Sunday, December 20, 2015

Bell Inequality Violation Myth Debunked

The myth that Bell inequality violation establishes superluminal causality is debunked. Entanglement experiments designed to demonstrate non-local effects apparently all rely on Bell's theorem also known as the Bell inequality. However, Bell himself stated, "There is a way to escape the inference of superluminal speeds and spooky action at a distance. But it involves absolute determinism in the universe..." (ref. 5 in [1]). Therefore, according to Bell, the exact time-development laws called bit operations [2] [3] [4] in binary mechanics (BM) [5] prevent particle entanglement experiments from demonstrating non-local "spooky action at a distance". This inescapable conclusion debunks the myth that the Bell inequality can be used in entanglement experiments to demonstrate superluminal effects and implies that quantum mechanics (QM) assumptions that system time-evolution is fundamentally probabilistic (not exact) are questionable. In short, use of the Bell inequality in entanglement experiments acts to establish that legacy QM formalism has been hopelessly flawed, no doubt including the unjustified assumption of continuous space-time.
Fig. 1: Unintended Result Surprises Investigators

Legend: Believers in superliminal causality face their worst nightmare, caught in the headlights of binary mechanics.

Monday, December 14, 2015

Binary Mechanics Lab Simulator Update

The Binary Mechanics Lab Simulator (BMLS) software has been updated. Fig. 1 shows a screen shot of a "laser" experiment. Basic information has been presented previously [1], and might best be consulted first. In addition, further evidence is presented that light velocity c equals bit velocity v / π.
Fig. 1: BMLS Screen Shot

Monday, June 15, 2015

Polchinski's "New Normal" Physics

In the last 48 hours, physicist Joseph Polchinski -- noted for string theory work including two textbooks -- revealed what may be the "new normal" in science, namely, good questions and verifiable facts are to be deleted and banned. His behavior took me completely by surprise. As background, several years ago I wrote: "String theories may turn out to be one of the strongest factors favoring the acceptance of quantized space and time as postulated in [binary mechanics] BM, according to the 'when all else fails...' rule" [1]. Now noted string theorist Polchinski appears to reveal a sort of totalitarianism in physics today. In sum, at least one string theory practitioner may have significant anti-science issues.

Fig. 1: Keene's Initial Comment and Polchinski's Second Reply
Legend: Note four replies -- two from Keene and two from Polchinski.

Friday, May 8, 2015

Physics Standard Model Forensics

Let us play detective and do some physics Standard Model (SM) forensics. The main research question is the mystery of the paucity of basic progress in physics for some six decades. This is our crime scene, so to speak, and we seek some clues concerning how about two generations of physicists could be fooled into an almost religious belief in continuous space-time? Our journey has three parts: first, reminder on the definition of a geometric point; second, the delta function of the great physicist Paul Dirac; and third, usage of this nonsensical math in the current physics SM.


The scientific merit of the present research question is enormous, since it hopes to find the cause of a huge waste of intellectual resources in the physics community over some six decades, not to mention billions in misdirected research funding from indebted governments.

Tuesday, April 21, 2015

Elementary Particle Energies

Abstract and Introduction
The eight elementary particles consist of four matter particles -- electron (e-L) and three R-handed d quarks (dR, red, green, blue), and four antimatter particles -- positron (e+R) and three L-handed d quarks (dL, red, green, blue) [1] [2]. With quantization of space, time and energy in binary mechanics (BM) [1], each of these eight particles is associated with a spatial object called a spot which may contain zero to six 1-state bits of quantized energy [3]. If a simulation randomly seeds these spots with 1-state energy bits, each particle type would represent about one eighth (0.125) of the total energy. This exploratory, descriptive study reports the discovery that application of the four fundamental time-evolution bit operations [4] causes redistribution of energy among the particle types which then exhibit markedly different energy densities. In addition, the distribution of energy among lepton and quark particle types by these time-development laws varies as a function of overall bit density in a physical system (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1: Elementary Particle Energies vs Bit Density

Legend: Matter: electrons (e-L, dark blue) and three R d quarks (dR, yellow). Anti-matter: positrons (e+R, pink) and three L d quarks (dL, light blue). Distribution of elementary particle energy (vertical) changes as a function of overall bit density (horizontal). SVUF (left) and VSUF (right) bit operations order.

