The Great Quantum Cover-up

Chapter One

“How Can a Particle Spread?”


Beware that you do not lose the substance by grasping at the shadows. Aesop



Physics, from physis, from phuin, from bheu: to “make grow”


Beneath and beyond the threshold of size that governs the reality we believe in, an entire world patiently awaits our presence. This invisible reality has been duly tapped, but shied away from, due to the initial incredulity and incompatibility with accepted dogma.


The problem begins and must end within the very namesake of the science that discovered it. Then disguised it. Then ignored and denied it. The science that refused ‘to grow’ with it; refused to evolve into a much more meaningful entity with awesome, unlimited new potential.


The Big Problem:


There is something going on in the realm of physics that no one wants to talk about. It’s been called the wave-particle duality, but that’s not really the problem. It’s been called “the measurement problem”, but that’s still putting it mildly. It’s been called “the reality crisis in physics” and “the problem of the infinities”. It’s been called just about everything but what it really is:there’s a Trojan horse in our midst!”


Actually, it's even worse than that. For it doesn't come from without; it's a part of their own system attacking their own way of thought from within.


The ‘measurement problem’ with the infamous quantum of action is that it grows! It gets ‘fatter’; it changes its size; it' spreads out’ continuously throughout time and space. The quantum particle is a bundle of either positive or negative accumulating electrical charge that has no choice but to repel itself, to ‘fly apart’, ‘explode’ ‘grow’ or ‘expand without limit’.


Now the problem with observation is that it transforms what is ‘essentially infinite to start with’ – continuous light waves – into discontinuous, finite light particles, or photons. What this means is that to maintain the finitude we see, a full spatial dimension must disappear, or “collapse”, during the process of observation. Just as it does in photography, which is the same process of transduction.


This ‘spatial dimension’? What is it? Where did it go? Most of all, why weren’t we made aware of the true nature of this observation-measurement problem?


Because it speaks of that unspeakable alternative,  Anaximenes' “INFINITE MATTER" AMONGST (what we have always thought was our) FINITE NATURE.


Nobody – and I mean NOBODY – that’s involved in officialdom wants anything to do with this millennia old problem, be it called Infinity, Truth, God or Logos.


Because no one wants to admit to the fact that for the last 3000 years or so, we’ve been totally wrong about the world of appearances “out there” and the assumptions and interpretations we’ve made about it as it arrives “in here”. And how we resist the unknowns of change, especially when it refers to something like 'our way of thought'.


Jesus said, “The Pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge (gnosis) and hidden them. They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to. You, however, be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves.”   (The Gospel of Thomas, #39)


“We are so geared to what is useful that we forget the meaningful.” (David Steindl-Rast, from The Music of Silence)


In a superb coup de grace carried out in a manner that challenges the imagination, our new breed of scientists pulled off the miracle of our times. And for the better part of the twentieth century, we’ve all reaped the harvest of its technological fruit.


But it was a smoke-screen; nothing less than the grandest, most elaborate, comprehensive, contrived, clever and subtle cover-up in the entire history of modern man. And with few exceptions, neither the revealers nor the concealers even new it was happening!


Now no one designed or dreamed up this thing.
 And no one’s conspired 'bout the mysteries we sing.
 It’s just how we play, how we seek and we hide,
‘Cause we just can’t remember who weights back inside.

                                                          JOY "The Rime"



MATERIAL GROWTH: you cannot apply the process to the reality you now have. You must apply your reality to the process. You have to realize its primacy. It is something that has always been and always will be; and that reality couldn’t exist without it.


And I promise you, slowly but most assuredly, once realized, almost every major existential mystery you’ve ever entertained will begin to unfold.


If atomic elements didn’t grow, we would have very little weight. We couldn’t even see anything because electromagnetic forces couldn’t exist without the frictional effects of growth and resistance. Atomic growth explains, not describes. It is the only perpetual motion machine you will ever find: the mechanism of change and transformation in all universes.


