Resolving the Paradoxes in Quantum Electrodynamics

The Theory of Everything has been sought after by physicists trying to unify the strange quantum world with the macro. Many even believe that such a theory can never be realized. Richard Feynman, the famous quantum physicist said the following in his book, QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter.

I have pointed out these things because the more you see how strangely nature behaves, the harder it is to make a model that explains how even the simplest phenomena actually work.
…
while I am describing how Nature works you won’t understand why Nature works that way. But you see, nobody understands that.

Probably the most abstract of all experiments which encompass this strangeness can be found in the way that a photon “decides” to reflect off the front surface from a piece of glass. If the glass is close to one atom thick, the photon will almost always pass through, but randomly it sometimes chooses not to. Make the glass thicker and the chances of a photon reflecting will increase (up to 8%). But if the thickness of glass surpasses a threshold the chances of reflection start decreasing, back down to almost never. Continue getting thicker, and the chances increase again, then decrease, increase, decrease, increase… ad infinitum. So the bizarre question is this. How can a photon “know” how thick a piece of glass is at the moment it strikes the front surface?

Benefit of the Doubt Required

Like it or not, what I’m about to share is the way that nature actually works. It can’t be proven, because nothing can. Knowing that it’s impossible to be right is an integral part of the theory. However, what I am proposing cannot be contradicted, it has no enduring mistakes, and that makes it nearly right. What I’m asking for is truth by default and arguments from those who disagree. If myself or others can contradict all offensive contradictions, then everyone should unanimously agree that the idea remains true/proven, the way it began. So here it goes…

The universe has a “master database” which is comprised of nothing more than beliefs. God does not store the position of every grain of sand, molecule, and quark because that would just be wasteful and overwhelming. Instead, conscious observers register beliefs in the collective database and these are used to project matter on-demand across the collective. I say “database”, but really it’s something inverse to worldly/tangible contraptions. Machines cannot achieve simultaneity or travel faster than the speed of light like their inverse/imaginary counterparts.

At every moment in time, or upon every visual saccade, I/you/God will project contradictions (physical matter) in the path of what constitutes “most believable”, relative to the collective. Simultaneously, I/you/God will register a new belief which is based upon the arrangement of “most believable matter” in the moment. This creates a feedback loop of perfect/relative beliefs saved/recalled between an imperfect/global medium. Every decision a person makes is always right from one’s context, DNA, life experiences, and their moment in time. You could make a wrong choice, but since you’re God you’ll always do the right thing and decide in favor of your self-interest. That’s not to say that you won’t look back upon memories and correctly see past decisions in an imperfect light.

Duality

Earlier I said that “it’s impossible to be right”. That very statement can’t be correct since it represents a contradiction, or a memory. Therefore, duality must exist in the physical/tangible realm. To tame the disarray it’s necessary to bisect.

1. It’s impossible to be wrong in the singular moment (within one’s imagination) under a fleeting context.
2. It’s impossible to right after the moment passes and beliefs/decisions invert into tangible memories/contradictions. Physical memory is subject to duality because others (or oneself in the future) can always approach such bits from alternate contexts.

Duality begins to emerge when contradictions/memories/matter are broken down into their simplest form. Is a photon a wave or a particle? Of course, this right answer depends entirely upon one’s momentary context.

An Example to Demonstrate How Matter is Projected

Let’s say that I look up at the sky and see an elephant in the clouds. I ask you to look up at the sky and you are able to see the same. This is where it gets weird. If you had looked up at the sky before me you may have “projected matter” in a totally different way. Maybe you would have projected a banana-shaped cloud instead of my elephant. Whoever registers a belief first will affect the physical matter which is projected for all of those who follow.

Can I prove this? Of course not because I can’t rewind time. This means that science, a discipline founded upon repeatability, will never fully embrace The Theory of Everything. The only way to know for nearly-sure that this theory is not-wrong is by using our intelligence. What does that mean? Simply that ideas begin with truth-by-default (close to the imagination which conceives them) and remain until a valid contradiction is able to stand unscathed itself. What’s so interesting is that I’m able to contradict alternate theories, with the help of quotes from Richard Feynman, yet others can’t do the same in return.