Monday, April 20, 2015

Three Proton Bit Cycles From One Positron Spot

A single positron spot in a spot cube [1] can participate in three proton bit cycles in neighboring spot cubes adjacent to the home spot cube of the positron spot as previously reported [2]. The video below shows this phenomenon with the freely downloadable Binary Mechanics Lab Simulator v1.36.8.


Friday, April 17, 2015

Expanding Universe Questions

The discovery that light speed in vacuum c is not constant over the entire vacuum energy range may raise significant questions about expanding universe concepts. A recent study reported evidence that light speed c begins to decrease at lower vacuum energy densities and that volumes at zero vacuum energy density, named absolute vacuum, were in fact completely opaque to electromagnetic (EM) wave transmission (Fig. 1 from [1]).
Fig. 1: Light Speed vs Media Density and Bit Operations Order

These findings raise the possibility that observed redshifts may not be due to an expanding universe, but rather to regions of lower vacuum density where light speed is decreased producing the exact same observed redshifts. This possiblity may raise serious questions about the veracity of the expanding universe theory in astrophysics. Indeed, the question of whether the universe is expanding, contracting or neither may be back on the table again.

Saturday, April 11, 2015

Proton And Electron Bit Cycles

Analysis of the proton [1] [2] and electron [3] bit cycles (Fig. 1) has revealed that the bit positions in these two cycles account for all possible bit positions according to the postulates of binary mechanics (BM) [4] and a physical interpretation of BM space [3]. Hence, in addition to the four fundamental bit operations which determine exact time-development of system states, a new constraint on BM as a physical theory is that physical mechanisms for observed phenomena may typically involve one or both of these cycles. In tests of this new constraint, bit motion within and between no more than two different bit cycles -- proton and electron -- would hypothetically account for all observable physical events.

Fig. 1: Proton and Electron Bit Cycles

Legend: Six 1-state bit positions in electron cycle (yellow). 42 1-state bit positions in proton cycle. Matter d quarks (dark red, green, blue); anti-matter d quarks (light red, green, blue). Positron positions (grey). Arrows (purple) indicate bit motion direction and results of the strong bit operation [5]. The unconditional bit operation (black) accounts for all motion between color-coded spot types. XYZ positions shown without commas: e.g., 013 is {0,1,3}.

Friday, March 20, 2015

If You Want to Keep Your Higgs Boson...

This note reports additional information regarding "If you like your Higgs boson, you can keep your Higgs boson" and other lost causes in the Standard Model (SM). With the quantization of space, time and energy in binary mechanics (BM) [1], infinitesimal time-development operators in conventional quantum mechanics (QM) were no longer mathematically applicable since only integer increments in spatial position and time were allowed. Thus, four binary bit operations were defined -- unconditional (U), scalar (S), vector (V) and strong (F), each occurring in a time tick t in a time-development cycle of duration T (4t). The unconditional bit operation corresponds to the momentum operator, leaving three fundamental forces defined by the scalar (electrostatic), vector (magnetic) and strong bit operations [2]. Only one bit operations order can be fully correct physics since each may affect the results obtained by others [3].

"...You can keep your Higgs boson." Fig. 1 shows force incidence as a function of bit density in a simulated 64x64x64 spot volume.

Fig. 1: Force Bit Operations Counts vs Bit Density

Legend: Counts for scalar (blue), vector (purple) and strong (yellow) bit operations from absolute vacuum (0 bit density) [4] to maximum bit density (1) for six permutations of bit operations order.

Sunday, March 15, 2015

Light Speed Amendment

Updated: April 17, 2015
Abstract and Introduction
In this pilot study, the hypothesis that absolute vacuum, defined as zero bit (energy) density [1], is opaque to electromagnetic (EM, light) transmission posed in 2011 [2] was confirmed using simulated volumes with bit densities ranging from zero to 0.30 expressed as proportion of maximum possible density. At zero bit density, light speed c was zero. The first detectable light transmission was seen at 0.10 bit density. Light speed c increased with increased bit densities through partial vacuum levels. An essentially constant light velocity c was obtained only at higher bit densities at and above approximately 0.15, thereby limiting the energy density range over which light speed invariance postulated in Special Relativity occurs. Thus, the Special Relativity postulate of "light speed invariance in a vacuum" was correct only for higher vacuum (bit) density ranges. The postulates of binary mechanics (BM) [3] generated the present hypothesis and explain the underlying mechanisms for the reported results.

