Is the Standard Model in Error? Exploring Alternative Theories in Physics

  • Thread starter Bruce Harvey
  • Start date
In summary, the Standard Model of physics, which has been widely accepted as the most accurate theory to describe the fundamental particles and forces of the universe, is being challenged by alternative theories. Some scientists are proposing new models, such as string theory and loop quantum gravity, to explain phenomena that the Standard Model cannot account for. These alternative theories are still being studied and tested, and it is yet to be determined if they will ultimately prove the Standard Model to be in error. However, the exploration of these alternative theories is an important part of the scientific process and could potentially lead to a more comprehensive understanding of the universe.
  • #1
Bruce Harvey
4
1
How did you find PF?
google search field of current loop in plane of loop
Physics graduate 1968 London University Royal Holloway College.
Profession Maths teacher to UK Further Maths A Levels.
Early retirement 1993 following stress burnout. Returned to study of physics, but found aspects of standard model hard to believe.

I believe the standard model to be in error because theories were formed and set in stone before the necessary experimental evidence was in place. For example, Lorentz's theory of electromagnetic mass and Lorentz-Poincare Relativity invalidated by discovery of Neutron, but not revised after Gell-Mann U,D Quark model. Quantised energy levels of hydrogen solved by Bohr before Deaver and Fairfax discovered Magnetic flux is quantised.
Since 1997, I have published my ideas on my website "The Physics of Bruce Harvey" located at [Link deleted by Mentors] ( the name relates to my attempts to write and sell educational software in the 80s)

My email address [Link deleted by Mentors] is one of the oldest on the internet.
I am currently editing material from my website into a book "A Unified Classical Model of Physics"

I unify EM, quantum theory, gravity and relativity from the assumption that the substance of the universe is energy in its two stable forms of electric and magnetic flux

I signed up today because I need some help understanding atomic clocks.

I promise not to use the forum to promote my own work or give answers contrary to the standard model

[Post edited by the Mentors]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Sad
Likes weirdoguy
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Welcome to the forum. Good that you apparently read the rules (well, some of them anyway --- you missed the one on "no personal information") and are aware that this is not the forum for new / alternate theories unless they are under active investigation in acceptable publications.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50 and berkeman
  • #3
Bruce Harvey said:
I promise not to use the forum to promote my own work or give answers contrary to the standard model
You already did!
 
  • Like
Likes Wrichik Basu, Vanadium 50 and berkeman
  • #4
Sorry about the personal information. I misunderstood "Start out by introducing yourself in the "new member" area (Please No Questions or Homework):"
 
  • Like
Likes phinds

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
112
Replies
1
Views
100
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
0
Views
846
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
17K
Replies
3
Views
107
Replies
3
Views
504
Replies
3
Views
145
  • New Member Introductions
Replies
1
Views
431
Back
Top