A quantum processing model (Figure 4.19) has no virtual bosons to make things happen because dynamic processing on a network, like an ever-flowing river, actively finds stable states. The first event created a plasma of extreme light that diluted to ordinary light as space expanded and collided with itself to give matter as a standing quantum wave. Extreme light overloading one dimension gave electron or neutrino leptons, depending on phase, and extreme light overloading a plane gave semi-stable up or down quarks, again depending on phase. In both cases, the repeating overload caused mass and the repeating remainder caused charge, including the strange one-third charges of quarks.
The only fundamental process in this model is a circle of quantum processing that in one node outputs “nothing”, so in quantum realism, space is null processing.
Distributing this circle gives the sine wave of light, so the entire electromagnetic spectrum is one process more or less shared so in quantum realism, light is space distributed.
Up and down quarks achieve stability by photon-sharing in a proton or neutron triangle and protons, neutrons and electrons then evolved into stable atoms that in time gave us. Matter entities have anti-matter versions with the same mass but opposite charge because processing can run in reverse. In the lines Figure 4.18 are similarities between supposed fundamentals but in Figure 4.19 they signify a dynamic evolution.
Figure 4.19 is simpler because one fundamental quantum process gives space, light and matter and it answers questions that the standard model of particles struggles with, including:
1. How do matter and charge relate? (4.3.2)
2. Why do neutrinos have a tiny but variable mass? (4.3.3)
3. Why does anti-matter with the same mass but opposite charge exist? (4.3.4)
4. Where did the anti-matter go? (4.3.5)
5. Why are quark charges in strange thirds? (4.4.3)
6. Why does the force binding quarks increase with distance? (4.4.4)
7. Why don’t protons decay in empty space? (4.4.6)
8. Why does the energy of mass depend on the speed of light? (4.4.8)
9. How did atomic nuclei evolve? (4.6.1)
10. How did electron shells evolve? (4.6.2)
11. Why does mass vary enormously but charge doesn’t? (4.7.3)
12. Why is the universe charge neutral? (4.7.4)
13. What is dark matter? (4.7.6)
14. What is dark energy? (4.7.7)
Some of the above are covered shortly. If a quantum network defines the pixels of space, nothing is needed to keep point matter entities apart. If the quantum network transfer rate is one node per cycle, the speed of light will be a constant. If electrons and neutrinos are phases of the same interaction, they will be brother leptons. If up and down quarks are phases of a three-axis interaction, there will be charges in thirds. If a quantum process creates matter, there must be anti-matter. Quantum processing explains more than inert particles pushed around by forces.
It’s time to abandon Newton’s idea that God put the world together like a clock, from existing bits. The standard model doesn’t describe God’s Lego-set because most of its “fundamental particles” play no part at all in the world we see.
If only quantum reality existed initially, it had to create physical reality from itself, with no divine shortcuts because there were no basic bits of matter just laying around from which a universe could be made! Given itself alone, it had to create an observer-observed universe by providing the observer and the observed from itself. This couldn’t occur in one step, so our was universe booted-up from a single photon, not made from preexisting bits. After that, it was complexity evolving from simplicity. The Mandelbrot set illustrates how a simple process can give endless complexity, as one line of code repeated gives rise to endless forms (Figure 4.20). There is no end to the Mandelbrot set not because was “built” from complex bits but because it is an endlessly dynamic interaction.
Quantum realism describes an essential simplicity hidden by complex outputs. If the null process we call space became light, then light became matter and matter became us, so nothing became everything. As Douglas Adams says:
“The world is a thing of utter inordinate complexity and richness and strangeness that is absolutely awesome. I mean the idea that such complexity can arise not only out of such simplicity, but probably absolutely out of nothing, is the most fabulous extraordinary idea. And once you get some kind of inkling of how that might have happened, it’s just wonderful.” Douglas Adams, quoted by Dawkins in his eulogy for Adams (17 September 2001)
The best argument against physical realism is the ridiculous complexity of the models it needs to describe it. Quantum realism derives physical complexity from quantum simplicity.