To: Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

c.c. to: Vice-Chancellor's Private Office of the University of Cambridge

Leszek Borysiewicz , Vice-Chancellor

Rebecca Simmons , Head of the Vice-Chancellor’s Office

Your Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

At the end of this letter I request Your Majesty make an intervention at the University of Cambridge.

Also at the end of the letter I explain the relevance of being of Your Majesty the burden of an intervention.

The reasons that support my request are shown in the sequence of facts presented ahead.

Quantum Mechanics-(QM) is the most accurate theory of the Physics of the whole times.

In the beginning of the 20th Century when the physicists begun to develop the QM, there was a duel between two of the most important quantum theorists: Heisenberg and Schrödinger.

The Heisenberg’s thought on what is the meaning of QM can be understood by his famous sentence: “What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning”.

The method of questioning preconized by Heisenberg was do not propose conjectures. Instead of, a theory must be developed via the mathematical formalism.

But Schrödinger had the suspicion that the discovery of the true laws of the Nature in the atomic level requires some unavoidable conjectures. And therefore from the Schrödinger’s viewpoint the Heisenberg method is inefficient for the discovery of the true laws of the atomic world.

The main aim of Schrödinger was to keep the Kantian causality principle in the development of QM. He believed that any physical effect must have a physical cause. So, one among the conjectures proposed by Schrödinger was the helical trajectory of the electron. He discovered that such helical trajectory exists in the Dirac’s equation of the electron, and so in his opinion the development of QM would have to be done by considering the helical trajectory, because by this way it would be possible to save the Kantian causality in the mathematical formalism for the QM.

Unlike, Heisenberg had the opinion that it is impossible to conciliate some phenomena in the atomic level with the Kantian causality, and so the helical trajectory itself could not save the causality, and therefore the helical trajectory was superfluous and an unacceptable “metaphysical” conjecture, and the QM could not be developed from that way. In Physics, metaphysical concepts are those ones which follow the Kantian causality.

The quantum theorists decided to adopt the Heisenberg’s method of questioning. The physicist Max Born proposed a mathematical formalism which supplied to QM its statistical background (known as wave function) and suppressed the Kantian causality for some phenomena, while Louis de Broglie proposed the principle according to which the matter has a property known as duality wave-particle. And Niels Bohr proposed the fundamental principle which tries to supply philosophical coherence to the duality, known as Principle of Complementarity (in some measurements a particle exhibits its wave feature, and in other sort of measurements it exhibits its corpuscular feature, but it can never exhibit both the wave and corpuscular features at the same time, during a measurement).

In order to understand the importance of the Principle of Complementarity for the QM, in his book on the Einstein’s life the physicist Abraham Pais wrote about Bohr: “…his concept of complementarity (which provides the philosophical underpinning for quantum theory) qualifies him as one of the twentieth century's greatest philosophers”.

This philosophical interpretation of QM is known as Copenhagen Interpretation, and it was established between 1925 and 1927.

Schrödinger became deeply depressed with development of QM by statistical laws, and he decided to abandon the Theoretical Physics, going to work in the branch of Biology.

Some years after 1927, there was a meeting between Heisenberg and a female Kantian philosopher, and she said to him that, in spite of some atomic phenomena occur via statistical laws, however probably it is possible to find physical causes for the statistical behavior, and by this way the Kantian causality would be saved. But Heisenberg struck a mortal blow in her hope. And he told her why: because when the Standard Nuclear Physics was developed based on the laws of QM, the nuclear theorists had discovered that it is impossible to find any physical cause for the emission of alpha particles by the radioactive nuclei. So, they concluded that the emission must be explained via statistical laws, without any physical cause, and therefore they had concluded that Heisenberg was right in rejecting the Kantian causality, since it is impossible to find any physical cause for the emission of alpha particles, by considering the Standard Nuclear Theory. And so Heisenberg said to her that was impossible to save the Kantian causality, and a waste of time to try to save it.

In the beginning of 1993 I have started to study the Quantum Mechanics, in order to verify if could be possible to find a new version for the theory, in the way pointed by Schrödinger. After all, perhaps the method of questioning preconized by Heisenberg and adopted by the quantum theorists could be inefficient for the discovery of the laws of Nature in the atomic level, and so perhaps the Nature yields phenomena through the Kantian causality, as supposed by Schrödinger.

