alexross

Hi Severian, Thank you for posting your equations I will take a closer look. In the meantime please note you do not use quantum entanglement or such non-classical explanations here. As far as I am concerned that is CQM now and no longer QM. Perhaps I should listen to criticism myself and start a new thread. I will chew that over. regards, Alex

Hi Elas, I understand your position. There is a fear that nameta9 broaches upon in that because the current 'theories' = hypotheses are so complicated no-one can question them and if you do you are on your own! Rather than rabbit on about my own theories I will address your points. Please let me rebuke you a little. People are entitled to question you and me for that matter. We all enjoy the intellectual masochistic sparring don't we? Now Complex Quantum Mechanics which I sent away in 1999 does meet all your criteria and more. It resolves the problems of Conventional Quantum Mechanics but unfortunately for me there is not a level playing field. The current theories are NOT good in their predictions. Try and tell me the position of any electron at this moment! Sorry, I sound a little too scolding! Lets return to a placid state. Now how about your comment that: "If we look at the energy (Hamiltonian) of an electron in an electromagnetic field, we find that there is a contribution from the interaction of the electron's angular momentum and the magnetic field. For an orbital angular momentum" Now to be fair I admit I do not know everything not certainly not the specifics you refer to but I can make a comment. Is it proven that these contributions come from the momentum and the field? It is worth bearing in mind that you can interpret mathematics in more ways than one. In 2000 I challenged anyone to prove my theories wrong. In 6 years I have had only 1 criticism and that is that I am being 'too complicated'. Anyone else want to take up the gauntlet? Now I hope you will take this in good spirit perhaps if your question had been worded a bit less like a defence of Conventional Quantum Mechanics I would not sound so disapproving. In fact I have very little to disapprove of and I am just setting out where I stand. Anyone who wants to carry on the discussion. Please write rather than email me or post a thread. Best wishes, Mr Alexander Ross BSc(Hons) AMIMA Dip. Int. Trd.