by Jeffrey H. Boyd

Copyright © Jeffrey H. Boyd, 2012

Most people are intimidated by quantum physics. Relax: this website will require no mathematics. We want you to stop being intimidated, so you can use common sense. The subjects we discuss here are not hard to understand. These are practical issues, like, “When you wake up in the morning and open your eyes, what do you see?” We propose to teach you an exciting new way to see yourself and your world.

Did you think that the previous paragraph was controversial? Did it made me sound like a lunatic? From the viewpoint of mainstream quantum physics, that last paragraph was jarring. Why? To begin with, because I use the term, “common sense.” QM and “common sense” are incompatible terms. Second because I imply that reality is what you see, touch, hear, smell, and taste. Third because I do not draw a huge distinction between the quantum world and the macroscopic world that you can see.

Many of my readers have never heard much about quantum mechanics (QM). Fuchs and Peres say that there is no such thing as “physical reality.” At the subatomic level all that exists is mathematics. Remember Plato? He and Socrates thought that the Forms were real, and physical reality wasn’t real. I find that absurd. Today QM experts teach that the mathematics is what is real, and physical reality isn’t.

This math lies outside space and time. The wave functions & probability waves are in control of what we take to be “physical reality.” Information can be transmitted a billion light years instantly. Cause and effect can be reversed in time. This is because it is the mathematical world that is in control. The waves are not real waves, they are probability waves that are behind the scenes, outside of space, below Planck time. Quantum physics has said goodbye to reality. QM teaches that when you look at a physical object, your act of looking is what causes that thing to exist! Professor David Mermin said that science has proved that the moon only exists because people look at it. Does that make sense to you?

There is more than one way to look at QM experiments. We propose an entirely different perspective, a paradigm shift. We step outside the QM box and rethink everything based on experimental data. Keep in mind that our theory, the Theory of Elementary Waves (TEW) is primarily an unconventional way of viewing empirical data, and designing new experiments for which TEW and QM predict different outcomes.

I have produced videos to explain my viewpoint in plain language. The problem however is that scientific opinion will not be changed by YouTube videos. It requires publishing research articles in physics journals, which I am now trying to do. These journals generally require that the material cited in the submitted articles should never have been made public before. Thus I cannot put some of my ideas on this website until after they are published elsewhere.

TEW starts with what sounds like a preposterous idea: that wave particle duality is wrong. There is an ocean of zero energy waves, which we only know about when a particle follows one of the waves. Usually a particle follows a wave backwards, i.e. in the reverse direction.

When we speak of waves going backwards, we mean forwards in time, but traveling in the opposite direction as particles. Elementary waves should not be confused with John Cramer’s backwards-in-time waves. In general elementary waves travel from detectors to a particle source before the particle is emitted, and all wave interference occurs before a particle is emitted. Interference is usually located at the particle source. Once emitted, a particle follows its specific elementary ray backwards with a probability of one. The radical difference between TEW and QM can be illuminated by saying that in TEW a particle has a trajectory, whereas in QM it does not.

The TEW approach also shares nothing in common with David Bohm’s “quantum potential” theory.