A Non-mathematical Model of Quantum Mechanics

Reference: A New Explanation of Inertia

QM seems to have provided only mathematical models for real phenomena, so far. Here are my views from a mile high altitude that is likely to wander into the territory of informed conjecture.

  1. The phenomena being examined by quantum mechanics is that the motion of atomic particles does not follow classical mechanics, yet it is not totally random.

  2. Individual particles, when viewed together over a period of time, appear to be distributed in space as if they are parts of a wave pattern.

  3. These particles somehow seem to “sense each other” not only when separated in space, much like a flock of birds, but also when separated in time.

  4. We have created mathematical models that use the concept of probability to explain the observed wave pattern emerging from apparent randomness of the particles. But they do not really explain the underlying nature of matter, energy, space and time.

  5. Questions that spring up are:

    1. Are these quantum particles really discrete?

    2. Do they really exist independent of each other in space and time?

    3. What is the true nature of a quantum particle?

    4. What is the true nature of space and time?

  6. We are basically observing a phenomenon that has both particle and wave characteristics. A key factor that is common to both of these characteristics is inertia.

  7. Inertia is basically a resistance to change in motion. In a particle the inertia is observed as its mass. In a wave the inertia may be observed as its frequency. From Einstein’s formulations, E = hf = mc^2, frequency seems to have a correspondence with mass in the form of direct proportionality.

  8. The wave function is trying to describe a phenomenon where inertia seems to be distributed between frequency and mass.

  9. Newton describes inertia as the inherent state of motion that maintains itself.

  10. With particle’s mass comes the characteristic of being “discrete” and “located.” This may be called the characteristic of “centerdness.” We can express the mass of an object through its “center of mass.” This “centeredness” of inertia corresponds to a spinning motion.

  11. With wave’s frequency comes the characteristic of “flow” and “spread,” understood as a photon or wave-packet. This may be called the characteristic of “spreadingness.” This “spreadingness” of inertia corresponds to an oscillatory motion.

  12. At quantum levels one is not observing the behavior of golf ball type particles. One is actually observing a motion consisting of both spinning and oscillatory characteristics.

These are enough of conjectures for the moment, but I hope they provide a likely picture from a mile high altitude above the mathematical jungle.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  • vinaire  On January 11, 2015 at 11:31 AM

    (1) We see SPACE as a background of matter and energy.

    (2) Matter consists of inertia in the form of mass. It possesses the characteristic of “centeredness.”

    (3) Energy (EM radiation).consists of inertia in the form of frequency. It possesses the characteristic of “spreadingness”.

    (4) Inertia changes its characteristic from “centeredness” to “spreadingness” in the particle-wave region addressed by QM.

    (5) “Spreadingness” seems to increase as the frequency decreases in the wave region.

    (6) It seems that space would be the ultimate in “spreadingness.”

    (7) Since absolutes are difficult to attain and it is easier to conceptualize in relative terms, we can think of space only in terms of vanishing frequency and inertia.

    (8) If we plot frequency on a logarithmic scale as a power of two, we may think of space as a “disturbance” with a frequency 20 or less.

    We mave have a workable definition of space as above.


%d bloggers like this: