Part-1: Matter Waves
The importance of a wave mechanism in the workings of the universe has long been debated. While possibly inaccurate in detail, we might simply anchor the start of this debate to the time of Newton and Huygens, when the nature of light first acquired an apparent ‘causal duality’.
Note: The corpuscular theory of light was possibly first outlined in the work of Descartes (1637), when he described light in terms of small discrete particles called ‘corpuscles’, i.e. little particles, which travel in a straight line with a finite velocity that possess ‘impetus’. Later, in 1672, Newton would forward his more detailed theory of light, although it was in-turn challenged by Huygens wave theory of light published in 1678.
While Newton’s reputation initially won the day, over the next 200 years or so, the consensus slowly started to favour the idea of light propagating as a wave, as the corpuscular theory did not appear to adequately explain all the observed behaviour of light, e.g. diffraction, interference, etc. While the idea of some form of wave model appeared to be supported by Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism, published in 1864, the description of the wave propagation media had already started to become increasingly abstracted in mathematics. The existence of any physical wave media was then further questioned by the negative results of the Michelson-Morley experiment. However, the scope of the debate changed at the start of the 20th century with the 1904 publication of Einstein’s work on the photoelectric effect and special relativity plus the subsequent development of quantum mechanics. However, the full scope of whether ‘particles were waves’ or ‘waves were particles’ would be compounded when deBroglie published his thesis on matter waves in 1924, after which mainstream science established its idea of some form of wave-particle duality to both light and particles. While this position is still upheld by mainstream science to this day, the discussion entitled ‘sources’ highlights that many still continued to question the apparent ambiguity of a ‘duality’ underpinning such fundamental causal mechanisms. However, throughout the 20th century, theoretical science would become increasingly dependent on mathematical models to underwrite its description of physical reality, such that the idea of any sort of wave theory of everything (WSE) would be side-lined, at best, as speculative conjecture. Of course, this did not stop mainstream science from all manner of speculative conjecture in support of its own preferred models, e.g. relativity, quantum mechanics and cosmology.
Note: At this point, some clarification might be necessary for it is recognised that the last set of links represent a somewhat sceptical appraisal of the accepted ideas within what might be called theoretical science, which then triggered an interest in Speculative Science. For the outcome of this personal learning process led to a questioning of science being biased towards a ‘mainstream consensus’ that appears to parallel the confirmation bias in most consensus worldviews so observable in many other areas of human society.
However, in the context of the note above, the subsequent development
of website-3 was never intended as an alternative to any of the accepted theories,
rather it was simply a continuance of a ‘duty of inquiry’ and personal interest that had driven the development
of the MySearch website from the outset. Likewise, the later inclusion of the
was not intended as an alternative wave model to those being reviewed,
rather it was seen as a review of general requirements on any wave model.
For while website-3 is generally supportive of many of the ideas associated
with an underlying wave model, it is not clear whether any specific
wave model reviewed, to-date, provides the necessary description of
the causal mechanisms required to seriously challenge mainstream science.
In this respect, scepticism has to work both ways.