Don’t look at something like a vase and wonder how it could grow and stay in one piece and last for thousands of years. That can’t even be  explained now. You must realize that form follows function. If the constituent parts (particles, atoms, crystals…) didn’t harmonize in the beginning and grow in unison and with “absolute perfection of dimension,” the clay that makes up the vase couldn’t even exist.




...let us proceed more optimistically, and come to terms with the picture that quantum theory appears to be telling us we must face up to. (Roger Penrose, pp 326 new)


And it is about time we come to terms with the whole miasma of mind-boggling discoveries during the first 25 years of the 20th century in the field of physics, the science of measurement and motion. Science itself has not done it. Apparently, philosophy cannot do it either. Or if it has been done, it has been ignored to death. Tacit boycotting of new ideas has been the rule of this ossified field. Especially if there’s any hint of infinity involved.


Let us free society from the strangling hold of an ideologically petrified science just as our ancestors freed us from the strangling hold of the One True Religion! (Paul Feyerabend, Against Method)


The entire reason for the so-called 'new physics' seems to lie in an attempt by the officialdom of Science to convince everyone (including themselves) that the particle does not spread out spatially in four dimensions (as true four-dimensionality would demand). Indeterminacy, superposition, complementarity, renormalization, virtual particles, point particles and especially, wave-function collapse, plus an observer created reality; these are the fictional alternatives to admitting to a four-dimensional, materially transfinite universe of Growth, Gravity and God – that “alternative” that is called “unthinkable”.




[Why is it, that] ...each atom, each 'elementary particle', turns out to be a bottomless well? (Stanislaw Lem, One Human Minute, 1986) 


The ultimate structure of the atom will never be found because it does not exist.” (David Bohm)


For aught we know an atom may consist entirely of the radiation that comes out of it…It is useless to argue that radiation cannot come out of nothing…


Each particle being extended in time, must be regarded as composed of what we may call “event particles”. The whole series of the events makes up the whole history of the particle, and the particle is regarded as being its history. Modern physics, therefore, reduces matter to a set of events which proceed outward from a center. If there is something further in the center itself, we cannot know about it, and it is irrelevant to physics.” (Bertrand Russell) emphasis in bold added


I am taking the view that all the important questions we strive so diligently to answer, come from that very “center”. We must focus our attention therefore, on plumbing the depths of that wellspring. And if this means going beyond the current limitations and abilities of upper-case Science, then so be it. And the first step?


 “Size gunslinger...size”.


Nature’s source of movement is always from within itself. Indeed, it is itself. James Carse, Finite and Infinite Games


Schrödinger proposed that the particle concept be entirely discarded and his concept of wave function be given all the physical reality, which meant that the electron was to be pictured as spread out continuously throughout space. (Atomic Scientists, Boorse, Motz, Weaver) emphasis in bold added


I insist upon the view that 'all is waves'. (Erwin Schrödinger)


The major difficulty with this view was that the wave-packet, though initially small and compact, eventually got fatter. Real electrons [i.e., ‘point particles’] didn't do this. (Barry Parker, Search For A Super Theory)


Didn’t they? This is just wishful thinking from the 'majority opinion'. The evidence, the language and their behavior says that they do.


In the system of waves constituting the electron there is a "disturbed area"... These disturbed areas [wave-packets] reveal the position of the electron. But we cannot say that the disturbed area is the electron. For any such area has a tendency to spread, and if the matter of our world consisted of a number of disturbed areas it would by now have spread indefinitely. (J.W.N. Sullivan, emphasis in bold added)


Faulty logic # 1 (see below)


But faulty logic has just begun. Sullivan goes on:


Each electron, in fact, requires a three dimensional space to itself. This would seem to make it obvious that these waves are merely a mathematical device [?]. It is distinctly disconcerting, therefore, to find that experiment, as we have seen, confirms their existence [??]…  The apparent agreement between calculation and experiment seems to be in some sense illusory [???].  It is very difficult to avoid the conclusion that the experiments have not yet received their right interpretation.  And there, for the present, we must leave the matter. (Ibid)


[?] What happened to Einstein’s fourth dimension?
[??] Is not an effect a measure of its cause?
[???] Is not consistency a measure of truth?


How do we reconcile the spreading of the electron’s wave packet all over town with the picture of a localized particle? The answer is that we must include the act of observation in our reckoning.


According to the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, developed by Born, Heisenberg, and Bohr, we calculate quantum objects as waves and interpret the waves probabilistically…Classical correspondence camouflages the quantum reality. (Amit Goswami, pp. 45)




Nick Herbert quotes J. von Newman: “…there is always a place in the analysis when one simply admits ‘and then a miracle occurs’.”  The “miracle”, of course, is the vector reduction called “the collapse of the wave-function”. Herbert uses the term ‘quon’ to represent any quantum particle:


This is the quantum law of motion: Increase and Multiply: starting from your inviolable realm, take all possible paths open to you. The natural evolution of a quon’s proxy wave is to expand without limit. However, in the measurement act a quon can’t realize all its possibilities because only one measurement result actually happens. Therefore at some point between its creation in the quon gun and its registration as an experimental result, a quon must repudiate the universal law of motion, halt its unbridled natural expansion, and contract into a single possibility corresponding to the single observed measurement result.” (Nick Herbert, Quantum Reality, pp 145, emphasis in bold added)


Herbert has just defined ‘the universal law of motion’ as ‘unbridled natural expansion’ by invoking infinity: ‘without limit’! Another half of a great truth.


Fred Allan Wolfe seems to back this up


Because it is so tiny, it takes only one billionth part of a billionth part of a second for the atom to spread out into fuzziness [read uncertainty]. And it continues to spread out until you come along and observe it. At that instant, depending on which experiment you perform, the atom is reduced to size. Just think, without you all atoms would spread out into the universe at an alarming rate.” (in Bob Toben’s Space, Time and Beyond, updated version, 1982 bold emphasis added)


Amit Goswami quips: It is this spreading of the wave packet that promotes incessant jokes about quantum weirdness among the connoisseurs... A wave packet that satisfies the Schrödinger equation at a given moment in time must spread with the passage of time.


It is hard to believe that the electron is physically smeared out across its realm of its positional possibilities, because every time we measure it we never see a smeared electron, always a point particle [Faulty logic #2, see below]. In each atom, however, something seems smeared out to fill the atom, an indescribable something we call the probability cloud…without really being very sure what we’re talking about. Whatever it is, though, the whole world is made of it.  (Nick Herbert, ibid P124) emphasis in bold added


But “How Can a Particle Spread? Here G.P Thomson begins to answer his own question:


The point which represents the energy of the electron is guided by the waves that surround it, and extend possibly to an indefinite distance in all directions...  The question of the physical nature of these waves is a very difficult one...  The waves, in fact must be regarded as perpetually running through the electron from behind so that the electron is always receiving a fresh supply [?]


Schrödinger speaks of this construction phenomena in a similar manner:  (here comes that word ‘precisely’ again)


The single waves always rise alternately in front of, and behind the electron, so that they become intensified in the space between in such a way that a constantly created structure occurs which moves at precisely the same speed as that of the electron.2 (emphasis added)


It seems impossible to see it any other way: the electron is being constructed from within itself; from “Deep down in the well where all rhythm begins” (the fifth dimension).


<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>


What Are We Missing?

I believe there is something basic we are all missing, some wrong assumption we are all making. If this is so, then we need to isolate the wrong assumption and replace it with a new idea....I strongly suspect that the key is time. More and more, I have the feeling that quantum theory and general relativity are both deeply wrong about the nature of time. It is not enough to combine them. There is a deeper problem, perhaps going back to the origin of physics....

And, according to the highly regarded theoretical physicist and author Lee Smolin,  here it is:

Motion is frozen, and the whole history of constant motion and change is presented to us as something static and unchanging. If I had to guess (and guessing is what I do for a living), this is the scene of the crime.... We have to find a way to unfreeze time.2

But how do you unfreeze time without doing the same for space? And thus size? And thus ignoring Minkowski’s ‘convenient’ and carefully worked out space-time invariance?


