Next Frontier in Physics—Space as a Complex Tension Field


We hypothesize that 100% of the energy of our cosmic system is held by a physically real Complex Tension Field (CTF). We are using an old methodology of thinking used by our forefather engineers long before the advent of modern scientific thinking. We call it Interaction Process Mapping Epistemology or IPM-E. We apply this IPM-E on to the prevailing Measurable Data Modeling Epistemology or MDM-E. This approach helped us analyze the “Measurement Problem”, recognized during the rise of quantum mechanics (QM), and helped us recover a universal property of all linear waves, that they do not interact, or interfere, with each other. This Non-Interaction of Waves, or the NIW-property, should be obvious through daily observations and through the Huygens-Fresnel diffraction integral and through critical evaluation of contradictory hypotheses we have been assigning to photons through ages. This implicates that the time-frequency Fourier theorem, although mathematically correct, and is used universally in all branches of science; does not map the real physical interaction processes for most optical phenomena. Accordingly, we present the necessary modifications for a few selected phenomena in classical and quantum optics to validate the NIW-property. In the process we find that accepting photons as non-interacting, but diffractively propagating linear wave packets crossing the entire cosmic space, requires CTF as a physical medium. Then we develop logical arguments in support of stable elementary particles as nonlinear but resonant vortex-like undulations of this same CTF. These vortex-like particles impose various secondary potential gradients around themselves giving rise to the four forces we know. Thus, CTF can serve as the cosmic substrate to develop a unified field theory without the need of dark matter and dark energy. In the process, we demonstrate a path to add ontologic thinking on our biologically successful epistemic thinking.

Share and Cite:

C. Roychoudhuri, "Next Frontier in Physics—Space as a Complex Tension Field," Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 3 No. 10, 2012, pp. 1357-1368. doi: 10.4236/jmp.2012.310173.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] F. Wilczek, “The Lightness of Being: Mass, Ether, and the Unification of Forces,” Basic Books, New York, 2010.
[2] T. Silverman, “Philosophical Solutions: In Physics, Mathematics and the Science of Sentience,” International Institute for Advanced Studies, Baden-Baden, 2010.
[3] L. Smolin, “Trouble with Physics,” Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 2006.
[4] R. Laughlin, “A Different Universe: Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down,” Basic Books, New York, 2006.
[5] R. Penrose, “Road to Reality,” Alfred Knopf, New York, 2005.
[6] N. C. Panda, “Maya in Physics,” Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, Delhi, 1999.
[7] L. Smolin, “A Real Ensemble Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics,” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 42, No. 10, 2012, pp. 1239-1261. doi:10.1007/s10701-012-9666-4
[8] P. W. Anderson, “More and Different: Notes from A Thoughtful Curmudgeon,” World Scientific, Singapore City, 2011. doi:10.1142/8141
[9] L. Susskind, “String Theory,” Foundations of Physics, 2011. doi:10.1007/s10701-011-9620-x
[10] H. P. Stapp, “Quantum Locality?” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 42, No. 5, 2012, pp. 647-655. doi:10.1007/s10701-012-9632-1
[11] R. Omnès, “Wigner’s ‘Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics’, Revisited,” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 41, 2011, pp. 1729-1739. doi:10.1007/s10701-011-9587-7
[12] C. Roychoudhuri, “The Constancy of ‘c’ Everywhere Requires the Cosmic Space to Be a Stationary and Complex Tension Field,” Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 8121, 2011, p. 23.
[13] C. Roychoudhuri, “Appreciation of the Nature of Light Demands Enhancement over the Prevailing Scientific Epistemology,” Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 8121, 2011, p. 58.
[14] G. S. Sandhu, “Fundamental Nature of Matter and Fields,” 2009.
[15] M. Pauri, “Epistemic Primacy vs Ontological Elusiveness of Spatial Extension: Is There an Evolutionary Role for the Quantum?” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 41, No. 11, 2011, pp. 1677-1702. doi:10.1007/s10701-011-9581-0
[16] P. D. Mannheim, “Why Do We Believe in Dark Matter and Dark Energy—And Do We Have to?” In: M. D’Onofrio and C. Burigana, Eds., Questions of Modern Cosmology—Galileo’s Legacy, Springer Publishing Company, Heidelberg, 2009.
[17] F. Lassiaille, “Gravitational Model of the Three Elements Theory,” Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 3, No. 5, 2012, pp. 388-397. doi:10.4236/jmp.2012.35054
[18] P. Smeulders, “Why the Speed of Light Is Not a Constant,” Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 3, No. 4, 2012, pp. 345-349. doi:10.4236/jmp.2012.34047
[19] Inside Science News Service, “Physicists Detect New Heavy Particle,” 2012.
[20] A. Kent, “Real World Interpretations of Quantum Theory,” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 42, 2012, pp. 421-435.
[21] P. Grujic and N. Simonovic, “Insights from the Classical Atom,” Physics Today, Vol. 65, No. 5, 2012, pp. 41-46.
[22] G. Greenstein and A. G. Zajonc, “The Quantum Challenge,” Jones & Bartlett, Boston, 2006.
[23] C. Roychoudhuri and N. Prasad, “Discerning Comb and Fourier Mean Frequency from a fs Laser, Based on the Principle of Non-Interaction of Waves,” Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 8236, 2012.
[24] C. Roychoudhuri, “Various Ambiguities in Generating and Reconstructing Laser Pulse Parameters,” In: F. J. Duarte, Ed., Laser Pulse Phenomena and Applications, InTech, Morn Hill, 2010.
[25] D. Lee and C. Roychoudhuri, “Measuring Properties of Superposed Light Beams Carrying Different Frequencies,” Optics Express, Vol. 11, No. 8, 2003, pp. 944-951 doi:10.1364/OE.11.000944
[26] C. Roychoudhuri, “Principle of Non-Interaction of Waves,” Journal of Nanophotonics, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2010, Article ID: 043512. doi:10.1117/1.3467504
[27] C. Roychoudhuri, “Why We Need to Continue the ‘What Is a Photon?’ Conference? To Re-Vitalize Classical and Quantum Optics,” SPIE Proceedings, Vol. 7421, 2009, p. 28. doi:10.1117/12.828193
[28] J. Leibovitz, “Dark Energy as a Property of Dark Matter,” Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 1470-1479. doi:10.4236/jmp.2011.212181
[29] B. Tamir and S. Masis, “Weak Measurement and Weak Information,” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 42, 2012, pp. 531-543.
[30] C. Roychoudhuri, “Measurement Epistemology and Time-Frequency Conjugate Spaces,” AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1232, 2009, pp. 143-152.
[31] C. Roychoudhuri, “Inevitable Incompleteness of All Theories: An Epistemology to Continuously Refine Human Logics towards Cosmic Logics,” In: C. Roychoudhuri, A. F. Kracklauer and K. Creath, Eds., The Nature of Light: What Is a Photon? CRC/Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, 2008.
[32] C. Roychoudhuri, “Locality of Superposition Principle Is Dictated by Detection Processesm,” Physics Essays, Vol. 19, No. 3, 2006, p. 333.
[33] C. Roychoudhuri and C. V. Seaver, “Are Dark Fringe Locations Devoid of Energy of Superposed Fields?” SPIE Proceedings, Vol. 6285, 2006. doi:10.1117/12.684613
[34] C. Roychoudhuri, “Propagating Fourier Frequencies vs Carrier Frequency of a Pulse through Spectrometers and Other Media,” SPIE Proceedings, Vol. 5531, 2004, pp. 450-461. doi:10.1117/12.580700
[35] C. Roychoudhuri, “Response of Fabry-Perot Interferometers to Light Pulses of Very Short Duration,” Journal of Optical Society of America, Vol. 65, No. 12, 1975, p. 1418. doi:10.1364/JOSA.65.001418
[36] C. Roychoudhuri and M. Tayahi, “Spectral Super-Resolution by Understanding Superposition Principle & Detection Processes,” International Journal of Microwave and Optics Tech., July 2006.
[37] C. Roychoudhuri, “Exploring Light-Matter Interaction Processes to Appreciate Various Successes behind the Fourier Theorem!” SPIE Proceedings, Vol. 8122, 2011.
[38] M. Born and E. Wolf, “Principles of Optics,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1980.
[39] C. Roychoudhuri, “Re-Interpreting Coherence in Light of Non-Interaction of Waves, or the NIW-Principle,” SPIE Proceedings, Vol. 8121, 2011, p. 44.
[40] C. Roychoudhuri and A. M. Barootkoob, “Generalized Quantitative Approach to Two-Beam Fringe Visibility (Coherence) with Different Polarizations and Frequencies,” SPIE Proceedings, Vol. 7063, 2008. doi:10.1117/12.793747
[41] P. A. M. Dirac, “The Principles of Quantum Mechanics,” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1974.
[42] N. Tirfessa and C. Roychoudhuri, “Analysis of Spectrometric Data and Detection Processes Corroborate Photons as Diffractively Evolving Wave Packets,” SPIE Proceedings, Vol. 8121, 2011, p. 33.
[43] D. H. Goldstein, “Polarized Light,” 3rd Edition, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2011.
[44] J. D. Jackson, “Classical Electromagnetism,” John Wiley, Hoboken, 1999.
[45] R. T. Hammond, “Spin, the Classical Theory,” Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2012, pp. 1-8. doi:10.4236/jmp.2012.31001
[46] K. O. Greulich, “Calculation of the Masses of All Fundamental Elementary Particles with an Accuracy of Approx. 1%,” Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 1, No. 5, 2010, pp. 300-302.
[47] V. Konushko, “Stability of Atoms, Causality in Elementary Processes and the Mystery of Interference and Hyroscope,” Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2012, pp. 224-232. doi:10.4236/jmp.2012.33032
[48] A. I. Arbabl and F. A. Yassein, “A New Formulation of Quantum Mechanics,” Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2012, pp. 163-169. doi:10.4236/jmp.2012.32022
[49] V. Balasubramanian, “What We Don’t Know about Time,” Foundations of Physics, 2011. doi:10.1007/s10701-011-9591-y
[50] T. Filk, “Temporal Non-Locality,” Foundations of Physics, 2012. doi:10.1007/s10701-012-9671-7
[51] S. Gryb and K. Thébault, “The Role of Time in Relational Quantum Theories, Foundations of Physics, Vol. 42, No. 9, 2012, pp. 1210-1238. doi:10.1007/s10701-012-9665-5
[52] R. T. Cahill and D. Brotherton, Progress in Physics, Vol. 1, No. 43, 2011.
[53] C. Roychoudhuri.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.