Manifesto for the Real World Scientific Revolution

We hold the following to be the case:

(1) Given that from what is called the standard model of quantum and particle theory it can be assumed that the universe consists just of matter/energy and the forces, this theory does not make sense. And given any assumption that the known forces are all the causes that act universally, no theory can be successfully developed that generally explains how the universe is the way that it is.

(2) How an invisible cause could act universally in addition to the forces cannot be demonstrated by measurement and calculation from any evidence found of matter and energy on the smallest scale. Nor can it be demonstrated that this cause acts in the world from any such evidence found of atoms, molecules, their subatomic components or photons of radiant energy when examined alone. This is a cause that, rather than attracting or repelling objects with some measurable strength, acts so that matter can remain in its naturally organised forms despite the action of the forces, and produces the effects that are called quantum wave, spin and entanglement. And only by sufficiently justifying and describing enough details of this cause by examining together enough available natural evidence of where it acts can it be explained how matter can exist at all while consisting almost all of the space be between its subatomic components as particles.

(3) Modern physics lost its rational scientific soul at the fifth Solvay Conference in October 1927 where the ideology of indetermism was first propounded (and subsequently incorporated into the language of all quantum physics textbooks) in what was to be called the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. The 1927 conference was also where Louis de Broglie's pilot wave interpretation of quantum mechanics was rejected.

(4) The closest to a true account of quantum behaviour and its cause yet to be published was propounded in two papers by David Bohm entitled "A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of 'Hidden Variables' I & II"(1952). This account was a more sophisticatd version of De Broglie's Pilot Wave account, and was shown to be consistent with all the experimental evidence from which the original quantum mechanics was derived. This account demonstrated that the uncertainties and probabilites of measurement in quantum meechanics could be understood as limtations in any experimental set up, rather than real properties of quantum behaviour beyond the experimental results. And these observed results could be accounted for by quantum objects being both waves and particles with definable trajectoreies while in motion. As such Bohm's account can be described as a determinate nonlocal causal interpretation of quantum mechanics.. http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v85/i2/p166_1 http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-bohm/

(5) The probabilities and uncertainties of measurement of quantum behaviour that led to the Copenhagen interpretation were a diversion from the fact that matter had been discovered to consist of so little of of anything that could be called material objects. So that just this discovery in 1909 of the minute atomic nucleus - which has since been measured to be about a 10,000th the diametre of the atom - was a clear indication the matter needed to consist of more than mere particles. Then the discovery of the electron wave property and Schrodinger's wave equation were clear indications that the quantum wave needed to exist universally as a real property for matter to exist at all as atoms and molecules.

(6) The present Standard Model of quantum and particle theory is severely limited by its lack of a causal explanation of quantum wave, spin and entanglement behaviour, and its description of virtual particle exchange and vacuum energy is not a true account of what occurs on the small scale beyond the measurable results of experiments. This is so because quantum field theory assumes that Heisenbers's Uncertainty Principle applies to the behaviour of quantum objects in motion. The Standard Model is thus successful as a mathematical scheme that accounts for many properties of matter by describing quantum behaviour just as directly detected and measured. But this model does not explain the quantum behaviour itself, and thus how the natural form and organisation of matter in general is possible.

(7) The only possible empirically verifiable account that may be called a theory of everything will be a natural explanation of everything that cannot be explained by the action of the forces alone. This account could be more accurately called a General Theory of Natural Organisation, where a determinate nonlocal causal quantum hypothesis is supported by an examination of sufficient large scale natural evidence, and thus demonstrates in enough detail from its observable effects how a cause acts universally, constantly and nonlocally in addition to all the forces.

(8) In a General Theory of Natural Organisation the evidence examined on the large scale will be of available astronomical findings in relation to the evolution of the presently observed large scale structure of the cosmos and the formation of stars and planetary systems, and living organisms in relation to the nature of the mind as a part of a nonlocal cause, the evolution of consciousness and general features of organic behaviour. This general theory may be regarded as a final explanation of how the universe that includes living organisms is the way that it is, but is capable of indefinite further development.

(9) The General Theory of Natural Organisation may be regarded as a scientific explanation which demonstrates that the real universe makes enough sense of life from a human point of view and will allow human beings to make more sense of their lives by their actions.