**13. Conclusion**

In this Chapter we have sought to present a thumbnail sketch of *a world without quanta*. We started at the very foundations of Modern Physics with a simple and continuous mathematical derivation of *Planck's Law*. We demonstrated that *Planck's Law is an exact mathematical identity that describes the interaction of energy*. This fact alone explains why *Planck's Law* fits so exceptionally well the experimental data.

What is emitted as an electron is a burst of energy which propagates continuously as a wave and going through both slits illuminates the detection screen in the typical interference pattern. This interference pattern is clearly visible when a large beam of energy illuminates the detection screen all at once. If we systematically lower the intensity of such electron beam the intensity of the illuminated interference pattern also correspondingly fades. For small bursts of energy, the interference pattern illuminated on the screen may be undetectable as a whole. However, when at a point on the screen *local equilibrium* occurs, we get a 'light burst' that in effect discharges the screen of an amount of energy equal to the energy burst that illuminated the screen. These points of discharge will be more likely to occur at those areas on the screen where the illumination is greatest. Over time we would

We have a 'reciprocal relation' between 'energy' and 'time'. Thus, 'lowering energy intensity' while 'increasing time duration' is equivalent to 'increasing energy intensity' and 'lowering time duration'. But the resulting phenomenon is the same: the interference pattern we observe. This explanation of the *double-slit* experiment is logically consistent with the 'probability distribution' interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. The view we have of energy propagating continuously as a wave while manifesting locally in discrete units (*equal size* 

The argument presented above rests on the following ideas. These are consistent with all our

2. Energy 'propagates continuously' but 'interacts discretely' when equilibrium occurs

Our thinking and reasoning are also guided by the following attitude of *physical realism*: a. Changing our detection devices while keeping the experimental setup the same can reveal something 'more' of the examined phenomenon but not something

the same input, our instruments may be so designed to produce different outputs.

*Planck's Law* fits so exceptionally well the experimental data.

In this Chapter we have sought to present a thumbnail sketch of *a world without quanta*. We started at the very foundations of Modern Physics with a simple and continuous mathematical derivation of *Planck's Law*. We demonstrated that *Planck's Law is an exact mathematical identity that describes the interaction of energy*. This fact alone explains why

b. If changing our detection devices reveals something 'contradictory', this is due to the detection device design and not to a change in the physics of the phenomenon examined. Thus, using *physical realism* we argue that if we keep the experimental apparatus constant but only replace our 'detection devices' and as a consequence we detect something contradictory, the physics of the double slit experiment does not change. The experimental behavior has not changed, just the display of this behavior by our detection device has changed. The 'source' of the beam has not changed. The effect of the double slit barrier on that beam has not changed. So if our detector is now telling us that we are detecting 'particles' whereas before using other detector devices we were detecting 'waves', *physical realism* should tell us that this is entirely due to the change in our methods of detection. For

get these dots of light filling the screen in the interference pattern.

**12.2 Explanation** *summary*

'contradictory'.

**13. Conclusion** 

results presented in this Chapter.

*sips)* when *local equilibrium* occurs*,* helps resolve the *wave-particle dilemma*.

1. The 'electron emitted' is not be the same as the 'electron detected'.

3. We have 'accumulation of energy' before 'manifestation of energy'.

Using our derivation of *Planck's Law* as a *Rosetta Stone* (linking Mechanics, Quantum Mechanics and Thermodynamics) we considered the *quantity eta* that naturally appears in our derivation as *prime physis.* Planck's constant *h* is such a quantity. Energy can be defined as the time-rate of *eta* while momentum as the space-rate of *eta*. Other physical quantities can likewise be defined in terms of *eta*. Laws of Physics can and must be mathematically derived and not physically posited as Universal Laws chiseled into cosmic dust by the hand of God.

We postulated the *Identity of Eta Principle*, derived the Conservation of Energy and Momentum, derived Newton's Second Law of Motion, established the intimate connection between entropy and time, interpreted Schoedinger's equation and suggested that the *wave-function ψ* is in fact *prime physis η*. We showed that The Second Law of Thermodynamics pertains to *time* (and not entropy, which can be both positive and negative) and should be reworded to state that *'all physical processes take some positive duration of time to occur'*. We also showed the unexpected mathematical equivalence between *Planck's Law and Boltzmann's Entropy Equation* and proved that "*if the speed of light is a constant, then light is a wave".* 
