Introduction to this Website
This website presents several works of Dr. Delbert Larson. The works concern the foundation of physics as well as philosophy. As such, these works deal with topics that have been worked on by many of the intellectual giants throughout history. Despite the efforts of such giants, the fundamental questions at the heart of physics and philosophy defy easy definitive answers, and over time additional experimental results continue to become known, resulting in a need to periodically reevaluate previously accepted dogmas. It is readily admitted that the works presented herein are likely less than perfect; and it is asserted that presently prevailing theory is less perfect as well. The works herein hence do not to claim to present knowledge of the ultimate truth; but rather the effort of the works is to make aim at the ultimate truth while trying to hit the mark more closely than presently competing theories.
Guideposts for Physical Theory
In order to properly examine physical theories of nature, the following aspects are paramount and should be adhered to as closely as possible:
- There must be no logical errors, nor mathematical errors, in the conceptual development.
- All known experimental results must be properly accounted for, both qualitatively and quantitatively.
- Any truly new theory must predict at least one result that is different than the prevailing theory.
- The theory should be simple.
- The theory should start with a listing of the axioms that are assumed.
Some comments are in order concerning the above list. While it should be clear to all that any theory must be logical, error free, and consistent with experiment, it may not be obvious that a new prediction be required. However, that latter point is very useful in ferreting out two common problems with the many crackpot efforts that abundantly populate the web, which are 1) a theory so vague as to allow for any experimental result whatsoever, and 2) a theory that is essentially just a renaming of things in the other theory that it replaces. By insisting that any new theory have at least one predictable difference separating it from existing theory, most "new physics theories" can be removed from serious consideration. Conversely, many would raise the "desired" aspects listed above to the state of "required". But the true philosopher must admit that nature might not be simple, and further, that a full listing of axioms may not even be possible, and we certainly don't want to be so tied up with philosophical perfection that we don't pursue these questions at all. Lastly, note the words should be adhered to as closely as possible above. A theory should not necessarily be cast aside for trouble with a single experiment, nor for some complexity here or there, as improvements in experimental knowledge can lead to improvements in the theory over time. But as guideposts for what make a good theory, the above five aspects serve as a good measuring stick for success.
The High Bar Set by the Presently Prevailing Theories of Relativity and The Standard ModelWhile the works herein do take aim at replacing both the special theory of relativity and the standard model for elementary particle physics, it should be noted at the outset that both of these presently prevailing theories are themselves extremely successful. The standard model - the theory of quark and lepton particles, along with the strong, weak, electromagnetic and graviational forces - is exceptionally successful in describing all physical particles ever found in particle accelerators. Special relativity results in the Lorentz transformation equations, and these equations have been used to design working particle accelerators. Hence, any new theory must meet the high bar of experimental consistency that is already met by these two presently prevailing theories. In essence, any new space-time theory must also arrive at the Lorentz transformation in some guise, while any new elementary particle model must in some way dovetail with the results of the standard model. And, beyond that, any new physical theory must also make unique predictions to differ itself from these prevailing theories while at the same time providing an adequate understanding of the results that the prevailing theories describe so well. Hence, there is a very high bar to overcome when one tries to present alternatives to special relativity and the standard model.
Fundamental Problems in the Theories of Relativity and The Standard Model
Despite the fact that special relativity and the standard model are so successful in explaining all presently known scientific data, they each do suffer from separate critical flaws that are widely acknowledged.
For the case of special relativity, it is well known that the results of quantum entanglement (Bell's Theorem) tests are incompatible with special relativity if an objective reality is assumed. While it is presently dogma that we should then question the axiom of objective reality, it should be of interest to pursue the other path - that of questioning the axioms of special relativity.
For the case of the standard model, the problem is that it now suffers from complexity. There are presently three generations of quarks and leptons, and each of the generations of quarks come in three flavors. In addition antiparticles exist for each quark and lepton. The resulting particle zoo is becoming so populated that a more fundamental level of elementary particles can certainly be thought to exist as a substructure to the quarks and leptons now evidenced.
While not directly a problem of physical theory per se, it is also a fact that in the past several decades physical theory has diverged steadily from classical religious teachings to the point where physical science and religion are presently viewed by many as being incompatible with each other. Yet it is the view of Dr. Larson that there is an enormous amount of value in both present science and classic religion; and the present dogma of forcing an intellectual choice between either accepting one or the other leads to a situation where a great deal of value is cast aside.
