Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Quantum weirdness explained

  1. May 20, 2003 #1


    User Avatar

    This is to invite comment on Dr. Lewis Little's "Theory of Elementary Waves" (TEW), which is expounded at http://www.physics.prodos.org/ [Broken]

    I'm paraphrasing and it's been a few weeks since I looked at the website, but the essence of the theory is:
    -The universe consists of elementary waves and elementary particles, which do not exhibit wave-particle duality.
    -Elementary particles move in paths which follow an elementary wave, in the opposite direction to the wave motion. This is the key difference between TEW and earlier theories which tried to divide the world into waves and particles: in the other theories the particles moved in the same direction as the wave.

    Here are some claims the website makes for TEW:
    Further down:
    The website has a link to Little's original paper (published in Physics Essays in March 1996); I've read part of this and as far as I can tell with my undergrad knowledge of QM it all makes sense. But if Little is right there are some things I don't understand:

    There are some big claims made for TEW and the theory is backed up by a paper published several years ago in a (presumably) reputable journal; why hasn't it set the world on fire? I'd never heard of Little before I stumbled upon the URL above, and his name doesn't appear on these forums. My QM lecturer hasn't heard of him either, and his chief proponent on physics.prodos.org is not a physicist but a computer scientist. Is he a crank, or just very poor at promoting his ideas? I'd appreciate it if some experts (or anyone with something useful to say) could take a look at Little's paper and tell me what they think.

    Looking forward to a lively debate
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. May 20, 2003 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Physics Essays is not a reputable journal.

    You probably shouldn't expect a lively debate on this topic -- this clearly does not belong in the Physics forum.

    - Warren
  4. May 20, 2003 #3


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Yep, I agree with Chroot
  5. May 21, 2003 #4


    User Avatar

    I wondered if that might be the problem. What is it then?
  6. May 29, 2003 #5
    I'd be interested in seeing some rational refutation of the guy's claims.
  7. May 29, 2003 #6
    Well for one, it implies the Uncertainty principle is just wrong. Within any time period greater than a plank era, a particle really is 'fuzzy' because it does not have any exact points.

    Second, I didn't see any mention about the energy associated with this elementary wave that is associated with elementary particles.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook