Quantum Magic: How Scientists Are Untangling the Universe’s Weirdest Mystery. Carl Kocher

I’m glad Carl admits QT is just magic. As he explains further at the end of his article with the following question, quoted below:

“Take another look at predictions #1 and #3 above. If we draw on our experience of life in a non-quantum world, we may notice something very strange when the polarizers are “crossed” at 90 degrees. If each photon has a 50% chance of transmission through its polarizer, why don’t we get coincidences 25% of the time? Instead, we observe none at all. At first consideration, this does seem to qualify as a paradox. One possible explanation could involve a missing component of quantum theory – perhaps a causal mechanism that could allow one photon, or one measurement, to communicate with the other. However, despite extensive research, no evidence has been found for such a mechanism.” Carl Kocher

https://scitechdaily.com/quantum-magic-how-scientists-are-untangling-the-universes-weirdest-mystery/

It may be a magical mystery for Carl Kocher. But the reason behind Carl’s mystery is that he believes in Einsteins fantasy photons and QT’s magical mystery tour. Because a traditional Young Huygens wave only classical model of light and an understanding of polarisation can fully explain the ‘no coincidences’ recorded when the polarisers at the two detectors are crossed in Carl’s experiment. Without having to resort to magic or mystery.

First of all one must understand how the source light is polarised. Carl confirms that the source beams of 551 and 423 nm from the excited calcium source are unpolarised. However he also admits that both beam paths will always have the same polarisation state when they arrive at the detectors at any one point in time. As long as both path lengths are equal. (“More generally, if one of the photons passes through a linear polarizer at any orientation, the remaining photon will then be in the same polarization state, pending future measurements.” Kocher)

And so when the two beams (423 &551nm) arrive at the two detectors, both detectors will receive light at any one point in time that will always be in the same polarised state. As long as both path lengths are identical. (This incidentally is the purpose of the coincidence counter. It records all counts over the time span of the experiment, but collates counts from both detectors to match them both to the same time of emission to check for coincidences. Which is also defined as the same path length)

And therefore, as Carl says in his article, if he crosses the polarising filters by placing a horizontally polarised filter in front of detector A, and a vertically polarised filter in front of detector B then only one of the two detectors can detect any incident wave light that left the source at same time. Unfortunately for Carl, real physics doesn’t use QT magic. And light is wave only. So instead of 2 imaginary magically entangled photons arriving at the detectors, it is just 2 same polarised points in the wave-only light beams (423 &551nm). With the proviso, as Kocher admits above, that both these beams when emitted will always be emitted with the same state of polarisation. And therefore they both arrive at the detectors with the same polarised state. Provided the two path lengths are identical.

For example if both detectors are receiving the same vertically polarised part of the lightbeams simultaneously, but only one detector can receive vertically polarised light due to the crossed filters, then obviously only one detector will detect any light at any one time.

Hence no coincidences will or can be recorded. Exactly as observed. 

Not only is this a physical mechanism that can explain the experimental results, no QT magic is needed either. Just a plain old classical theory of wave only light as described by Young and Huygens

For further examples of how QT magic can be explained by a wave only classical model read Here

Attosecond delays in X-ray molecular ionization

“Here we report measurements of the X-ray photoemission delay of core-level electrons, with unexpectedly large delays,..”

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07771-9

As usual, Einsteins theory on photoelectrics is being proven once again to be pseudoscience. As the above quote from the linked papers abstract reveals. Problem is the theorists including those writing this paper just can’t bring themselves to admit that Einstein invented imaginary photons in 1905 purely as an excuse to validate the ludicrous claims in his soon to be published paper on special relativity. Knowing that the wave only theory of light accepted at the time was not consistent with his soon to be published fantasy of imaginary photons always travelling at c in all frames in his next paper on special relativity. 

The photon model is possibly one of the greatest obstacles to our understanding of the universe. Hubble, Planck and many other leading theorists at the time never accepted cosmological redshift was due to expansion. But because Einstein and his ludicrous quasi religious fantasies had by the 1920’s become to be worshipped and revered, nobody could accept that Hubble had just discovered that photons DID indeed lose energy over distance. A discovery that invalidated both of Einsteins 1905 Photoelectric and Special Relativity papers. And the continuing dogmatic adherence to anything Einstein published still prevents today’s theorists from understanding this basic fact: That light isn’t a photon. It is a wave only phenomena. And further to that...Electrons are also fantasies. Electric current can be much better modelled as variations in strength and orientations of adjacent atoms magnetic fields.