A Brief Introduction and Links to the Individual Works
An Absolute Theory for the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies
"An Absolute Theory for the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" was published in Physics Essays, volume 7, in 1994. This work deals with the fundamental question of whether or not a length contraction exists in nature. The axioms of Einstein and Lorentz are presented, along with a modification of the Lorentz axioms proposed by Dr. Larson. Whereas Lorentz proposed an ad hoc length contraction and clock retardation to explain experimental results, Dr. Larson explores the possibility that only clock retardation exists, with objects retaining their original lengths even after they have been accelerated into motion. The null result of the Michelson Morley test is explained as being the result of electric fields having nulls enforced at the mirrors of the apparatus, which, similar to waves on a string, will be forced to have wave phase velocities modified by the experimental apparatus. A detailed and careful analysis of all experimental data is done, and a new group velocity equivalent of the Michelson Morley experiment is proposed to test space time theory.
"An Absolute Theory for the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" is reprinted here with permission granted in 1999 from Physics Essays:
A Derivation of Maxwell’s Equations from a Simple Two-Component Solid-Mechanical Aether
"A Derivation of Maxwell’s Equations from a Simple Two-Component Solid-Mechanical Aether" was published in Physics Essays, volume 11, in 1998. This work starts with some simple axioms and goes on to show how Maxwell's Equations can be derived from two very simple solid components. The work therefore answers questions such as "What is the Electric Field?", "What is the Magnetic Field?", and "Why do Electric monopoles exist but not Magnetic Monopoles?". The work proposes a test of the theory using atomic clocks immersed in RF fields to see if aetherial motion can be show to lead to clock retardation.
"A Derivation of Maxwell’s Equations from a Simple Two-Component Solid-Mechanical Aether" is reprinted here with permission granted in 1999 from Physics Essays:
The A-B-C Preon Model
"The A-B-C Preon Model" was published in Physics Essays, volume 10, in 1997. This work begins with an observation that a muon decaying into an electron is a process that is very analogous to a Hydrogen atom in the 2s state decaying into a Hydrogen atom in the 1s state. Since the Hydrogen atom is a composite particle, the analogy is extended to postulate that the electron and muon are likewise composite particles. The analysis continues by looking at other matter, and arrives at a model wherein all matter can be seen to be composed of three preon particles, which are named A, B and C. The work results in a great simplification over the Standard Model, but does so in a way that dovetails with the standard model. The theory proposes that a 69 GeV Z-like signature should exist in data from colliding beam experiments - a prediction not shared by the standard model.
"The A-B-C Preon Model" is reprinted here with permission granted in 1999 from Physics Essays:
Fusion is the process that fuels the sun and stars, and it is well known that water contains 1000 times more energy than gasoline if fusion energy can be effectively extracted. ECOFusion is a proposed device that uses the technology of colliding beam particle storage rings to enable a working fusion power generator. ECOFusion promises to be a safe, clean and economically viable means of producing power for many millenia into the future. The ECOFusion work has yet to be published in a peer reviewed journal, but an entire separate website is available with several videos.
The following link will take you to the ECOFusion website:
A Personal Philosophy: God, Nature, and the Human Soul
"A Personal Philosophy: God, Nature, and the Human Soul", was completed as part of Dr. Larson's martial arts studies. A requirement of the Dallas area do jang of Grand Master John Shepperd is that students prepare a work on personal philosophy as a partial requirement for the rank of brown belt. Dr. Larson's brown belt paper, "A Personal Philosophy: God, Nature, and the Human Soul" begins with an overview of Dr. Larson's physical philosophy and as such is an excellent introduction into his more technical works which are linked to below. But the work covers many additional topics beyond physical philosophy, including thoughts on religion and politics, as well as the reporting of an experiment designed to prove the existence of the human soul. Fundamental philosophical questions such as "what is life?", "what is my body?" and "what is me?" are briefly investigated. It is realized that fundamental philosophical questions resist efforts to arrive at simple defined answers, but proposed answers are given that have a certain range of validity.
One of the many themes of "A Personal Philosophy: God, Nature, and the Human Soul" is to reject the hypothesis that a person cannot both be an excellent scientist and devout. By carefully taking a mental scalpel to the existing dogmas of both established science and established religion, it is shown how one can indeed embrace the vast majority of both presently prevailing Christianity as well as presently prevailing physical dogma. It is of course important to wield the mental scalpel carefully and use it extremely sparingly so as to leave as much intact as possible of the great body of works that comprise modern physics and religion, but it is argued in "A Personal Philosophy: God, Nature, and the Human Soul" that once so done a person can indeed be both a devout Christian and an excellent scientist.
The following link will take you to a page with more information about Dr. Larson's work entitled "A Personal Philosophy: God, Nature, and the Human Soul":