| ## Quirk Theory: Notes on "The Equation of Natural State"
And so ends a remarkable 10 year journey to develop a
unified theory of quantum gravity out of pure geometry with no parameters.
It seemed like a bloody good idea at the time, and came as quite a surprise
when I actually achieved a result. It was developed as provable theory for
physics but it might still prove just another mathematical oddity: It
potentially explains so many anomalous things in current theory that I am
cautiously optimistic but will leave it to you to judge. If nothing else it explains
many of the key ideas behind geometry, general relativity and quantum
mechanics in an easy to read form. The final draft is now publicly available at the link below. I ask nicely at this point that you only keep a temporary copy for review, since the draft may well be updated in response to comments. Unofficial review is continuing as per link below so check back from time to time.(Update, the unofficial review process is more or less over now. As a generalisation none of the reviewers saw any value in this theory, even though complete time dependent circular motion for all amplitude and frequency was successfully encoded in the internal co-ordinate structure of a parameter free geometry). The theory remains here, and I stand by it completely and wholeheartedly, as testimony to my apparent ignorance in these matters. 1/10/2012 Quirk Theory- Notes on "The Equation of Natural State" V1-3.pdf Updates to the group associated with Equation 6; until is is worked out , it will be called GENS for Group of Equation of Natural State. Quirk Theory - Worked Example of Plane Circular Motion ver 1-4.pdf (added notes on the photon solution, chronology of events, method for predicting angles for nuclear disintegration, etc.) Also note arxiv.org/abs/1208.3841 Constraints on Chronologies, Shapere, Wilczek . Quirk theory mandates pair wise swapping of states to mediate all gauge forces. Things are back on track again I think. 29/9/2012 I have taken the rather ridiculous step of accepting a request from a topic forum on researchgate.net to unofficially and somewhat publicly peer review this document. (update note! This is working out better than I expected. I now wish to strongly advocate to all of you a public peer review process, where the peer review itself is also publicly published alongside the article for our journals, and also a kibitz mode where anyone can oversee the back and forth between reviewers and the authors.) https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_spacetime_continuous_or_discrete40 for a long but occasionally interesting discussion and some topical background. Thank you to Bill LaPorte-Bryan for hosting this attempt at a new method of peer review for ideas. Perhaps we should call it Wiki-review - review by general consensus. Thanks to Ulrich, Sanjay et al for talking me into it. It either will be a barrel of fun for all if taken in the right spirit, or a complete train wreck. Glory, or Ignominy, or just a gentle fade to black, you get to choose! This public peer review model is still working out really well, even if it results in the failure of my attempt it will be worth it. The basic idea in the paper is as follows: If you accept nature pays more than lip service to principles of least action, then I demonstrate that field theories most likely can never achieve a unified result. But L geometry can impose principles of least action a-priori (through a requirement for scale invariance) and adding this, plus the principles of relativity and quantisation to L geometry results in Quirk theory: "An Equation of Natural State" that constrains the movement of the L manifold. This theory is not a field theory, it is an algebraic theory resulting in a coupled set of ordinary differential equations) Leibnizian (L) geometry is not Cartesian (C) geometry done a different way. It is a whole class of geometry on its own. C and L manifolds can only ever approximate each other, they cannot be mathematically transformed to each other. Quote from October 5 New Scientist: "The late physicist John Wheeler said the "basis for all mathematics is 0=0' " That is all Quirk theory is saying. Equation 6 is an Equation of Natural State (ENS) describing how symmetry breaks with the expansion of space. Equation 7, it's derivative with time is Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Equation 8, it's second derivative with time is is the energy-time uncertainty. These equations allow you to take any three observed states of a physical system with time, and it will give you the entire path of that system. It must be a natural system, because these equations guarantee a least action path. It is like a magic trick that nature plays on us. If the observations are sensitive to initial conditions, you will get a spread of available solutions, and in the case of an electron, this spread should be the wave function probability density function of the system. Quirk theory requires Space to start as a singularity. Space must expand from this state. Expanding space is forced to break the gauge symmetry of the GENS group associated with the Equation of Natural State, again and again until only three dimensions are left, with the broken gauge couplings creating force. Forces are mediated by the swapping of the points in the quirk (quantised relative co-ordinate) when two particles align along the root vector of their respective gauge symmetry. Bent space is mass. That's it in a nutshell. Quirk theory also predicts mass is quantised, which completely explains why QM requires a unique value of mass associated with each wave function to make the theory work. I apologise in advance for the length; I do deliver a real calculable equation at the end. It should be split into 3 or 4 papers and it reads like a cross between a paper, a book chapter, and a user guide. Feel free to skip over parts where I teach you to suck eggs; it was deliberately written in simple English and the content need not tax a well read high school physics student: This was a deliberate choice after years of frustration over combing through the completely unnecessary arcane and impregnable terminology that has built up around GR and QM over the last 100 years. Mathematicians and Physicists really need help talking a common language, and plain English might just be what is required. Also for the reference purists out there I make no apologies for using references to Wikipedia. It was a deliberate choice in protest at the rapidly increasing trend to hide research behind pay per view firewalls. I accept publishing research has to be paid for, but it was even more expensive to do when I was young and as a citizen I could walk into any university library and pick up and read any journal I liked for free. The references therefore are not to definitive works, but you can find your way to those from the links provided. |
---|

**Terms and conditions:** Business products and services outlined
on this web site are regulated by the laws of the State of Queensland, Australia. No liability is assumed for the products, services and web content beyond the minimum proscribed by law.
Liability is strictly limited to the purchase price of the product or
service. No consequential liability for misuse or non performance of
products and services is accepted. Software is generated to ACNR (All Care, No Responsibility) standard, unless otherwise negotiated.**Â© Copyright 2008 Andrew Jonkers**