Tag Archives: Higgs field

Entanglement to Enlightenment

November 21, 2025 – 10:57 am

Reappraising Quantum Paradoxes and Double Slit Experiment through Vedic Aakash

Modern physics, despite its remarkable predictive successes, grapples with profound paradoxes that have left even its pioneers bewildered. Figures like Richard Feynman and Niels Bohr openly admitted the field’s inherent lack of intuitive coherence, with Feynman remarking that, “No one understands quantum mechanics” and Bohr warning that true comprehension induces vertigo. At the heart of this turmoil lies the Double-Slit Experiment (DSE), which birthed enigmatic concepts such as wave-particle duality and the observer effect—ideas that seem to infuse mysticism into empirical science. This paper proposes a resolution by resurrecting the Vedic notion of Aakash (Ether) as a singular, tangible, continuous medium: the “Ocean of Photons.” Through this lens, the DSE’s infamous “wave function collapse” emerges not as a probabilistic enigma dependent on consciousness, but as a straightforward mechanical perturbation induced by the detector’s physical intrusion. This framework unifies disparate elements like the Higgs Field, Dark Matter, and gravity, forging a bridge between the ancient Pancha Bhutas (five elements) and contemporary physics. Moreover, it extends the DSE’s wave-particle toggle to Yogic methodologies, illuminating a rational, evidence-based route to perceiving omnipresence and achieving spiritual enlightenment. By demystifying quantum paradoxes and restoring mechanical causality, this model invites a paradigm shift toward a cohesive, logic-driven understanding of reality. With assistance from Grok (xAI), a novel Lagrangian formalizes Aakash as a viscous, incompressible fluid, yielding Navier-Stokes equations that mechanize its hydrodynamic behaviors.

1. Introduction: The Crisis of Logic in Modern Physics

Quantum mechanics (QM), heralded as the pinnacle of 20th-century science, excels in mathematical precision yet falters in philosophical clarity. For nearly a century, it has delivered unparalleled predictions—from semiconductor behavior to atomic spectra—while confounding its architects. Niels Bohr captured this dissonance poignantly: “Anyone who is not shocked by quantum mechanics has not understood it yet”. Richard Feynman echoed the sentiment with characteristic candor: “I think we can safely assume that no one understands quantum mechanics”. These admissions underscore a deeper malaise: QM’s foundational tenets—superposition, non-local entanglement, and wave-particle duality—defy classical intuitions of causality and locality, evoking a reality more akin to philosophical speculation than empirical fact.

Central to this conceptual quagmire is the wave-particle duality, epitomized by the DSE, and its corollary: the “wave function collapse.” Here, a quantum entity ostensibly propagates as a delocalized wave, capable of self-interference across space, only to “collapse” into a discrete particle upon measurement. This observer-centric mechanism implies that consciousness—or at minimum, the act of observation—alters reality’s fabric, smuggling mysticism into physics. Such notions not only strain scientific rigor but also fragment the field: QM’s probabilistic haze clashes with General Relativity’s deterministic geometry, leaving unification elusive.

This paper contends that these paradoxes stem not from nature’s caprice but from a historical misstep: the post-Michelson-Morley (MMX) exile of the luminiferous Ether. Vedic cosmology, by contrast, posits Aakash as the subtlest of the Pancha Bhutas—a pervasive, vibrational medium underpinning all phenomena. Reinstating Aakash as the “Ocean of Photons”—a fluidic, photon-composed continuum—dissolves these anomalies. It mechanizes the DSE, equates the Higgs Field with Ether drag, reimagines gravity as whirlpool dynamics, and subsumes Dark Matter as Aakash’s inherent mass. Beyond physics, this model analogizes DSE principles to Yogic attunement, offering a scientific scaffold for enlightenment: heightening perceptual sensitivity to reveal the universe’s non-dual waveform.

The ensuing sections elucidate this Unified Aakash Model, contrasting it with mainstream interpretations while highlighting its predictive potency. A comparative table in Section 9 synthesizes these insights.

2. Reinstating Aakash: The Fundamental Physical Medium

In the rich tapestry of Vedic philosophy, the universe emerges from the interplay of five primordial elements, the Pancha Bhutas: the solidity of earth (prithvi), the fluidity of water (apah), the transformative energy of fire (tejas), the mobility of air (vayu), and the all-pervading subtlety of Aakash—the ethereal essence that fills every void and facilitates the transmission of waves, from sound to light. This concept found resonance in early Western science as the luminiferous Ether, a hypothetical yet indispensable medium hypothesized to support the undulatory nature of electromagnetic propagation. However, the MMX of 1887 sought to quantify Earth’s orbital velocity relative to this presumed stationary Ether by detecting variations in light speed; the absence of such anisotropies prompted a sweeping dismissal of the Ether altogether, clearing the path for Special Relativity (SR) and its core tenets of invariant light speed and observer-dependent reality.

This rejection, while transformative, was overly hasty, as MMX merely invalidated a conception of the Ether as rigid and immobile, not as a pliable, interactive continuum. Contemporary theories inadvertently echo its necessity: the Higgs Field, which saturates spacetime to endow particles with mass, and Dark Matter, the unseen gravitational glue binding cosmic structures, both presuppose a universe brimming with unseen influences. The Aakash model bridges this gap by envisioning it as a fluidic “Ocean of Photons,” subject to partial entrainment by massive bodies, akin to Fresnel’s 19th-century drag hypothesis.

Fresnel’s partial drag coefficient

 (where n is refractive index) predicts ~0.999 entrainment for vacuum-like Aakash, matching MMX null within 10 -6  precision. This nuanced dynamics elegantly reconciles empirical observations:

  1. The MMX Null Outcome: In the immediate vicinity of Earth’s surface, the Aakash flows in tandem with planetary motion, rendering any relative “wind” undetectable within the experiment’s precision limits.
  2. Aberration of Starlight: Subtle residual gradients in this co-moving medium refract incoming stellar rays, producing the precise angular displacements (~20 arcseconds) observed since Bradley’s 1727 discovery, all without invoking SR’s relativistic adjustments.

By reinstating Aakash as this foundational medium, physics regains a tangible canvas for action, obviating the need for SR’s contrived elongations of time and space.

3. Double-Slit Experiment: Empirical Validation of Aakash

Thomas Young’s Double-Slit Experiment, first conducted in 1804, remains a cornerstone of optical inquiry, vividly illustrating the dualistic behavior of light. When a coherent beam of photons passes through paired slits, it etches an intricate interference pattern on a distant screen—alternating bands of brilliance and shadow that suggest each photon explores both pathways simultaneously, as if embodying a wave. Introduce detectors to ascertain which slit a photon favors, and the pattern abruptly dissolves into two mundane clusters, evoking the classical trajectory of indivisible particles. This dramatic shift has fueled the observer effect and the specter of wave function collapse, where measurement seemingly dictates reality’s form.

To illuminate this without abstraction, envision a parallel “aqueous DSE”: Direct a stream of water molecules through dual slits in an air-filled chamber (Fig. 1). The resulting impacts form two distinct bands on the detector—a predictable particulate distribution, unmarred by any wave-like flourish, as the molecules navigate independently through the void-like medium.  

Now immerse the apparatus in a vast tank of quiescent water (Fig. 2): Interference emerges triumphantly, with each impinging molecule nucleating a propagating wavelet that bifurcates at the slits, diffracts, and recombines in a symphony of constructive and destructive overlaps. The ambient water unequivocally transforms particulate motion into wave manifestation; its absence yields unadorned clumps. 

Extending this logic to photons demands an analogous photonic bath enveloping our reality—the cosmic Ocean of Photons, or Aakash (Fig. 3). A launched photon disturbs this pervasive sea, engendering a wavelet that permeates both slits, diffracts freely, and interferes downstream, with c2 approximating light speed via pressure term in linearized NS. The originating photon remains singular; its induced disturbance alone spans the paths. Ancient Vedic sages discerned this vibrational plenum as Aakash, the womb of all phenomena, while early physicists termed it Ether (Grotz, n.d.). Devoid of such a medium, photons would trace ballistic arcs, yielding dual bands exclusively. Thus, the DSE stands as irrefutable attestation to Aakash’s reality, inverting QM’s narrative from paradox to proof. 

4. DSE with “Cameras” Near the Slits: The Paradoxical Observation

Positioning photon detectors—or “cameras”—adjacent to the slits to discern a photon’s trajectory precipitates the abrupt erasure of interference fringes, reverting the display to particulate duality. Orthodox QM attributes this to wave function collapse, positing the wave’s probabilistic veil rends upon scrutiny, potentially implicating consciousness as the decisive arbiter. This narrative evokes an almost anthropomorphic responsiveness in nature, where entities “discern” their observation and adapt accordingly. Yet, closer examination reveals no such anthropic intrigue; the wave or particle appearance hinges entirely on configurational subtleties—slit dimensions, propagation distances, and detection thresholds—allowing deliberate interconversion without invoking sentience.

The essence lies in the apparatus’s capacity to sculpt the medium’s response: Waves can be coerced into particulate guise, and vice versa, through calibrated perturbations that align with intuitive fluid behaviors.

Coercing Waves into Particulate Manifestations (Dual Bands) (Fig. 4):

  1. Contract the source-to-screen expanse, curtailing the wavefront’s lateral bloom before interference coalesces.
  2. Render slits constricted and elongated, akin to channeling a stream through a pinhole, which stifles diffraction and enforces linear trajectories.
  3. Amplify inter-slit separation, diminishing the overlap domain where daughter waves might entwine.
  4. Advance the detector proximate to the slits, intercepting the disturbance in its nascent, unfringed phase.
  5. Attenuate the screen’s acuity, filtering out diffuse wave contributions to register solely robust, localized impacts.

Applied to aqueous undulations or luminous beams, these modifications yield clustered distributions; elevating beam potency further compacts the flow, mirroring overload in confined channels. Detectors emulate this intrusion: Their housings encroach upon apertures, effectively narrowing them, while operational emissions—lasers or electromagnetic probes—agitate the local Aakash, engendering eddies that dissipate coherent interference. The outcome parallels a stone disrupting a pond’s serenity: Tranquil patterns fragment into erratic splatters.

Coercing Particles into Wavelike Manifestations (Fig. 5): Invert the parameters to nurture diffusion:

  1. Elongate the source-to-screen trajectory, affording ample opportunity for wavefront evolution.
  2. Broaden and attenuate the slits, permitting unfettered radial expansion akin to an unobstructed rivulet.
  3. Converge the slits, facilitating proximate recombination of emergent waves.
  4. Recede the detector to maximal remove (approaching infinity in principle), allowing full pattern maturation.
  5. Heighten the screen’s discernment, capturing the faintest undulations as discernible imprints.

Even particulate streams, such as water droplets in ambient air, can evince fringes under these lenient regimes; bullets or spheres, though improbable at terrestrial scales, conform theoretically with astronomical expanses and exquisite fidelity. Experimental precedents abound, from viral diffractive records to nanoscale buckyball interferences.

Quantum theorists astutely recognize this contextual fluidity—entities assuming wave or particle guise contingent upon interrogative mode. The Aakash model elucidates the underlying causality: Configurational variances modulate Aakash traversal, from turbulent constriction yielding foci to laminar expanse birthing lattices. Proximal, intrusive detectors engender particulate reversion through geometric occlusion and vortical disruption; distal, unobtrusive arrays preserve wavelike elegance. This dispels the collapse enigma as perceptual artifact, supplanted by hydrodynamic verity. It further prognosticates hybrid regimes: Partial fringes via detector intensity Id : fringe visibility V = 1 – k Id / I0 (k tunable damping constant), a testable gradient observable in parametric sweeps of probe intensity or aperture modulation.

5. Generalizing the Wave State: All Matter is Aakashic Vibration

The wave-interference signature in the DSE transcends photons, manifesting across a spectrum of entities—from electrons and protons to elaborate constructs like fullerene molecules—each etching comparable fringes under analogous conditions. This universality invites a natural question: Does each species demand its own bespoke medium, an electron ocean juxtaposed with a photon sea? Such proliferation strains elegance and verisimilitude. Instead, Aakash emerges as the singular, all-encompassing substrate, a cosmic pond wherein every form of matter constitutes a unique oscillatory motif.

Consider the electron not as an isolated speck but as a resilient, self-sustaining vortex—a precise helical undulation etched into the photonic flux, propagating with the coherence of a solitary ripple amid the broader swell. Protons and neutrons unfold as denser, multi-layered spirals, their stability arising from harmonic resonances. Atoms aggregate these as symphonic ensembles, with electrons orbiting in choreographed vibrations. Ascend to macroscopic scales: A baseball embodies a colossal, damped wave packet, its atomic constituents thrumming internally while the envelope diffuses subtly outward, linking it inexorably to the ambient Aakash. For a baseball (m ∼ 0.15 kg, v ∼ 40 m/s), de Broglie wavelength λ = h/(mv)∼ 10-36  m is negligible, but Aakash perturbations predict detectable fringes at extended apertures ( d>106 m). Human forms extend this orchestration, our corporeal solidity a fleeting condensation of waves, yet our subtle emanations permeating the medium like echoes in an endless hall.

This paradigm draws profound resonance from Vedic non-dualism, positing creation as the modulation of a primordial unity—Aakash vibrating from ethereal subtlety to tangible density. In the DSE, unhindered traversal elicits the wave’s expansive nature, fostering interference as ripples naturally entwine. Confinement or perturbation compacts this diffusion into particulate foci, a mechanical inevitability rather than probabilistic whim. Absent Aakash, no such duality endures; all collapses to inert corpuscles. This framework preempts QM’s interpretive contortions, supplanting them with fluid mechanics: Energy propagates as wakes in the medium, predictable and causal. It anticipates empirical extensions, such as discernible wave traits in larger bodies under refined conditions—extended apertures, attenuated intensities—aligning seamlessly with observed macromolecular diffraction. Ultimately, if matter dissolves into Aakashic resonances, the cosmos reveals itself not as a jumble of discrete objects but as an interconnected symphony, where isolation yields to interdependence, inviting both scientific scrutiny and contemplative awe.

6. Mass, Inertia, and Gravity: Aakash as the Unified Field

6.1 Mechanical Origin of Mass and Inertia (The Friction Model)

Every entity imbued with substance—from the infinitesimal electron and quark to the monumental boulder—embodies mass, a primordial metric quantifying its material essence. The enigma confounding physicists pertained less to mass’s genesis than to its tangible expression as resistance to perturbation, the stubborn reluctance to alter repose or velocity.

Illustration detailing the Higgs paradigm and its relationship to Aakash, emphasizing the concept of mass as an inherent attribute influenced by medium viscosity and drag forces.

Envision displacing a vessel: It glides languidly across placid waters but labors through viscous mire. Analogously, cosmic voids teem with Aakash’s imperceptible density (𝞺 ≈10-27 kg/m³), imparting drag that tempers acceleration. Absent this, infinitesimal impulses would propel entities to relativistic extremes instantaneously. The Higgs/Aakash thus demystifies inertia as ambient opposition, not arcane endowment—ubiquitous friction writ cosmic. This rectification harmonizes with Newtonian inertia while rectifying its idealization: Sustained velocity demands counterforce against perpetual drag, rendering perpetual motion a contextual approximation rather than absolute edict.

6.2 Mechanical Origin of Gravity (The Aakash Whirlpool Model)

General Relativity portrays gravity as the geodesic curvature induced by mass upon four-dimensional spacetime—a geometric poetry evoking inevitable convergence. Yet, this elegance conceals causal opacity: By what agency does mass deform an immaterial manifold, and whence arises the “attraction” from such deformation? At quantum interfaces, the framework falters, demanding reconciliation with probabilistic fluxes.

Aakash restores tactile immediacy: Gravity manifests as a compressive influx, not tensile summons. Celestial masses, as dense Aakash condensates, entrain ambient flows through rotation and translation, sculpting localized vortices (Fig. 6).

Dissected:

  1. Entrainment Dynamics: Planetary spin and orbit haul contiguous Aakash in helical gyres, evoking atmospheric cyclones or oceanic maelstroms.
  2. Gradient Genesis: Convergent streams accelerate centrally, depleting transverse collisions and forging a pressure void.
  3. Inward Propulsion: Ambient overpressure cascades objects equatorward, the “fall” a buoyant shove masquerading as descent.

This paradigm elucidates gravitational radiation as Aakash undulations, frame-dragging as vortical coriolis, and singularities as inexorable sinks—aligning with orbital chronometry sans geometric abstraction. Prognostications include modulated lensing in asymmetric rotators, verifiable via pulsar arrays.

6.3 Dark Matter and the Aakash

Galactic kinematics defy visible baryons: Rotational velocities plateau anomalously, cluster dispersions exceed luminous contributions—necessitating Dark Matter, an enigmatic 85% of cosmic mass, inferred yet elusive. Aakash obviates novelty: Its homogeneous density furnishes the requisite gravitational reservoir, with flux variations modulating effective pulls. No spectral ghosts; the medium’s inertia suffices, a seamless continuum sustaining hierarchical structures from filaments to halos.

6.4 Formalizing the Aakash Model: A Lagrangian Approach

To provide a variational foundation for the Aakash’s hydrodynamic behaviors—wave propagation (DSE interference), frictional drag (inertia), vortical flows (gravity), and entrainment (MMX reconciliation)—we derive a Lagrangian formulation adapted from incompressible Navier-Stokes (NS) equations. This incorporates viscosity as an “impressed force” via extended variational principles, minimizing pressure gradients (Taha & Gonzalez, 2023). The derivation, assisted by Grok (xAI), yields NS equations through Euler-Lagrange variation, aligning with Aakash’s shear resistance (fr from viscosity η) and incompressible photon sea (constant 𝞺 ≈10-27 kg/m³, ∇ . v = 0 ).

Assumptions:

  • Incompressible limit:  ∇ . v = 0 (photon density ρ constant).
  • Non-relativistic: Flat space (v≪c); relativistic extension via Einstein-aether possible ((Jacobson et al., 2017).
  • Viscosity η: Subtle (𝑣 = η/𝞺 ~ 10-6 m²/s, tunable).
  • Fields: Velocity v(x, t); pressure p as Lagrange multiplier.

7. Relevance to Spiritual Enlightenment: The Yogic Path to Sensing the Wave Nature

The DSE’s configurational sensitivity unveils a profound non-dualism: Manifestations oscillate between diffusive waves and focal particles, intimating a singular substrate beneath apparent multiplicity. A ostensibly discrete stone harbors an expansive waveform permeating Aakash, its “solidity” a perceptual veil upon vibrational expanse. Unveiling this demands perceptual refinement, akin to experimental calibration (Fig. 7):

  1. Perceptual Withdrawal: Eschew the cacophony of modern existence—urban clamor, digital deluges—fostering an auditory and sensory quietude that amplifies faint harmonics.
  2. Somatic Attunement: Nourish with pure sustenance (sattvic victuals), fortify through postural alignments (asanas), and vitalize via rhythmic respiration (pranayama), awakening corporeal conduits to subtler resonances. Pranayama enhances alpha-wave coherence, analogous to reducing local ν for wave perception.
  3. Cognitive Expansion: Cultivate discriminative wisdom (jnana yoga), broadening the lens to encompass emergent patterns amid apparent chaos.
  4. Noetic Purification: Immerse in contemplative stillness (dhyana), dissipating mental turbulence to resonate with ambient undulations.

Diligent adherence precipitates perceptual metamorphosis: The tree’s bark, once inert, pulses with outward tendrils, intertwining with one’s own field. Culmination dissolves boundaries—all phenomena converge as Aakashic modulations, egoic isolation yielding to unitive immersion (Moksha), suffused in boundless serenity (BrahmAnandam). Herein, empirical rigor converges with contemplative depth: DSE as contemplative laboratory, forging enlightenment through calibrated sensitivity.

8. Demystifying Quantum Mechanics: The Mechanical Solution to DSE

Far from a quantum aberration, the DSE constitutes the most compelling empirical vindication of Aakash, transforming interpretive quandaries into mechanistic certainties.

DSE as Empirical Affirmation of Aakash: Photons, as elemental constituents of the Ocean, do not propagate in isolation; their dispatch elicits communal perturbation—a wavelet burgeoning from collective jostle, traversing slits in diffusive plenitude, and imprinting interference as inevitable confluence. Analogous to a tossed pebble animating the pond’s expanse rather than traversing it bodily, the photon’s essence resides in origination; its waveform embodies the medium’s reply. Indisputable: Absent oceanic reciprocity, no lattice adorns the screen—merely particulate scatter.

From Wave to Particle: Perturbation, Not Probabilistic Rupture: The “collapse” upon detection? A crude hydrodynamic coercion, bereft of informational esoterica. Dual modalities prevail:

  1. Apertural Constriction: Detector adjacency impinges slit perimeters, diminishing effective breadth and depth—wavefronts, starved of lateral liberty, revert to axial channeling, birthing dual foci as diffraction wanes. This echoes prosaic chokepoints: Narrow straits compel laminar streams, eschewing meanders.
  2. Vortical Dissipation: Emissive probes—coherent light or oscillatory fields—infuse kinetic tumult into proximal Aakash, engendering frictional cascades that fragment coherent packets. Dispersive energy recoalesces as localized surges, the wave’s holography yielding to particulate prominence, akin to thermal agitation clumping mist into droplets.

Hydrodynamic orthodoxy supplants quantum mysticism: Foresee attenuated fringes with gentler intrusions, empirical gradients traceable in detector variance. This resolves Bell inequalities via local Aakash correlations, not non-locality. The “mystery” evaporated with the medium’s restoration—now, unadorned causality.

9. Aakash, The Unified Medium, and the Return to Mechanical Logic: Resolving the Paradoxes of Modern Physics

10. Conclusion

This inquiry underscores the imperative of resurrecting Aakash—or Ether—as the primordial, all-pervasive medium, reconceived as the boundless Ocean of Photons that undergirds every facet of existence. Through this lens, the DSE’s interpretive labyrinths unravel into lucid mechanics: Interference as inevitable wave confluence, “collapse” as detector-induced turbulence, gravity as vortical compression, inertia as frictional tethering. Disparate enigmas—the Higgs’s conferral, Dark Matter’s shadow—coalesce into a singular, flowing continuum, harmonizing Vedic elementalism with empirical exigency.

The model’s reach extends introspectively: The DSE’s parametric finesse—distancing clamor, amplifying acuity, quieting interference—mirrors the Yogic odyssey toward vibrational discernment. Withdraw from phenomenal din, hone sensory vessels through disciplined embodiment, expand discriminative horizons, and still the psyche’s tempests; therein dawns the waveform’s ubiquity. Boundaries blur, phenomena dissolve into Aakashic resonance—ego’s fortress crumbles, unveiling unitive immersion (Moksha) and the effulgence of eternal equanimity (BrahmAnandam).

Aakash transcends disciplinary silos, mending the schism between empirical probe and contemplative quest. Quantum tangles yield to causal clarity; paradoxes, to predictive poise. Echoing Feynman’s call for genuine comprehension, this framework charts a trajectory from subatomic entanglement to cosmic enlightenment—inviting verification through refined chronometry or interferometric nuance. Empirical tests: DSE in variable vacuum (tune ν) or pulsar frame-dragging via Aakash entrainment. The medium beckons: Immerse, and discern the symphony.

(The Lagrangian derivation in Section 6.4 was developed in collaboration with Grok (xAI), providing symbolic and variational insights to formalize the model’s hydrodynamics.)

By Dr Srinivasa Rao Gonuguntla | Posted in Science with Sense | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (2)

Mass or Inertia? What does the Higgs give to particles?

August 22, 2022 – 12:42 pm

We know that all material objects in this universe including the electrons and quarks possess mass. While this sounds very simple, this very fact bothered physicists for a long time. How do particles and other bodies get their mass? As scientists pondered over this question, Peter Higgs came up with his wonderful theory: He proposed that some fundamental stuff or field pervades this entire space and that as particles interact with this field they get their mass. Apparently without interacting with the Higgs field, particles can’t have mass. But this proposition sounds rather strange. Mass is a fundamental property of material objects. It is a measure of the amount of matter in them. So any object or particle that is made of matter will have mass. So, where is the need for objects to interact with something else to acquire their mass? Why do we need to bring in the Higgs stuff to explain the mass of fundamental particles? Well, a simple explanation and a slight modification of Higgs theory will clear the confusion.

In our every day life, we measure the mass of objects with the help of common balance. Also we can know the mass of objects indirectly by measuring their weight. But we can’t use these methods of estimating mass in the outer space where no gravity exists. There, we need to measure the inertia of objects to estimate their mass. We know that inertia is the resistance offered by objects when we try to move them. The more the mass of an object, the more will be its inertia and the more will be the force required to move it from rest. But inertia of an object or the resistance offered by an object not only depends upon its mass but also upon the medium or the environment in which it exists. For example, it requires more force to move objects in water than in air. That is, the more the density and viscosity of the medium, the more will be the resistance and the more will be the force required to move objects. And conversely, the less viscous and less dense the medium, the less will be the frictional resistance and the less will be the force required to move objects.

In other words, inertia of an object (or the resistance offered by an object when we try to move it) not only depends upon its mass but also upon the frictional resistance of the medium. The same expressed in mathematical terms:

I ∝ m x fr

where
I is the inertia
m is the mass of the object
fr is the frictional resistance offered by the medium (or environment)

From this, we can learn that for inertia to become manifest, there must be some medium or some resistance in the environment. If there was nothing in the space and no resistance in the environment, inertia would become nonexistent and we wouldn’t be able to know the mass of fundamental particles. Also, if there wasn’t this thing called inertia in Nature, every object, tiny and big, would get accelerated to infinite velocities even with slightest force which is obviously prohibited in Nature. This implies that absolute vacuum doesn’t exist in Nature, rather our entire space is permeated by some resistive fluid medium. And our scientists have given a name to that stuff filling the universe i.e. Higgs field. But unlike what the scientists believe, what the Higgs ‘field’ gives to particles is inertia and not their mass.

Actually people have known and believed in the existence of some subtle medium or some fundamental stuff pervading this entire universe since ages and which they have called with different names in different times and different contexts. For example in ancient Hindu scripts it was mentioned as ‘Akash’, one of the ‘pancha bhutas’ or five elements that made this universe. And in the pre-modern era, it was known by the name ‘Ether’. Modern day scientists describe that as Higgs field in one context and dark matter in another context without realizing that they both are just one thing. And on this blog, we have described the same as cosmic ocean of photons or ultra-photons. And despite the different names and descriptions given, they all are one and the same, and the same one thing will explain all the phenomena in Nature from inertia to gravity and the wave like behavior of particles in DSE.

People may argue that Michelson Morley experiment had disproved the existence of ether. But if that was true, Michelson experiment would also disprove Higgs field and dark matter. If at all the experiment disproved something, it was just our misconception of the ether and not actually the ether.

Coming back to our discussion on Higgs, the proposition of the existence of Higgs field puts the first law of Newton in jeopardy. The law states that 1) an object at rest continues to be at rest and 2) an object in uniform motion continues to be in the same uniform motion unless acted upon by external force. While the first part of this law still holds true, the Higgs theory clearly disproves the second half of it. Because of the frictional resistance of the space conferred by the Higgs medium, any object moving in space is ought to come to rest at some point in time. Or, in other words, with Higg’s field pervading our entire space, the scenario of a moving body with no external force acting upon it doesn’t simply exist and so Newton’s first law becomes irrelevant in this Universe. And the story doesn’t stop there. The existence of Higgs field calls for review of many other scientific theories.

Contrary to the prevailing belief, it neither requires costly experiments nor complicated maths to do science but rather commonsense. But unfortunately, commonsense has disappeared from modern science as it has become purely mathematical. While scientists have been successful in explaining the Nature in mathematical terms, they have been failing to translate that into rational physical models. It is questioning of the irrational beliefs which paved the way to science. But this questioning attitude, the very basic foundation of science, has disappeared from the discipline of science nowadays. As people confuse science for technology, they blindly believe in everything that gets taught as science, however irrational and weird that may be. People need to realize that science and technology are two different things and that technology can be built without a thorough understanding of the underlying physics. For example radio was invented when scientists knew little about electromagnetic waves. While a better understanding of Nature definitely helps build better technology, technology can’t be argued as a blanket proof of science. If people remain as critical and skeptical in science as they do in politics and religion, they will realize that many of our modern scientific theories need rewriting.

By Dr Srinivasa Rao Gonuguntla | Posted in Science with Sense | Also tagged , , , , | Comments (4)