Why the analysis of wide range of physical phenomena leads to consistent and successful results when applying the BSM concept and models? 

The foundations of the modern physics rely on postulates and rules adopted about 100 years ago. Now a real gap exists between the highly abstractive theories about the matter from one side, and physical reality from the other. With the advances of the applied fields the existing gap becomes more acute and some papers began to appear in the peer review journals [1]. In the beginning of the 20th century the physical science has not been able to provide logical explanations of some physical phenomena, while their mathematical interpretations appeared successful. As a result the Quantum Mechanics is born. The principle of causality, that is essentially important for the objective reality, has been replaced by the uncertainty principle. Influenced by the successful results from the quantum mechanical models, the theoretical physics gradually abandoned the physical logic and replaced it by a mathematical logic. As a result, the mathematical physics took the guiding role in theoretical physics. Now the concepts of the mathematical physics dominate and form our  vision about matter, space and time. This approach led to development of highly abstracted theories in order to provide some explanations of long standing problems in a vast range from micro to macro Cosmos. In the same time not successful attempts are made to extend the individual narrow range theories into one universal unified field theory. In such approach many of the adopted rules become cross violated in the wider range of space and time. Many interdisciplinary studies indicate that the Nature from the microworld to the cosmology is in amazing harmony, so it could not be described by contradictable models or rules. Despite the enormous efforts from army of theoreticians, significant fundamental problems are not still solved [2,3]. Some attempts of explaining not solved problems relying firmly on the orthodox dogmatism and using only a mathematical logic lead even to fallacy of ambiguity [4].    

    One of the main advantage of the physical models developed by the BSM theory is the lack of gaps between the theoretical models and the practical applications related with them. The common relations between different in first gland phenomena are always identifiable. These feature greatly facilitates the analysis of some very difficult and long standing problems. 

    In the recent years some non orthodox vision about the physical vacuum,  challenging some of the adopted postulates begun to appear in some physical conferences. The paper "Can the Vaccumm be Engineered for Spaceflight applications?, by H. E. Puthoff has been reported at the NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics conference, 18 Aug, 1997. The following paragraph extracted from the paper says:

 "After a one -year investigation Forward finished his study and submitted his report to the Air Force, who published it under the title Mass Modification Experiment Definition Study. The Abstract reads in part: "...Many researchers see the vacuum as a central ingredient of 21st Century physics. Some even believe the vacuum may harness to provide a limitless supply of energy. .... It was possible to find an experiment that might be able to prove or disprove that the inertial mass of a body can be altered by making changes in the vacuum surrounding the body."

    The BSM theory allows to put the physical science on logical rails by some corrections in its fundamental blocks. The great profit from a such approach is that illogical looking phenomena in quite broad range of space and time (from the subatomic particles to the Cosmology), obtain a logical sense. It becomes apparent that interstellar travels in enormous distances with huge velocities and accelerations are possible and the Nature provide us enough energy and in much cleaner form. But the use of such new kind of energy without adequate knowledge of the matter and space structures could be a dangerous.


1. S. Nagel, Physics in Crisis, Physics Today, September 2002, pp. 55-57, published simultaneously in FermiNews.

2. Paul Stowe, Problems and the Philosophy Inherent in Modern Physics, Mountain Man Graphics archive, Australia, 1997 http://www.magna.com.au/~prfbrown/news97_l.html 

3. John Baez, Open questions in Physics http://hepweb.rl.ac.uk/ppuk/PhysFAQ/open_questions.html

4. Dave Pressler, The greatest math error, Journal of Theoretics, http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Articles/5-1/commentary5-1.pdf

Return to Home page