I have developed my theory along more than 20 years, and in 2006 it was published in a book form by the Bäuu Institute and Press with the title “Quantum Ring Theory”- (QRT).

http://www.bauuinstitute.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=22:quantum-ring-theory-foundations-for-cold-fusion&catid=8&Itemid=103 [www.zpenergy.com]

As my QRT was developed by considering the helical trajectory proposed by Schrödinger, in my theory it is rejected as absurd Bohr’s Complementarity. As supposed by Schrödinger, in my theory is considered that the wave feature of the electron and other particles is caused by the helical trajectory.

Therefore, according to my Quantum Ring Theory the pillar which supplies philosophical coherence for the duality is wrong: Bohr’s Complementarity is false, absurd, and must be rejected.

In the end of 1993 I have discovered a new nuclear model, which works with some principles different of those used in the Standard Nuclear Physics. In the page 186 of my book QRT is shown that the emission of alpha particles by the radioactive nuclei has a physical cause, in spite of the emission follows the Bernoulli’s statistical distribution. Therefore Heisenberg was wrong by supposing that it is impossible to find a physical cause for the emission of the alpha particles. Ironically, he was right in another point: the physical cause is impossible to be found if one tries to find it in the current nuclear models proposed according to the laws established in Quantum Mechanics and adopted in the development of the Standard Nuclear Physics.

But of course in 2006 (when the book QRT was published) my theory could not be considered seriously by the scientific community. Because at that time obviously nobody could suppose two highly improbable things: 1) that the Standard Nuclear Physics could be wrong, and 2) that my new nuclear model could have any chance to be right.

In 2008 I wrote the book “The Missed U-Turn, the duel Heisenberg vs Schrödinger”, where It is explained for the lay reader the foundations of the Quantum Ring Theory, and why some foundations of Quantum Mechanics are wrong, and it is narrated the duel between Heisenberg and Schrödinger.

In 2010 I had submitted for publication by the Cambridge International Science Publishing my book “The Missed U-Turn”, and in 2011 the book was accepted for publication. In 20 October 2011 the publisher Victor Riecansky has signed the Agreement (see it ahead):

[www.zpenergy.com]

Unfortunatelly after Victor Riecansky sign the Agreement, I had commented in the Andrea Rossi’s blog Journal of Nuclear Physics that my new book would be published by the Camb. Int. Sci. Pub. And after my advertising some physicists started threatening Victor, saying that they would boycott the publishing house, and so he decided do not accomplish the Agreement signed by him.

The boycott against the publication of my book The Missed U-Turn by the Cambridge Int. Science Pub. is understandable, since up to 2010 the quantum theorists strongly believed that do not exist any experimental evidences suggesting that QM was developed from any wrong principle. They strongly believed it because some experiments which debunk some laws of QM were simply rejected by the quantum physicists, as for instance the experiment Conte-Pieralice published in 1999 by Infinite Energy Magazine and the experiment made by Don Borghi and published in 1993 by the American Journal of Physics (Conte-Pieralice and Borghi experiments are different versions of the same experiment, proving that neutrons are formed by fusion of protons and electrons at low energy, which is impossible to occur according to the laws of QM). In 1999 I sent a letter to Prof. Stephen Hawking, telling him about the Conte-Pieralice experiment. But his secretary sent me a reply, telling a lie: she said that Prof. Hawking was weakned, and could not send me a reply. However one month later Hawking gave a lecture at an university, and therefore Hawking simply did not want to hear about that experiment. Hawking claims that “Not only does God play dice, but... he sometimes throws them where they cannot be seen”… but when somebody tries to tell him about an experiment proving that God does not play dice, he simply refuses to take knowledge on the experiment. Later in 2002 I sent emails to the Nobel Prizes in Physics A. Leggett and G.t’Hooft, telling them about the Borghi’s experiment. Dr. Leggett sent me a reply saying that it is not his field of expertise, and Dr. t’Hooft sent a reply claiming that “the experimental evidence is phony”. So, in spite some experiments were showing that some laws of QM are wrong, Hawking continued to keep his dream of finding a Theory of Everything based on the wrong foundations of QM, and Dr. t’Hooft continued to keep his dream of finding a solution for some inconsistencies of QM, as tell us W. G. Unruh in his review on the book “Quo Vadis Quantum Mechanics?” , published in 2005: “For many, the locus is in the probabilistic nature at the heart of the theory. Nature should surely, at some fundamental level, know what it is doing. The photon, despite our inability to measure it, should know where it is and how fast it is going. The papers by t'Hooft, Hiley, and Smolin fall into this camp.”

Therefore, in spite of some experimental findings were pointing to the theorists that there was need to retake the development of QM by replacing the Heisenberg’s method of questioning by the Schrödinger’s method, before 2010 the theorists in general were trying to avoid the collapse of the Quantum Mechanics by simply neglecting the results of some experiments which were showing to be wrong the Copenhagen Interpretation. They successfully rejected the cold fusion phenomenon from 1989 up to October 2014, when finally the cold fusion was definitively confirmed (Andrea Rossi’s cold fusion reactor was tested by nuclear physicists of three universities in Europe, with positive results).

But some experiments published after 2010 have changed the panorama which up to that year allowed the quantum theorists to avoid the collapse of the Quantum Mechanics. Those experiments show that Heisenberg’s method of questioning has failed for the discovery of the true laws of Nature for the atom and the sub-atomic particles. Let us see the most important of them:

1- First experiment

Along 80 years the nuclear theorists have supposed that even-even nuclei with equal number of protons and neutrons have spherical shape, because it is impossible they may have a non-spherical shape according to current nuclear models based on the Standard Nuclear Physics. Unlike, in the page 137 of the book Quantum Ring Theory it is shown that those nuclei have non-spherical shape, and so in 2006 the book QRT was defying a dogma of 80 years of the Nuclear Physics.

In 2012 the journal Nature published the paper “How atomic nuclei cluster”, describing experiments which have detected that even-even nuclei with equal number of protons and neutrons have non-spherical shape, as predicted correctly in QRT, and so a dogma of 80 years considered untouchable by the nuclear theorists was proved be wrong.

So, Heisenberg had supposed wrongly that it is impossible to find a physical cause for the emission of alpha particles by radioactive nuclei because his conclusion was based on his wrong belief that the Standard Nuclear Physics is correct.

Therefore, the most stronger Heisenberg’s argument for rejecting the Kantian causality was invalidated by the paper published by Nature in 2012, since the experiments proved that the Standard Model is wrong, and by consequence we cannot use it as argument for the rejection of the Kantian causality.

2- Second experiment

According to the nuclear model proposed in QRT, there is a z-axis about which the protons and neutrons are symmetrically distributed in the even-even nuclei. But according to the Standard Nuclear Physics it is impossible the existence of the z-axis, and thereby obviously in the years after 2006, (when my book was published), the nuclear physicists have used to consider as impossible the new nuclear model proposed in the book QRT. Scientists of the Liverpool University have discovered that the nucleus 88Ra224 has pear shape, which is impossible by considering the Standard Nuclear Physics. In 2013 they published in the journal Nature the paper “Studies of pear-shaped nuclei using accelerated radioactive beams”. In order to explain the pear shape, Prof. Butler has proposed the existence of the z-axis in the nuclei. However, as according to the Standard Model the existence of the z-axis is impossible, the nuclear physicist Gavin Smith of the University of Manchester, UK, said: “I believe that this will eventually lead to results of much broader impact than this experiment alone, with the possibility of placing constraints on the standard model.”

3– Third experiment

The stronger blow against the Standard Nuclear Physics occurred in October 2014, with the publication of the Lugano Report, which confirmed the cold fusion phenomena: Rossi-Effect was confirmed by experiments made by nuclear physicistsl of three universities of Europe, published with the title “Observation of abundant heat production from a reactor device and of isotopic changes in the fuel”. According to the Standard Model cold fusion is impossible to occur. But as the Rossi-Effect was definitively confirmed in October 2014, then the Standard Nuclear Physics is definitively wrong. Thereby the Standard Nuclear Physics is definitively dead, and there is need to develop a New Nuclear Physics. And the most important to know is: obviously the New Nuclear Physics cannot be developed by using the overcome and obsolete Heisenberg’s method of questioning, because 100 years the research have resulted into error.

4- Fourth experiment

The stronger blow against the Quantum Mechanics occurred in 2012, with the publication of the paper “Violation of Heisenberg's Measurement-Disturbance Relationship by Weak Measurements”, describing an experiment led by Aephraim Steinberg.

He discovered that a particle can have at the same time its wave and corpuscular features, detected in the same measurement, and so it proves that Bohr’s Complementarity is false.

Finally, other dogma of 100 years collapsed, bringing down the most important support pillar of the philosophical coherence of the Quantum Mechanics.

The experiment also brings down the de Broglie’s interpretation for the duality wave-particle, because a particle cannot have at the same time the shape of wave and matter, because while the wave has wave function, matter cannot have it. And a particle cannot, at the same time, to have and do not have a wave function .

The unique way which survives for explaining the duality wave-particle is that one pointed by Schrödinger, by considering that wave feature of the particles is due to their helical trajectory. Other mortal blow in the Heisenberg’s method of questioning.

5- Other experiments

There are many other experiments which are proving that the Standard Nuclear Physics was not developed through the true laws existing in the Nature, because some light nuclei have nuclear properties impossible to be conciliated with any current nuclear model based on the laws established in the Standard Nuclear Physics. For instance, in 2009 the Physical Review Letters has published the paper “Atomic nucleus of beryllium is three times as large as normal due to halo”. The experiment detected that Be11 has one neutron separated from the core of a distance that is 3 times larger than allowed according to the Standard Nuclear Physics, and therefore the binding of protons and neutrons within the nuclei cannot be via the “strong force” as considered in the Standard Model. In short, if the Standard Model was right, Be11 could never exist. Other experiment was published in 2012 with the title “End of the magic: Shell model for beryllium isotopes invalidated”. The experiment shows that the nucleus Be12 has a distribution of neutrons impossible to exist according the the Standard Nuclear Physics. And again, if the Standard Model was right, also Be12 could never exist.

But in spite of there are many other experiments impossible to be conciliated with the theoretical models proposed according to the laws of the Standard Model, here I have mentioned only those ones which are the most striking.

Perhaps we may consider as understandable that before 2011 the quantum physicists have supposed their attempt on saving the Quantum Mechanics was successful. And that’s why some of them decided to boycott the publication of my book The Missed U-Turn by the Cambridge International Science Publishing.

But after 2010 any effort for saving the foundations of Quantum Mechanics became absurd, because between 2011 and 2014 the principal pillars of the theory were knocked down by experiments.

Incomprehensibly, the theorists continue trying to save the Heisenberg’s method of questioning the Nature, as we realize by looking what happened in the beginning of 2015, when I have published in Amazon.com two books:

1- The Missed U-Turn, the duel Heisenberg vs Schrödinger

2- The Evolution of Physics, the duel Newton vs Descartes

The Nobel Prize in Physics Dr. Brian Josephson has posted in Amazon.com a review with the title “Bad Physics” for the book The Evolution of Physics, and after that we had a long discussion, by exchanging a lot of emails. A print of his replies in the inbox of my hotmail is shown ahead:

[www.zpenergy.com]

However, after a long discussion with Dr. Josephson, he realized that he is unable to support his attempts for saving Quantum Mechanics with acceptable and reasonable arguments. First he tried to save QM by using himself a Bad Physics in his arguments. And finally he decided to stop the discussion, and so he stopped sending me any reply. Unfortunately, Instead of to adopt a honest attitude, by assuming that there is no way to avoid the collapse of the Quantum Mechanics developed from the Heisenberg’s method of questioning the Nature, Dr. Josephson preferred to adopt the strategy of betraying the Scientific Method, refusing to accept the new experiments published after 2010.

When our discussion was over, I have asked to Dr. Josephson the grace of changing his review in Amazon.com, by writing a honest new review, recognizing that my book is supported by strong experimental evidences. But he did not attend my request. So, his intention is obvious: to boycott my books, by suggesting to the Amazon costumers that “Bad Physics” is published in my books.

