM depends on space-time collapse.

This apparent paradox can be reconciled by concept of black hole/gravastar (i.e. graviton or "dark energy" star), forming our Universe generation. The gravitational collapse of such object is followed by gradual increasing of its internal density, which manifest itself as a omnidirectional space-time expansion from internal observer perspective, i.e. perspective of observer, which is formed by standing waves of such environment. The single concept can therefore explain the conceptual problems of both GR, both QM at the same moment.



By such way, we can understand the gravity action as an acceleration force in terms of omnidirectional expansion inside of Aether density gradient. Such gradient makes a gradient of expansion speed, i.e. the gravity force. Such approach has even it's own testable predictions, for example in slowing of speed of light or by gradual expansion and dissolving of kilogram/meter prototypes from long-term perspective (1, 2, 3) and its closely related to dark matter and dark energy phenomena.



Now we can understand as well, why numeric prediction of cosmological constant by GR differs by two hundreds orders of magnitude from those predicted by QM. QM follows the model of collapsing universe, while GR considers the concept of expanding universe on background.

AWT and double slit experiment

Double slit experiment (DSE or DSX) is an iconic experiment of quantum mechanics, because it illustrates well quantum delocalization and collapse of wave function phenomena and you can play with it in Java applet herein. While mechanical analogy of DSE exists already, the AWT explanation of DSE experiment is quite easy and it follows exactly the macroscopic experiment.



By AWT vacuum has a foamy structure of Aether density fluctuations and every object is moving through vacuum foam like boat or fish beneath water surface. Such fish creates a typical undulations of water surface - a ripples, which are always perpendicular to the fish motion direction. In quantum physics such undulations are called de-Broglie wave.



At the water surface, the surface waves are increasing a density of density fluctuations, thus leading into formation of turbulence. In vacuum, such shaking increases a density of vacuum foam in direction, by which particle is moving, so that the speed of light remains invariant for such object. From outside perspective we could observe a relativistic contraction of such object. This connection illustrates a close relation of quantum mechanics and relativity:



Note that the deBroglie wave propagates through vacuum by speed of light, it always advances particle location like ripples spreading from swimming duck. While pin-point particle cannot pass through both slits at the single moment apparently, its deBroglie wave can do that without problem under formation formation of typical flabelliform interference patterns.



Because every shaking makes vacuum foam more dense, the vacuum density becomes non-uniformly distributed around particle, when passing through double slit. This affects particle motion accordingly, because by AWT every particle consist of standing wave packet and it propagates along foam branes like wave. All waves are focused by more dense environment, so that path of particle motion prefers the directions of flabelliform patterns. At the case of repeated experiment, the particle traveling through random undulations of vacuum foam follows the wave interference patterns at target. Note, that such interpretation doesn't require mutual interaction of individual particles during experiment - path of particle spreading remains affected by interference even at the case, when only single particle gets involved into experiment.

Was relativity proved by quantum mechanics phenomena?

The fractal character of nested Aether foam leads to the formation of dualities from human logic perspective. Consecutive logic of human thinking is dual to intuition, which is collective result of many synapses actions at the same time. Therefore by human logic the observable reality is described strictly by surface gradients and transversal wave spreading (so called "gradient driven reality"), while the information mediated by longitudinal waves of many particles is perceived as a "quantum chaos". Therefore Aether appears as composed from layers of causal membranes, surrounded/alternated by gradually more chaotic particle field and vice-versa. Human understanding consists of formal theories dualities, alternated by zones of intuitive understanding / philosophy, which are forming an uncrossable barriers between both theories from formal math perspective due their divergence into landscapes of infinite many solutions. On the other hand, every tendency to describe the universe by formal theory with infinite exactness leads into scrambled perceiving of reality as well, because of mixed inner/outer perspectives during interpretation of individual theories.

The supersymmetric situations, when formal model was used as a logical explanation of dual theory and vice-versa were not so rare in history of physics. The so-called geocentric model of Ptolemy was formalized by introducing of epicycles concept by Tycho de Brahe up to precision, which could serve for astronomical predictions well. Therefore Galileo opponents, the proponents of Holy Church in particular have objected to Galileo by predictability of geocentric model, which could serve as an indirect confirmation of its logical validity. How we know today, this logic was quite weak from observational perspective - but still not quite wrong from more AWT perspective.

The very same situation has repeated in physics at the beginning of 20th century, when Einstein has come with his relativity theory. With respect to relativity, the quantum mechanics is dual theory in many aspects. Therefore is nothing strange, Einstein has opposed quantum mechanics violently, especially its concept of quantum uncertainty ("God does not play dices with the universe.", EPR paradox) by the similar way, like many string theorists are objecting the LQG theory by now. The relativistic aberration (observed first by Eddington, 1921) and gravitational lensing (observed by F. Zwicky 1932) are both considered as iconic phenomena of general relativity. Therefore we can expect, Einstein would be quite surprised by claim, the relativistic aberration or gravitational lensing are quantum mechanics phenomena, not relativity effects. While such stance appears ridiculous (both effects were predicted and computed just by using of relativity) - exactly the opposite appears correct from AWT perspective!

The main problem is, the gravitational lensing was interpreted as a result of space-time curvature, which should manifest itself by time dilatation, which was never measured directly. From strictly causal perspective, only the curvature of light path can be measured due the local character of (special) relativity theory. By special relativity the light is always spreading by constant speed through vacuum, so no refraction phenomena should be observed both at macroscopic scale, both at microscopic scale, if we consider, the elementary particles are pinpoint objects, surrounded by vacuum, too. The observer, falling into black hole would see the speed of light unchanged and straightforward even at the case, he would encircled the black hole together with photons, thus effectively staying at rest from more general perspective. As we can see, every local postulate violates explicit theory from more general perspective less or more lately.

The quantum gravity character of relativistic aberration follows from the fact, the fragmentation of image by gravity lens introduces a multiverse aspect into observation, because it makes the observed object location uncertain, thus violating a single-time arrow causality and Lorentz symmetry. By such way, prof. Einstein succeeded in persuasion of mainstream physics community about validity of relativity theory by using of experiment, which can be interpreted as a direct violation of Lorentz invariance and relativity as such..;-) We can compare it to the "proof" of geocentric model on background of successful prediction of solar eclipses by using of epicycle model of Ptolemy. While lack of exactness is apparent in every theory based on non-formal logic, such doublethink and lack of logic is less or more hidden problem of every formal approach as a manifestation of Gödel uncertainty theorem.

A dual approach to Aether theory

The AWT can be interpreted as a extrapolation of 1D particle theory in 10-24 dimensions (i.e. string theories) to theory of zero-dimensional particles in infinite-dimensional space-time, i.e. into Aether. The quantum gravity (QG) theory can be considered as dual quantum field theory to string theory (ST) in certain extent, while still being slightly more general then ST, being based on general relativity, instead of special relativity, like ST. Which theory should be dual to Aether theory, after then?

By my opinion the most promising candidate should be generalized geometrodynamics, introduced by J.A. Wheeler in the mid of 50th of the last century. Geometrodynamics is general relativity based concept, which describes Universe in terms of space-time deformations. If we realize, all particles in AWT are formed by Aether density fluctuations, we can say, material particles are formed by space-time curvature and whole universe can be described in terms of nested space-time curvature and acceleration instead of mass/energy density field.

From geometrodynamics theory the Universe existence follows from omni-directional Universe expansion, which in its consequence leads to the formation of local and global event horizons, i.e. particles and gravity phenomena. While the quantum mechanics neglects the expansion of probability function (wave packets of particles) due the gravity (the existence of gravity cannot be derived from quantum mechanics), a classical geometrodynamics neglects the gravitational collapse of geons into singularities due the expansion of Universe.



The omni-directional Universe expansion/collapse prohibits both the expansion of wave packets into infinity from internal perspective, both the collapse of geons into singularities from internal perspective, so we can see, the gravity is a direct manifestation of Universe expansion and the gravity force as an acceleration force at the presence of space-time curvature.

Why AWT is more general, then relativity and quantum mechanics?

The general character of AWT is given by its implicit, recursive nature, thus fulfilling the Ouroboros archetype. From AWT follows, whatever theory of your personal preference can be made nearly as general, as AWT simply by introducing of recursion concept into it, so it will obtain a fractal character of nested Aether foam. The so-called double quantization or double relativity can be considered as a first unconscious attempts to give an implicit character to existing formal theories.

But AWT still remains more general, then every fractal version of relativity or quantum mechanics or their combination, because of lower number of ad-hoced postulates required. In addition, the classical (Newtonian) character of AWT makes the Aether most symmetric and as such atemporal description of reality, i.e. stable dual brane in causal space-time of many theories possible. By AWT the character of relativity (the special relativity in particular) is given simply by fact, it describes the wave spreading from internal perspective exclusively - i.e. from perspective of the very same wave, which is serving for information spreading, while being strictly Lorentz invariance based. This introduces a causal bias into interpretation of observation.

With compare to relativity, the quantum mechanics is dual to relativity, i.e. by strictly outer perspective driven, as it always describes the energy wave spreading and space-time deforms from perspective of observer, which stays outside such deforms and it has some reference wave/frame available (i.e. it's Lorentz symmetry violation based). While the classical mechanics still enables us to describe for example the surface wave spreading both from perspective of surface wave (i.e. from relativistic perspective), both from light or sound wave perspective (the quantum mechanics approach). So we can consider the classical physics as a conceptual environment, which enables us to seamlessly reconcile the quantum mechanics and relativity by unique way with respect to correspondence principle without introduction of interpretation bias on background. And this is rather strong point of Aether concept - it can seamlessly connect the relativity and quantum mechanics on all ends of both energetic, both dimensional scales.

From the above follows, the contemporary view of classical mechanics as a special cases of both relativity, both quantum mechanics is fundamentally incorrect, as the exactly the opposite is true here: both relativity, both quantum mechanics are special, biased view of chaotic particle system, as described by classical mechanics, instead.

Aether and quantum mechanics

Richard Feynman: "It is safe to say that nobody understands quantum mechanics".
John Wheeler: "If you are not completely confused by quantum mechanics, you do not understand it."
Roger Penrose: "Quantum mechanics makes absolutely no sense." (via phys.wp.com)

OK. The interpretation of quantum mechanics by Aether Wave Theory is easy and it's based on the foam behavior of Aether fluctuations, which are getting more dense after introduction of some energy by the same way, like soap foam during shaking inside of evacuated vessel. This behavior can be modeled easily by common computer and you can play with it by using of interactive Java applet. Note the similarity of foam behavior and dynamic mesh approach, used in numerical simulations.

As the result, every wave propagates through vacuum like so called quantum wave packet ("particle"), where the mass density of vacuum (so called the probability function, denoted by blue line on the picture bellow) is proportional the the actual energy density in each space and time interval (red color), thus fulfilling the Schrödinger equation - a fundamental equation of quantum mechanics.

The foam model illustrates the particle-wave duality, i.e. the fact, every isolated wave (soliton) propagates through vacuum like less or more pronounced density blob (wave packet), the density of which is proportional the wave frequency, which keeps the energy of wave packet quantized. This leads to interesting phenomena during wave packets collision, when the gradient forming blob becomes so large, so that the wave will bounce from internal walls of wave packet like wave inside of glass sphere or similar resonator and it will change itself into isolated standing wave of particle, undulating at place (a process known as a materialization of radiation).