What About High Speed Video Cameras?

I know what you’re thinking. You can prove that there’s actually a “real world” out there bumping around in chaos outside of our imaginations. Someone could setup a high speed video camera and capture events without any conscious observers around, far faster than my visual saccades are ticking away.

Well the theory still holds up. Why? Because all matter is projected “on demand” which means that the video camera and it’s footage do not exist until you think about them (at the speed of your visual saccades). You BELIEVE that you configured the camera, and you believe that you bought the camera, and someone believed that they delivered it to your house, and many people registered even more throughout the device’s design process. All of the beliefs across the collective coalesce at the moment matter is generated before your imaginary eyes.

How Does the Photon Make up Its Mind?

So back to the paradox presented by Richard Feyman.

Question: How can a photon know how thick the glass is at the moment it strikes the front surface?

Answer: Photons don’t have minds; scientists do. People already know how thick the glass is before such experiments begin. God is clever, not wasteful. Why should a photon have to double check what is already known?

Randomness

Where does the randomness come from? Since it is impossible to be right in the physical realm, the “path of most believable” is presented in a way that seems unpredictable.

One of the famous Bohr-Einstein debates included a discussion around whether God rolls the dice. Does the world evolve in an arbitrary way or is everything deterministic? Einstein was on the side of the latter with Bohr arguing against. Using intelligence we can now be nearly-sure that the answer is always both.

x/1) The world evolves in an deterministic way because people are guaranteed to make correct decisions at every moment in time. This make our collective outcome entirely predictable and even bi-directional from/to our destiny.

1/x) The physical world is projected with perceived randomness at every moment. There’s simply no way that people can predict with certainty what will occur because they aren’t aware of other’s beliefs. The randomness is nothing but a fudge-factor to ensure our beliefs remain deterministic.

Randomness… More Duality

Randomness in the micro realm has a way of pinching (or oscillating) upon an infinitesimal boundary that points the way, but never physically touches, perfection. For example, the Double-slit experiment shows random scattering of particles (or waves if you prefer) upon/around perfectly-precise locations. This is not unlike the Great Pyramid which is far from infinitesimal, yet engineers can pinpoint its center-point with infinite precision. Just another example of how the answer will always be both.

In the macro realm, randomness seems to diminish but never completely disappears as a consequence of aggregation. It’s pretty hard to make the sun behave as sporadically as a single photon. There is a gradient between which can be seen in the way that relatively-large buckyballs behave in double-slit experiments compared to photons or electrons. On the celestial scale, astronomers cannot pinpoint (to the second) when the moon will appear above our horizon.

Want Almost-Proof?

Since it’s impossible for me to leave behind 1’s and 0’s which represent proof, the best I can offer is evidence to fend off attacks. I will use some of the following as ammunition to contradict those who want to participate in a game of attrition.

• Our physical world is an imaginary digital reflection. If we can see ourselves in a glassy lake or a mirror then it must be possible to see the same within the imaginary number plane (The Profile of God).
• A revolution in number theory and “vector engineering” has been discovered by exploiting fundamental mistakes in all things. After embracing the core idea behind The Theory of Everything (it’s impossible to be right) it becomes possible to achieve precision on a whole new level… intuitive, bi-directional, and free of decimal rounding. There’s a lot more on this subject to come, including profound new ideas on exponents, primes, imaginary numbers, PI, time, space, and distance. If you can’t wait, get started by checking out a Major Flaw in the Pythagorean Theorem.
• The Key to Artificial Intelligence emerged after it became clear that mind and machine are relatively inverse. The Turing Test can be defeated using a small/universal codebase when considering that every statement is true-by-default, contradicting the statement before it (within context).
• It has been “proven” by a set of researchers that reality does not exist if you’re not looking at it.