Dr. Josephson has a strong personal interest in boycotting my books. Because in University of Cambridge he is the Director of the Mind-Matter Unification Project, where he uses the foundations of QM in his research. Then it is obvious that it is not of his interest to recognize that QM was developed from the wrong Heisenberg’s method of questioning (as my books are showing and the experiments are proving) because that would be a confession that he is doing his research through a wrong and surpassed way of research, by keeping the wrong Heisenberg’s method, and therefore he is using an overcome version of Quantum Mechanics for developing his scientific work.

I have sent a series of emails to the physicists of the University of Cambridge, in order to show them the need of replacing the Heisenberg’s method of questioning by the method proposed by Schrödinger, and to retake the development of a New Quantum Mechanics, in the way pointed by Schrödinger. But some physicists have considered my effort as harassment, as Dr. Siddharth S. Saxena, who sent me the following reply:

.=====================================================

Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 00:44:48 +0100 Subject: Re: Collapse of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty and Bohr’s Complementarity From: sss21@cam.ac.uk To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com; rzecznikkgp@policja.gov.pl

I have already asked you to remove you from my mailing list and i you continue to harras me by sending these continuious unwanted messages. i am now reporting you to polish police for harassment formally.

Dr. Siddharth S. Saxena

Quantum Matter Group Chairman, Cambridge Cavendish Laboratory Central Asia Forum University of Cambridge Jesus College, Cambridge CB3 0HE Cambridge CB5 8BL United Kingdom United Kingdom Phone: +44-1223-337379

.=====================================================

As we realize, some physicists of the University of Cambridge consider themselves as victim of harassment, because they continue to develop their researches by keeping the foundations of Quantum Mechanics, in spite of they know that many experiments are proving that some of the foundations are wrong. But they do not want someone point out to them that their method of research does not make sense.

So, some scientists wish nobody remember them that the efficiency of the Heisenberg’s method, which along 100 years the scientific community believed to be successful, was finally debunked by a series of experiments after 2010. These scientists block their minds like those hysterical patients of Freud, blocking their minds when some tragic event destroys the deeper meaning of their life, without which their lives no longer have meaning.

Only Freud can explain why, after 2010, some physicists are desperately trying to save the outdated Quantum Mechanics developed through the obsolete Heisenberg’s method.

Finally let me tell the reason why I sent this letter to Your Majesty.

According to its Homepage, the Mission of the University of Cambridge is the following:

Mission

“The mission of the University of Cambridge is to contribute to society through the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence”

As shown here, experiments published after 2010 have shown that Heisenberg’s method of questioning has failed in the research for the discovery of the true Laws of Physics in the atomic level. This means that the Heisenberg’s method, nowadays used in the universities worldwide, cannot be considered anymore as the highest international level of excellence , as before 2010 it was considered.

Therefore, there is need to replace the Heisenberg’s method by the Schrödinger’s one, in order to discover the true laws, and to develop a new updated version for a New Quantum Mechanics.

In the case the professors of Physics of the University of Cambridge continue to teach to the students the Heisenberg’s method, the university will be teaching to the students a surpassed method of research, and thereby disagree to the Mission of the university (teach to students the highest level of excellence). This will configure fraudulent misrepresentation, and the University of Cambridge can be processed in court by the students who feel themselves deceived by the practice of quackery and ideological falsehood in the departments of Physics.

In order to avoid the possibility of such unpleasant situation, the University of Cambridge must adopt a suitable slogan in order to reconcile the Mission of the university with the highest level of excellence, as follows:

“Physics Department students are encouraged to contribute to the effort of of Quantum Mechanics improvement, in order to develop a new updated version attuned with the latest experimental findings”

Your Majesty,

as well as the subjects of the Queen must be loyal to the royal crown, it is the duty of the Queen to look for the interests of Her subjects. And the loyal subjects do not want their children be deceived in universities, acquiring an outdated knowledge, belied by the latest scientific experiments.

That’s why I request your Majesty to influence the decision of Leszek Borysiewicz, Vice-Chancellor at University of Cambridge, to adopt the slogan proposed by me, in order to update the scientific method of investigation in the Physics Departments, by replacing the Heisenberg’s method by the Schrodinger’s method.

God save the Queen…

… and hopefully the Queen saves the Quantum Mechanics

Wladimir Guglinski