Short Communication
Ben Campbell Biezanek
Abstract
The author started work upon this subject in 2007, 12-years ago. He recognised at the start that the mainstream of physics teaching was failing to connect up the dots between classical views of physics after Newton as modified by Einstein’s special and general relativity with the more rigorous science of quantum physics, so he tried the different approach of going back to first principles in everything and seeking the error. The error was found in Albert Einstein’s retention of classical units within his equations for relativity. For example; Einstein retains the metre to express a speed of- light in metres per second, while it turns out from diligent observational work by Clauser and Freedman (USA 1972) and Alain Aspect (France, ongoing) demonstrating instant action at a distance with entangled quanta, that the metre is an inadmissible unit that has no proper applicability within a correct appreciation of relativity. The equations that Einstein gave us were correct within the terms that he stated them, but classical measurement units are insufficiently rigorous for fully connecting the real world of the quanta with the illusions seen and experienced within our macro world of classical physics. In the author’s opinion, this is the most dramatic and far reaching insight ever achieved within our progress towards a better fundamental understanding of the real physical nature of our universe. This discovery makes it much easier for students to understand atomic physics. The creator began work upon this subject in 2007, 12-years back. He perceived toward the beginning that the standard of material science showing was neglecting to associate up the dabs between old style perspectives on physical science after Newton as adjusted by Einstein's unique and general relativity with the more thorough study of quantum material science, so he attempted the distinctive methodology of returning to first standards in all things and looking for the mistake. The blunder was found in Albert Einstein's maintenance of old style units inside his conditions for relativity. For instance; Einstein holds the meter to communicate a speed of-light in meters every second, while it diverts out from steady observational work by Clauser and Freedman (USA 1972) and Alain Aspect (France, continuous) exhibiting moment activity a good ways off with trapped quanta, that the meter is an unacceptable unit that includes no appropriate relevance inside a right energy about relativity. The conditions that Einstein gave us were right inside the terms that he expressed them, yet old style estimation units are inadequately thorough for completely interfacing this present reality of the quanta with the fantasies seen and experienced inside our large scale universe of traditional material science. In the creator's feeling, this is the most sensational and sweeping knowledge at any point accomplished inside our advancement towards a superior crucial comprehension of the genuine physical nature of our universe. This disclosure makes it a lot simpler for understudies to comprehend nuclear material science. Why do we need a book about theoretical physics from a non - theoretical physicist? Theoretical physics is supposed to be a body of thought that is consistent, but unfortunately it is not. For what reason do we need a book about hypothetical material science from a non - hypothetical physicist? Hypothetical material science should be a collection of believed that is reliable, however sadly it isn't. There are two models of material science that are totally extraordinary and really appear to negate one another. The two models are quantum material science and old style physical science. A hypothesis of everything or Grand Universal Theory (GUT) would accommodate these two speculations. Quantum mechanics is blameless in light of the fact that it has never put a foot wrong in the last one hundred years. Each hypothesis has been totally vindicated in the research facility. So as there is in reality just one uniform nature then our perspectives on traditional material science must be contorted in some unpretentious manner that we essentially lack to the base of yet. The creator has unintentionally through other work revealed the easily overlooked detail that Einstein missed in 1905 and again in 1915. With this small and irrationally straightforward hypothetical disclosure, the two models of material science become completely accommodated. At the end of the day simply right for this minuscule mistake in Einstein's reasoning and afterward we definitely know the hypothesis of everything. The two unique renditions of this book are presently indistinguishable, with the exception of the spread.