The Physics of Matter Waves

In part, this entire section of discussions under the heading ‘The Wave Model’  was intended to provide a framework in which the ideas of Milo Wolff and Gabriel LaFreniere could be initially evaluated, as they initially appeared to be the main sources of reference material. As such, the previous discussions listed below have attempted to evaluate some of the various, and sometimes conflicting, ideas surrounding the concept of matter waves:

While it was hoped that this approach would lead to some consolidation of a workable wave model, efforts to-date only appear to have raised more questions than answers concerning some of the most fundamental concepts. Therefore, rather than this discussion being the framework for a more detailed review of the work of Wolff and LaFreniere, it is currently reduced to a ‘state-of-play’ update regarding the perceived problems within the wave models being investigated. Therefore, this discussion only outlines some of the problems perceived, which if unresolved may negate the purpose of any further review; such that the sub-page discussions to follow are primarily a collection of notes related to the various issues being investigated. So, by way of introduction to these issues, the question raised in the title of the first discussion above will be repeated:

What are matter waves?

Historically, the concept of matter waves was anchored in the quantum mechanical description of the deBroglie wavelength. However, the review of the developments leading from quantum mechanics to quantum field theory appears to only provide a mathematically abstract model rather than a physical description of sub-atomic reality.  While many now consider a mathematical or epistemological model adequate for scientific progress, there are others who hope that a more physical or ontological model  might still be developed. As such, the idea of a physical wave structure that might replace the ambiguity of the current wave-particle duality description still has much appeal, if the wave physics can be shown to work, even in general principle. However, while an entire section of website-1 has been given over to ‘Speculative Science’, an important distinction has to be drawn between being open-minded enough to review a speculative theory and attached enough to reject it, if it does not seem to ‘stack up’.

So does the WSM model ‘stack up’?

First, it has to be recognised that even in the limited context of this initial WSM review, there are essentially two different wave models under consideration, not one, even if the quantum wave-particle duality model is put to one-side. Of course, any expansion of the WSE discussion under website-3 to include the POU and OST models will only complicate the scope of potential wave models. From this perspective, we might realise that there has to be a major problem in, at least, one of these models, and possibly all of them, especially when we factor in the weight of authority of the accepted models. However, while accepting this note of caution, we might still recognise that the accepted models of science are not without their own set of problems and contradictions.