Helmut Hille

For a New World View of Physics

With my Proposal "what holds the world together in its innermost core"

It is a human viewing habit to understand separately seen objects as separately existing objects, although the system sun-earth-moon proves the opposite. None of these bodies would have its orbit without the other und there would be no tides on earth. Entangled quanta have shown that their common origin makes them behave as being one. The Big Bang is the origin of all matter in our cosmos; the matter wants to reunite in form of gravitation. This is another proof for the power of the invisible, which has to be accepted. As a way out, today, we search the invisible in the dark matter and in energy. However, the invisible which I am concerned about has no name. It is only the reverse side of the visible, which we capture by means of the gravitational constant. Thus, gravitation is a form of entanglement of all concerned matter (radiation is also matter), which I call provisionally super entanglement. In connection with another three reasonable premises this results in a world view of physics which is rational and not metaphysical like the actual one.

Thesis 1 and 2
In terms of physics my world view is based on two new statements and on two known statements. The new statements are 1. The differentiation between universe and cosmos. Our cosmos which emerged from a common event may only be one of many in a universe with no limits in space and time. This would explain its past and its future. 2. Gravitation is a phenomenon of the entanglement of all concerned matter/energy triggered by the so-called Big Bang; this is the reason why matter constantly tries to reunite. It's the Super entanglement that holds the world together in its innermost core. In this view, gravitation is another proof of the Big Bang, because nothing comes from nothing. Aristotle already described gravitation as the striving of the bodies for their "natural place". Just as entangled particles currently react to each other over any distance, gravity is at the point of its action from the very start, it does not have to "bend" something elaborately beforehand, nor must it rush to somewhere, which would only then be distant effects, which Einstein rightly did not like. However, things are not distant from another - we only see them that way. This is the answer to the problem! So this is also about the role of the observer, namely his viewing habits, which he has to become aware of. Even Newton saw no need for a time factor for gravitation.

The Nature of Gravity
To differentiate it from particle entanglement, I provisionally have called the more extensive entanglement, which I mean here, "super entanglement". So that doesn't explain the entanglement of particles, as was demanded from me by an Einstein friend in Freiburg in autumn 2019. I see it more as part of the super entanglement when research is done in very small dimensions. My Proposal of uper entanglement as the nature of gravitation is a continuation of quantum physics, which for metaphysical reasons has not been dared to think through to the end.My suggestion of super-entanglement as the nature of gravitation is a continuation of quantum physics, which for metaphysical reasons no one dared to think through to the end. Ultimately, the double-slit experiment as one of the most important experiments in the history of physics can only be understood through the entanglement of all matter by the Big Bang, which some other authors now see it that way too. In this view there is not only no problem between gravitation and the particles, quite the opposite: only quantum physics makes gravitation and the cosmos understandable to us. What more can you expect from a physical world view today? You just have to have the courage to think it.

Thesis 3 and 4
In addition to the two new reasons for a new world view of physics mentioned so far, the consistent observance of the well-known law of energy conservation is essential so that physics remains science, as well as Newton's understanding of gravitation. From the law of conservation of energy it follows that our universe must have a past and a future. Hence my distinction between cosmos and universe. Therefore it is imperative. And Newton's gravitational equation shows that the ratio of the gravitational strength of a body is constant to the amount of its matter, which is rightly called the gravitational constant and has proven itself very well. Gravitation cannot be "radiated", as is so lightly expressed today, because otherwise there would be e.g. one day a cosmos full of gravitational energy without associated gravitating bodies or vice versa, which - despite the age of our cosmos - has not been observed anywhere. I think it is reasonable to assume that the cosmos, whether near or far, whether on earth or in space is of the same nature everywhere due to its common origin* and I also agree with Newton: hypotheses non fingo. And it doesn't need it either! Everything is already well known to us - we just cannot believe it. I hope to have given you the rise of a wonderful new, unified view of physics and cosmology.

*One could call this thesis 5: Unity of the cosmos through its primal leap. From primal leaps to quantum leaps: nature makes leaps and they are essential to it as creative pinciple.

Thesis 1: The distinction between cosmos and universe
Thesis 2: Gravitation as entanglement phenomenon
Thesis 3: Consistent observation of the energy conservation law
Thesis 4: Gravitational constant is neither variable nor losable

Thesis 1 and 4 are consequences of thesis 3 (energy conservation)
Thesis 2: My proposal for a deeper understanding of gravitation,
that I understand what holds the world together in its innermost core."(Goethe/Faust I)

The cosmen come and go, but the energy, the universe remains!

What is there not to understand about it???
A consistent cosmology was the last big gap in science.

Nothing new has to be discovered for all the statements, than it is sufficient to name the known phenomena correctly. This gives rise to all by itself a new World View of Physics. And I don´'t think it can be refuted either. As the name of the new world view I propose "the Dynamic Universe", because it is dynamic in alls its parts.

Course Cosmos:   Dynamic Universe    Primal Leap    + Super Entanglement     Dynamic Universe

© Hille 2020
Translation 2019 by Martha Greiner-Jetha (Gröbenzell near Munich, Germany)

back to the head
back to index