Methods and Results

Fig. 1: Delay in Arrival of Wave Front with Two Bit Operations Orders.

Friday, March 6, 2015

Higgs Boson Buries Standard Model?

Abstract and Introduction
Contrary to common belief, work on the Higgs field and boson [1] may be a significant nail in the coffin for the Standard Model (SM) in physics. The scalar Higgs field may in fact describe adjacent pairs of spot units which implement the strong bit operation ("strong force") in binary mechanics (BM) [2]. With the discovery of the central baryon bit cycle [3], this binary definition of the strong force is the basis for quark confinement. Observed particle motion requires 1-state bit emission from one baryon cycle with subsequent absorption by another cycle. The Higgs boson may represent one or more instances of strong force scattering which confines 1-state bits in cycles and thereby prevents particle motion. Recall that particle mass, as the force/acceleration ratio, describes the inverse of the likelihood of such particle motion. The so-called Higgs mechanism is said to confer mass on fermion particles, a concept apparently equivalent to confinement of 1-state bits in cycles. This speculative article steps through this process and discusses some consequences, namely diminished SM and enhanced BM credibility.

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Non-Zero Proton Electric Dipole Moment

Proton electric dipole moment (EDM) dp equals 8.534265E-32 ecm, calculated from positions of charged 1-state bits in the central baryon bit cycle [1] model of the proton [2] (Fig. 1), elementary charge e and the estimated fundamental length d [3] based on binary mechanics (BM) postulates [4] and nucleon scattering data [5]. This dp is deemed to be accurate to at least 7 digits based on (1) the CODATA accuracy for elementary charge e, (2) the integer position coordinates are exact, (3) the assumption that the charges are centered on the coordinate grid shown and (4) only one 1-state bit circulating in the central baryon bit cycle. The BM prediction of zero electron EDM has been confirmed by observations conducted by two independent labs deemed to be reliable [6]. The present non-zero proton EDM result is consistent with all experimental measurements to date [7] and is discussed regarding P and T symmetry issues.

Fig. 1: Electric Charge Positions in Central Baryon Bit Cycle

Legend: Centers (0 - 4) of bit loci (approx. 0.6 fm cubes of quantized space) viewed from the XY plane and rotated 90 degrees, the YZ plane, showing charge densities -- positive: red (2), light red and orange (1) and negative: yellow (2), light yellow and orange (1).

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Non-Spherical Proton Shape

Binary mechanics (BM) has predicted a non-spherical proton shape, supported by accumulating experimental data and quantum chromodynamic (QCD) modeling. This paper further documents the non-spherical shape of the proton, highlighting clear advantages of BM over QCD. Based on a pair of relativistic Dirac spinor equations of opposite handedness, quantization of space, time and energy was proposed in a 1994 paper presenting BM [1]. As a result, quantum mechanical (QM) formalism evolved into (1) the bit function replacing the wave function for an irreducible representation of the state of any physical system and (2) four fundamental bit operations replacing infinitesimal operators for system time evolution [2]. With time quantization in discrete tick t units, Planck's constant h for an action quanta could then be parsed to define energy quanta as 1-state binary bits independent of time or frequency considerations. Another consequence of BM postulates was discovery of a cyclical circulation of 1-state bits in a quantized spatial structure named a spot cube (Fig. 3A in [1]). With a physical interpretation of BM space [3] and simulation software [4], this 1-state bit circulation was further described as an 84 tick central baryon bit cycle, detailing the physical basis for quark confinement [5].

Fig. 1: 1-State Bit Density in Central Baryon Bit Cycle
Legend: Centers (0 - 4) of bit loci (approx. 0.6 fm cubes of quantized space) with densities of 1 (light grey), 2 (grey) and 4 (black) 1-state bits viewed from the XY plane and rotated 90 degrees, the YZ plane.

