Physics

Presenting A Hypothesis Of Everything, And Finding Out A Giant Had A Similar Idea At The Same Time Is Great.

By Hontas Farmer in Quantum Gravity

A hypothesis of everything, that is not what
I first thought it would be, is what I will present tomorrow at the April 2019 APS
conference. Quantum Gravity, finding a way to make general relativity into
a quantum theory of some kind, has been the driving mystery of my adult life.  Now,
after years of work towards that, a few who have researched the problem think
it was the wrong approach.  That instead we should make Quantum Field theory
compatible with General Relativity in some way or the other.   Not the other
way around. The talk is “Formal Unification of Gravity and Particle Physics in
Lagrangian Euclidean Space with Experimental Predictions” (1) Theoretical
physicists have the tough challenge of questioning the assumptions of the most
stubborn person anyone can meet, themselves.

The hypothetical model that will be presented is a product
of what I called “Relativization” of quantum field theory.  It is similar, in
concept, to an almost simultaneously proposed idea from Sir Roger Penrose known
as “Gravitization”.  In his words:

“This reversal of wording is deliberate, of course,
indicating my concern with the bringing of quantum theory more in line with the
principles of Einstein’s general relativity, rather than attempting to make
Einstein’s theory—or any more amenable theory of gravity—into line with those
of quantum mechanics (or quantum field theory).” (2).

In my words.

“The idea expressed in this short paper is that one could
try incorporating QFT into GR instead of the other way around. Instead of
quantizing General Relativity we relativize QFT by demanding strict adherence
to the Einstein Equivalence Principle.” (3)

He published in a more mainstream journal than I did, around
the same time I did. Even so I only found out about his work by chance perusal
of the physics arXiv (4)!  I was floored.  Like anyone who read a Brief History
of Time back in the 90’s and then read a bit more about Hawking… Penrose’s name
and work would be one of the first things found.  He would be on the list of
theoretical physics giants of the late 20th and early 21st
century since I was in high school.

Roger Penrose came up with the same idea, same basic
concept, as me at about the same time as I did. I can now die happy. Hopefully at age 120.

If I never break into the undeniable, high impact, high
visibility literature. If there are always some reasons why my ideas, as stated
by me, are just never good enough. The fact that a concept I came up
with gains some level of acceptance is as good as it gets.

What better post publication peer review is there, in purely
theoretical physics, than other people having the same basic idea?

PDF will be
embedded here after the presentation. (1)

Here is my hypothesis of everything, presented, very
briefly, in the same style as the math in Penrose’s journal publications.

Great Minds Think Alike.

Some who read this might think this is about priority, I
officially don’t care about that. 

Lately we have seen how ugly humanity can look when such
questions are asked. Unless people are getting prizes with money for it then I’ll
want my cut.  Maybe a job where I don’t have to hustle quite as hard to make
ends meet.  Maybe just at the jobs I have, as adjunct/part time faculty being
able to teach the special research courses that do exist there… occasionally.  To
be able to give my own students a chance for some small version of that kind of
moment when their code really pays off, or a problem they have worked on for
all semester is solved… and set them up for more.  

That is why I do what I do where I do it instead of doing
the myriad other things one who “only” has a MS in physics can do.

In fact, if this is ever proven out and only sometimes
called Penrose-Farmer, or even Penrose-Howl-Fuentes - two or three other names -
and rarely Farmer, that would be great too.

Professionally I care about educating the public, educating
my students, paying my bills, and maybe once a year hearing I did ok.   Notoriety
would only be worth it if it comes with money.  Even a high-minded theoretical physicist
must eat and afford a place to sleep.

*I have many colleagues in community college faculties who have several masters
level degrees.  Some attained their PHD or EdD late in life. Generally, this environment
is friendly and welcomes those who don’t fit the molds and who like the
teaching aspects of faculty life as much as the pure research.   It is not
often done and usually only our most senior and distinguished faculty get to do
this, but student research for credit, as a separate course does exist at most two-year
colleges.  Furthermore, science faculty at same often also work at research or industrial
labs.  If not, they conduct their own projects as I do.   This paragraph is
necessary because the above fact is a little-known surprise to many people even
in academia.  

Bibliography

1. Formal Unification of Gravity and Particle Physics in
Lagrangian Euclidean Space with Experimental Predictions. Farmer, Hontas
Freeman. s.l. : American Physical Society, 2019. https://absuploads.aps.org/presentation.cfm?pid=14777

2. On the Gravitization of Quantum Mechanics 1: Quantum
State Reduction. Penrose, Roger. s.l. : Springer, May 2014, Foundations of
Physics, Vol. 44, pp. 557-575. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10701-013-9770-0

3. Quantum Gravity by Relativization of Quantum Field
Theory. Farmer, Hontas Freeman. s.l. : The Winnower - Now Owned by Wiley, 2014,
The Winnower. http://dx.doi.org/10.15200/winn.140751.17561

4. Exploring the unification of quantum theory and general
relativity with a Bose-Einstein condensate. Howl, Richard, Penrose, Roger and
Ivette, Fuentes. s.l. : arXiv.org. https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.04630