I have argued for many years on this blog that the photoelectric effect can be easily explained as a non relativistic classical wave only effect. Where light is a wave that gets “quantised” into packets of wave only electrical current by the detector atom. Using well documented and still scientifically accepted understanding of resonance in those resonating systems called atoms. No need for imaginary particles like photons or electrons. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8H9kx9_sQYA

Detailed study of a rare hyperluminous rotating disk in an Einstein ring 10 billion years ago

A new paper titled “Detailed study of a rare hyper luminous rotating disk in an Einstein ring 10 billion years ago” has come to my attention.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-024-02296-7

This paper is a good example of how the more pages of theory based on assumptions only, increasingly byzantine maths and a good load of devious data crunching the paper has, the more fantastical and pseudoscientific its conclusions will probably be. 

As usual the BBT theory consistently fails to explain why predictions of (the lack of) star and galaxy formation in the early universe don’t match the observations. A serious problem now for BBT theorists with the new JWST data. However the fantastical BBT can still be saved by pretending even more imaginary dark matter exists in the early universe than previously predicted. (As Narayanan et al postulated in 2015) These sort of very mature old galaxies have been recently observed in hi redshift surveys and cause a serious existential problem for the BBT. They shouldn’t exist! There’s not enough time for them to form after the beginining of time in the BBT fantasy universe. One get out for supporters of this failed theory has been that there were multiple fast occuring mergers of early galaxies. However the authors of this paper admit...no such evidence of any mergers is observed in this particular hi redshift mature galaxy studied in this paper. 

But the authors of this 2024 paper now cite Narayanan and pretend even larger than expected, or allowed, imaginary dark matter existed in the early universe and fortunately can be invoked to save the continually failing BBT. Thank heavens for brilliant mathematicians. They can turn a sows ear into a silk purse. And it is this pseudoscientific sleight of hand of that is used to save their cherished BBT. The rule seems to be: If the observation contradicts your preferred theory, then make up imaginary observations of imaginary new never before observed particles and your theory will be saved. For a few weeks at least until JWST comes up with new data that contradicts your theory once again.

When will supporters of the BBT theory admit that their favourite theory has never yet made a successful prediction. Starting with Gamows 1940’s prediction of a ridiculous 50k temp for the CMBR. (when a CMBR of 2.8K was measured in the 60’s, suddenly everyone forgot how wrong Gamow, LeMaitre or Apher and Herman’s predictions actually were) And JWST in particular has been a trying time for Big Bang fantasists. Every week some new JWST early universe data contradicts the Big Bang theory. Yet rather than admit the BBT is a quasi religious fantasy devised by a catholic priest desperate to reconcile his faith with a science that wouldn’t conform to his religion (LeMaitre) the theorists can always rely on Dark Matter. The phlogiston of the 21st C.

Physicists measured Earth’s rotation using quantum entanglement

Physicists measured Earth’s rotation using quantum entanglement! Since when has classical wave interference become “Quantum interference”?

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/earth-rotation-quantum-entanglement

The experimental setup as described in the original Silverstein et al 2024 experiment is fairly complex compared to the original Sagnac version. However complexity here does not mean it is no longer a basic time of flight Sagnac interferometer with observations consistent with a classical wave only model of light.

I’ve seen similar flights of fantasies of supposed ‘proof of QT’ from other very well known “Quantum” experiments. For instance the Kim et al 1999 Delayed Choice quantum eraser experiment. Where on analysis they had only confirmed the classical model of light. Where light is a wave only and not a photon. 

The technique is also used here. QT ‘researchers’ also have made the experiment as complex as possible so as to disguise the fact that the experiment can still be explained classically without referring to relativity or QT. I have comprehensively dissected Kim et al’s Delayed choice experiment setup and shown how adding complexity is also used to prove Quantum fantasies, at this following link http://physicsexplained.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-main-illustrationbelow-is-schematic.html

The same applies to this current 2024 experiment. They manage to pull off this Quantum trick by pretending that somehow ...classical polarised states of wave only light and wave interference are signs of the light being a particle and subject to quantum nuttiness!! 

The fact is that in this experiment there is still only just a path difference detected. And it is detected, as usual for any Sagnac interferometer, via interference patterns. Nothing more. They even admit this is all thats observed. The sleight of hand here is QT dogma at its greatest. They pretended that classical wave interference, observed and documented for centuries by Young and others... is somehow now called “Quantum Interference”

Laughable nonsense as usual from establishment physicists.

Tiny bright objects discovered at dawn of universe baffle scientists

 Tiny bright objects discovered at dawn of universe baffle scientists

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ad55f7

It seems that supermassive very old mature galaxies, too old for the BBT to accommodate, have been confirmed to exist in the “very early” Big Bang universe in a new study just published in Astrophysical Journal letters. In this quote from an article on the paper in the online source Science daily, one researcher seems baffled:

“We have confirmed that these (galaxies) appear to be packed with ancient stars -- hundreds of millions of years old -- in a universe that is only 600-800 million years old. Remarkably, these objects hold the record for the earliest signatures of old starlight," said Bingjie Wang, a postdoctoral scholar at Penn State and lead author on the paper. "It was totally unexpected to find old stars in a very young universe. The standard models of cosmology and galaxy formation have been incredibly successful, yet, these luminous objects do not quite fit comfortably into those theories."

Incredibly successful? My understanding is that every time we look at the early universe it turns out to not match BBT predictions. Notice that the age of the imaginary Big Bang has changed over the years from 8 to 25 billion years. And finally only settled on its current age when the so called CMBR confined it to an exact 13 or so billion years old. 

Don’t forget that not only did Hubble himself never accept expansion as an explanation for the observed redshift/distance relationship called Hubble redshift, but that the BBT itself was invented by a devout Catholic priest LeMaitre! 

So once again the Big Bang theory has failed spectacularly. But the bigger question is...Why are they so confused? We Critics of the Big Bang have been saying for years that the universe is infinite in age and not expanding and that JWST would confirm that the BBT was a delusional fantasy. 

Inner core backtracking by seismic waveform change reversals. Wang et al 2024

With regards to a recent paper in Nature titled  ‘Inner core backtracking by seismic waveform change reversals’ Wang et al 2024

I would like to point out here that the authors have ignored or were unaware of a theoretical model of the dynamo that drives the earths magnetic field that Inpublished in 2008 here on this blog. I predicted in this 2008 paper that the earths more solid inner core rotates at different speeds from the outer mantle. And is now beginning to slow down its rotation speed relative to the mantle. I notice that this Nature paper, using the latest data and recently published, confirms my 2008 predictions. Without giving any credit to my earlier predictions which I must point out predates their papers conclusions by almost 2 decades.  

Please notice the last paragraph of the my 2008 paper and linked below. It predicts the inner core is beginning to slow down. http://physicsexplained.blogspot.com/2008/12/earths-magnetic-field.html

First observation of a focused plasma wave on the sun

The following link is from an article titled ‘First Observation of a focussed plasma wave on the sun’

https://phys.org/news/2024-05-focused-plasma-sun.html

I have to say the quality of this research seems to be very poor. Or at the very least a rather complicated and torturous mathematical description of what is simply two convex wavefronts travelling across a liquid surface. An ubiquitous example seen everyday in waterwaves.  

The paper claims in the following quote from the article on the paper linked above:

“the original arc-shaped wavefronts changed to an anti-arc shape, with the curvature flipped by 180 degrees, from curved outward to saddle-shaped outward”

Fortunately a time based series of images from the Solar Dynamics Observatory is also supplied to show the data in graphic form. Making it  easier for visual analysis. No need for algorithms and pseudoscientific mathematical models. And let me stress the point: There is no “anti arc” concave wavefront. The researchers, being visually illiterate mathematicians, were unable to understand the data in a simple visual graphic format. Despite the fact that this data in graphic form is presented as evidence in their paper.!! Hi-liting how maths has prevented theoretical physics from understanding the true nature of the universe.

Look at and study frame by frame, the animated sequence of solar images from the paper and also supplied in the linked article above at the phys.org website. (And originally published in Nature at this link: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-46846-z )

What is actually happening is that there are two main sources of circular expanding wavefronts on the solar surface coming from the initial coronal ejection (s) starting at a central point one above the other on the left hand side of the satelitte images.  These are essentially convex wavefronts in the “liquid/plasma” surface of the sun. (Analogous to two waves in water propagating outwards from two stones dropped into the water simultaneously and adjacent to each other.) As the two wavefronts propagate outwards and horizontally towards the right hand side of the images, they NEVER flip from convex to concave. What actually happens is the two main convex waves intersect and interfere with each other as they propagate rightwards in the images across the plane of the suns surface and create an ILLUSION of a single concave wave propagating to the right of the satelitte images. 

This is a simple effect seen in water waves in ripple tanks or for that matter, in any liquid. In the illustration below the two sets of concentric rings indicate the two wavefronts travelling out across the solar surface after the initial event. The time lapse is shown by colouring the sets of 2 expanding wavefront circles with different  colours as follows. 

Time (t) elapsed is denoted as: t1 green circles, t2 black, t3 red and t4 blue.