Your new thesis: Removing Singularities from Physics

  • As many already know, studying for the physics GRE and getting accepted into a graduate program is not the final hurdle in your physics career.
  • There are many issues current physics graduate students face such as studying for their qualifier, deciding upon a field of research, choosing an advisor, being an effective teaching assistant, trying to have a social life, navigating department politics, dealing with stress, utilizing financial aid, etc.

bdnelson111
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 12:15 pm

Your new thesis: Removing Singularities from Physics

Postby bdnelson111 » Tue Mar 01, 2011 12:28 pm

Hey all you aspiring young physics students out there, I have a nice master's thesis or doctoral thesis for you. Removing singularities from QM or GR. My math skills are exhausted, I'm just an engineer with 8th grade math skills. I did however, create singularity fee, quantized versions of Plank's Law, Einstein's energy-momentum eqaution and deBroglie's wave equation. Same results, just new derivations (this is not a new theory, just new versions). The key is to introduce a minumim allowed energy quanta with a fixed wavelength.

check it out at nosingularities.com, carry this idea forward if you feel so inclined.

thks
brian

User avatar
WhoaNonstop
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 1:31 am

Re: Your new thesis: Removing Singularities from Physics

Postby WhoaNonstop » Tue Mar 01, 2011 12:41 pm

bdnelson111 wrote:I have a nice master's thesis or doctoral thesis for you. Removing singularities from QM or GR.


I'd die of boredom. Twice.

-Riley

negru
Posts: 308
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Your new thesis: Removing Singularities from Physics

Postby negru » Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:38 pm

um ok how is the minimum wavelength compatible with lorentz invariance?

bfollinprm
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:44 am

Re: Your new thesis: Removing Singularities from Physics

Postby bfollinprm » Tue Mar 01, 2011 2:19 pm

negru wrote:um ok how is the minimum wavelength compatible with lorentz invariance?



For once negru and I were thinking the same thing. Distances are only definable absolutely in 4space, and only then in an inertial massless frame.

bdnelson111
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 12:15 pm

Re: Your new thesis: Removing Singularities from Physics

Postby bdnelson111 » Tue Mar 01, 2011 3:31 pm

from an energy standpoint, the minimum unit energy I describe is a fixed value in Jolues, its wavelength comes from Plank's Law. It is invarient under Lorentz transformations because it is always moving at light speed. Look at Figure (1) under Einstein's section from my website. In this case energy chains always move at light speed, sublight speed just means its moving in a helical fashion, with the net velocity only being a component of light speed. (the lead of the helix).

Again, this is not a new theory, just a new version of Einstein's equations. Any equation from special reletivity you'd like me to convert I would be happy to.

-thks

CarlBrannen
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 11:34 pm

Re: Your new thesis: Removing Singularities from Physics

Postby CarlBrannen » Tue Mar 01, 2011 8:46 pm

bdnelson111 wrote:from an energy standpoint, the minimum unit energy I describe is a fixed value in Jolues, its wavelength comes from Plank's Law. It is invarient under Lorentz transformations because it is always moving at light speed.


Light is always moving at light speed and yet, when it is Lorentz transformed, the energy in a photon changes. That's because the energy has to do with the wavelength and on changing the wavelength the energy changes.

This is also true when you Lorentz transform an (energy, momentum) vector. The energy does, in fact, change.

I'm not saying your theory doesn't work. That would require a lot more effort on my part, effort that I don't have the time to spend. I'm quite sympathetic with the motivation. And I also believe that there is an energy that is constant under Lorentz transformations. But what I'm saying is that it is not compatible with the transformation of energy and momentum by the usual Lorentz transformation. You need to be more radical on this, to get what you want.


User avatar
midwestphysics
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:37 am

Re: Your new thesis: Removing Singularities from Physics

Postby midwestphysics » Tue Mar 01, 2011 11:20 pm

Dreaded Anomaly wrote:http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html


Absolutely and undeniably awesome, in no uncertain terms. :lol:

CarlBrannen
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 11:34 pm

Re: Your new thesis: Removing Singularities from Physics

Postby CarlBrannen » Tue Mar 01, 2011 11:27 pm

Dreaded Anomaly wrote:http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html


Along this line, my personal favorite is 't Hooft's comment:

HOW to BECOME a BAD THEORETICAL PHYSICIST
On your way towards becoming a bad theoretician, take your own immature theory, stop checking it for mistakes, don't listen to colleagues who do spot weaknesses, and start admiring your own infallible intelligence. Try to overshout all your critics, and have your work published anyway. If the well-established science media refuse to publish your work, start your own publishing company and edit your own books. If you are really clever you can find yourself a formerly professional physics journal where the chief editor is asleep.

http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theoristbad.html

This is my favorite because he's chief editor of Foundations of Physics and nevertheless published my explanation for the combined question of "where does spin-1/2 come from" and "why are there three generations?" I.e.:

Spin Path Integrals and Generations
http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.3114




Return to “Current Physics Graduate Student Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest