Comparison of Subquantum Kinetics
to Conventional Physics and Astronomy


Comparison to Quantum Theory and Field Theory

Conventional Physics

Subquantum Kinetics

1 Special and general relativity are disproven by the Sagnac, Silvertooth, and Ampere force law experiments. The subquantum kinetics (SQK) ether concept is supported by the Sagnac, Silvertooth, and Ampere force law experiments.
2 Special relativity suffers from the twin clock paradox and the light-source-velocity paradox. SQK avoids this problem.
3 Classical field theory is plagued by the field-particle dualism. SQK avoids this problem.
4 Classical field theory suffers from the infinite energy absurdity. SQK avoids this problem.
5 The wave packet model used in quantum mechanics to model a subatomic particle has the problem of gradually spreading out. Also it cannot model a particle at rest. SQK avoids this problem. Field patterns composing a subatomic particle remain structurally coherent over time, even when the particle is stationary.
6 Is plagued by the nonintuitive wave-particle dualism concept. SQK avoids this problem. Subatomic particles naturally incorporate wave aspects in their structure.
7 Does not explain what charge and mass are, or how they generate electric and gravitational fields. SQK explains what they are and how they generate such fields.
8 Fails to account for experiments showing that gravitational fields may be electrostatically induced. Considers antigravity an impossibility. SQK explains such experiments. Allows the possibility of antigravity propulsion.
9 Maxwellian electrodynamics fails to explain the induction of Tesla waves, nonpolarized longitudinal energy waves. SQK explains the induction of both transversely polarized Hertzian waves and Tesla waves.
10 Advocates the nonintuitive notion that natural events are inherently indeterminate. Accepts the Copenhagen Interpretation of the Uncertainty Relation. Retains the commonsense notion of causality. Nonlocal superluminal interactions explain the EPR experiment results. Maintains that the Uncertainty Relation is merely a statement about the limitations inherent to quantum level observation.
11 Quantum electrodynamics and general relativity, two pillars of conventional field theory, contradict one another, a problem known as the cosmological constant conundrum. SQK avoids this problem. All fields (electrostatic, magnetic, gravitational, nuclear) are encompassed within a single internally consistent theory.
12 General relativity is fatally flawed in that it allows the formation of cosmologically disruptive naked singularities. SQK avoids this problem.


Comparison to Cosmology and Astrophysics

Conventional Cosmology & Astrophysics

Subquantum Kinetics

1 The big bang theory proposes the counterintuitive notion that the universe emerged out of a state of nonexistence. Subquantum kinetics (SQK) avoids this problem. Proposes that physical form emerged from a preexisting ether substrate.
2 Fails to explain how subatomic particles originate. It merely postulates that they form out of the vacuum. SQK explains in detail how subatomic particles arise from subquantum fluctuations in the ether.
3 Fails to explain why our universe is made up of matter as opposed to antimatter. SQK predicts a matter/ antimatter bias to particle materialization.
4 Introduces the ad hoc assumption that the universe is expanding, in order to account for the cosmological redshift phenomenon. SQK naturally predicts a tired-light cosmological redshift effect without introducing any ad hoc assumptions.
5 The expanding universe model fails to make a good fit to astronomical data on four cosmology tests. The tired-light static universe cosmology makes a superior fit to astronomical data on all four cosmology tests.
6 Conventional cosmology fails to explain observations of galaxies with redshifts greater than 4.0. SQK accounts for the existence of galaxies having redshifts many times higher than 4.0.
7 Conventional physics fails to explain why the jovian planets and brown dwarfs fall along the M-L relation for low mass stars, attributes this to chance. SQK explains this conformance by predicting that planets, brown dwarfs, and low mass stars are similarly powered by genic energy.


Fails to explain the source of the excess heat coming from the Earth's core. SQK attributes the excess heat from the Earth's core to genic energy.
9 Fails to account for the inflection (at 0.45 solar masses) in the stellar luminosity function and for the accompanying upward bend in the stellar M-L relation. SQK explains this inflection and upward bend as arising from the onset of fusion energy production and the formation of a radiative core at the star's center.
10 Fails to adequately explain stellar pulsation. The SQK genic energy prediction explains this phenomenon.
11 Fails to explain the source of energy powering supernova explosions and why supernovae arise from blue giants. The SQK genic energy prediction explains this phenomenon.
12 Fails to account for the energy source powering galactic core explosions. The SQK genic energy prediction explains this phenomenon.
13 General relativity predicts that massive, highly luminous galactic cores should exist as matter-consuming black holes. But this prediction fails to conform with observation. SQK predicts that black holes should not form, that galactic cores should instead consist of very dense stellar bodies that continually create matter and energy. This predictionis supported by observation.

Note: genic energy is the name given to the excess energy that is produced by the photon blue-shifting phenomenon predicted by subquantum kinetics.