Tuesday, February 3, 2015

Intrinsic Electron Magnetic Moment Derivation

The Bohr magneton μB and hence, the electron intrinic magnetic moment μS, without g-factor or electron rest mass consideration and without anomalous magnetic moment "correction", may be calculated from the fundamental length d and time t constants [1] of binary mechanics (BM) [2]. In this report, μS is computed from d, t, elementary charge e and a classical expression of magnetic dipole moment based on a current around the perimeter of a circular area, marking perhaps the first direct derivation of μS from first principles of a comprehensive physical theory. The more conservative interpretation is that the so-called anomalous magnetic moment represents an experimental artifact with reference to μS measurement.
Fig. 1: Electron Spot Geometry for Magnetic Moment Calculation

Saturday, January 31, 2015

Intrinsic Electron Spin and Fundamental Constants

For the first time, the empirically measured value of Planck's constant h is calculated from first principles of a physical theory to the full precision allowed by CODATA values. Using the postulates of binary mechanics (BM) where both space and time are quantized [1], this report describes the key steps in this calculation and proposes values for the fundamental length d and time t constants.
(1) Bit velocity v was defined as greater than the speed of light in a vacuum c consistent with the BM constraint that v > c [2].
(2) A physical interpretation of BM space [3] suggested a proposed value for the fundamental BM length constant d as approximately 0.6 fm.
(3) d/v = t' = approximately 6.35E-25 s, the fundamental time constant in BM space-time.
(4) The fine structure constant α maps this quantized time unit t' from BM space to observational space with t = αt' = approximately 4.63325E-27 s.
(5) Intrinsic electron spin and hence the Planck constant h was calculated using only electron rest mass me and the proposed length d and time t constants.
(6) In addition to steps (3) and (4) above, another method was used to calculate quantized time t based only on me, h and quantized length d.
(7) Finally, eq. 9 calculates Planck constant h directly from the independently determined length constant d (step 2 above) and familiar physical constants.

Monday, January 12, 2015

Zero Electron Electric Dipole Moment

A previous article [1] (1) presented the hypothesis that the electric dipole moment (EDM de) of the electron equals zero, (2) cited confirmation by a London group led by Jony Hudson [2] which reported measurements, with increased precision, of de = (-2.4 ± 5.7stat ± 1.5syst) x 10E-28 e cm, an EDM not statistically different than zero with a high degree of confidence, and (3) questioned the assumption that this result implied a spherical electron shape, without any consideration that other shapes could yield the same zero EDM result. For example, Fig. 1 shows three negatively charged objects (white circles) on a plane and equidistant from the orthogonal spin axis, which rotate counter-clockwise so its magnetic dipole moment points toward the viewer.

Fig. 1: XYZ position parity 111 electron spot with hypothesized EDM = 0
Now a second independent research group dubbed ACME headquartered at Harvard has confirmed the hypothesis again with even greater precision reporting a de = (-2.1 ± 3.7stat ± 2.5syst) x 10E-29 e cm, further decreasing the probability that a small, yet non-zero EDM may be readily demonstrable [3].

Friday, January 9, 2015

Particle Up-Down Spin and Quantized Time Parity

Some consequences of time quantization in binary mechanics (BM) [1], which postulates a fundamental time unit and constant named the tick (t), are (1) precise definition of the phenomenon of electromagnetic (EM) resonance at the most elemental level possible, (2) recognition of the particle time phase phenomenon due to elemental EM resonance and (3) complete explanation of the previously mysterious quantum mechanical (QM) particle up-down spin property. These advances mark the demise of the 72-year-old up-down particle spin mystery, born with the Stern-Gerlack experiment in 1922 [2] and ending with the BM postulate of quantized time in 1994 [1]. These perhaps milestone developments illustrate failure of QM formalism to elucidate physical observations due to its obsolete assumption of continuous space-time.
Fig. 1: Elemental EM resonance from space-time quantization

Legend: Five spot units at integer coordinates form part of a spot unit channel. Each spot unit consists of a mite (circle) and lite (arrow) bit locus. 1-state bits (yellow) at T = 0 shift in the lite direction (right) in unconditional bit operations (T = 1, 2, 3).