Robert B. Laughlin, the 1998 Nobel Laureate, on the back cover of his book A Different Universe says, “Everything we think about fundamental physical laws needs to change.”


And what does his subtitle mean: “Reinventing physics from the bottom down”?


The theory of “Emergence”, which Laughlin appears to embrace, is the latest resurrection in physics. It seems to be in defiance of reductionism and Russell’s dictate that “if there is something further in the center itself, we cannot know about it, and it is irrelevant to physics”


Gerard ‘t Hoofts, the 1999 Nobel Laureate: “His core belief, developed over decades, is that quantum physics is wrong.” Lee Smolin, in his book The Trouble with Physics, p. 318.


David Gross, the 2004 Nobel Laureate in physics says, “We don’t know what we are talking about… The state of physics today is like it was when we were mystified by radioactivity… They were missing something absolutely fundamental. We are missing perhaps something as profound as they were back then.”5 


Elsewhere, he says:


The real change that’s around the corner [is] in the way we think about space and time. We haven’t come to grips with what Einstein taught us. But that’s coming. And that will make the world around us seem much stranger than any of us can imagine.6  


On Roger Penrose: “Much of his work in the last two decades is motivated by his conviction that quantum mechanics is wrong.” (Smolin, p. 319)


While many leading physicists admit private misgivings about quantum mechanics, their public stance is that its problems were settled back in the 1920s. (Ibid, p. 323)


Something dishonest, nay, extremely dishonest, is going on in the upper echelon of Science. “The Emperor Wears No Clothes” and his subjects are reluctant (if not scared to death) to say anything threatening their tenure, reputation etc.


Now there is hardly one idea in this work that has not already been considered by others. Ironically, of all the philosophers, scientists, and scholars that I’ve talked to privately, none have even shown a reluctance toward the main idea in this work. And many have even said they’ve had similar ideas. However, on any official basis, none would touch it. And you cannot blame them. For a scientist assumes great risk when he goes beyond the standard model of his chosen field:… “because every successful scientist has a vested intellectual, social, and even financial interest in maintaining the status quo.” (I. Bernard Cohen)

So, What Are We Really Missing?


What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not a goal … Man is something that must be overcome.” Nietzsche (Tarnas, pp 370)


“Life is a banquet. And the tragedy is that most people are starving to death… We’re surrounded with joy, happiness, with love. Most people have no idea of this whatsoever. The reason, they’re brainwashed. They’re hypnotized; they’re asleep….


“Most people, though they don’t know it, are asleep. They’re born asleep, they live asleep, they marry in their sleep, they breed children in their sleep, they die in their sleep without ever waking up.”3  


Heraclitus (5-600 BC):


He complained that most men failed to comprehend the logos, the universal principle through which all things are interrelated and all natural events occur, and thus lived like sleepers with a false view of the world…perhaps the first philosopher to entertain serious doubts about reliability of sense perception.
Encyclopaedia Britannica




FAULTY LOGIC 1:  If matter spreads from its constituent spreading particles, then surfaces would be accelerating. And ACCELERATED CLOCKS SLOW DOWN (“When in time the clock slows/As the universe grows/And my now is another man’s then.”)


FAULTY LOGIC 2: The entities being observed are the very same entities that construct the observer and all of his devices! So since THE EYE THAT SEES CHANGES LIKE WHAT IT SEES IT CANNOT SEE THE CHANGE! 



* "Size, Gunslinger...size", from The Dark Tower I, 1982, by Stephen King, Signet

1. From: The Great Conversation

2.Lee Smolin, The Trouble With Physics, “Lee Smolin is a theoretical physicist, who is a founding member and researcher at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics. “ 

3. Anthony de Mello, Awareness pp 26; Image Books, Doubleday

5. quoted in Smolin’s book on P. xv in the intro.

6. David Gross, 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics, in KC Cole's book, The Hole in the Universe,  pp105