So my theory is Quantitative, because quantity is a natural number and can be measured objectively. While distance, speed, acceleration, and so on are measured only in Irrational numbers, which need to be rounded. And any rounding means subjectivity, manual, human decision.
As the basis of the number of elements, I, in full accordance with the Standard Model, took the smallest element, a photon. Let’s see wha photon is, should we?
As you know, there are strings in the String Theory, that is, one- or two-dimensional (not stipulated for sure, let’s come later?) material points. At the same time, absolutely everything in the universe is three-dimensional, which is the fact. I decided that photons are these strings, the proof (theoretical) of which I considered the stationary Schrodinger equation. Indeed, in this equation (which is out of time), the mass of a particle is in the denominator, while according to the Standard the mass of a photon is 0. So, in the Schrodinger equation for a photon there is a division by zero! Which is, in principle, forbidden in mathematics! Does this mean that Schrodinger was wrong?
No! He was not mistaken because all particles are sets (more than one, two or more, remeber that you deal with Quantitive?) of photons. This means the Schrodinger equation for 1) three-dimensional particles, 2) with mass. This is the first proof that my Quantitative works.
The second is Einstein’s second postulate and the fact it’s proved by experiments. many experiments! he said: the speed of light c is a constant, independent of the relative motion of the source. Do you know something which moves with a constant speed? There is none. I decided that the photon moves with the constant speed and is out of time.
Another proof that photon is a one- or two-dimensional material point is practical, experimental. Namely, the double-slit experiment.
An interference patterns appears on the screen when the width of the slits approaches the wavelength of the emitted monochromatic light. If the width of the slots is increased, the illumination of the screen will increase, but the severity of the minima and maxima of the interference pattern will fall until it completely disappears.
Hence, under the action of the photoelectric effect (Einstein), a force arises in the atoms at the edges of the slits, since the atoms are excited by the hit of photons. Then we are talking about changing the molar masses and volumes of these atoms, look at what Bohr said about this: the orbits of electrons change. This is my speculation.
This is the force that leads to the deviation of photons from the shortest distance to the screen! And produces minima and maxima. Indeed, "if the width of the slots is increased, the illumination of the screen will increase, but the severity of the minima and maxima of the interference pattern will fall until it completely disappears."
In my formula derived from Newton's law for gravity, which I converted from material (one- or two-, strings) to accumulation points (three-dimensional, sets), there is a constant G, which is proportional to the ratio of material (photons) to accumulation points (three-dimensional, sets). Which is the reason why String Theory is in my formula is, why the Theory is the basis of Quantitive.
If we do not recognize that there cannot be photons (mass 0) in the Schrodinger equation (it’s for sets only), then the whole building of Quantum Physics will collapse! Only by realization that photons are material points can Schrodinger, my Quantitative and Standard Theory be harmonized, under the umbrlla of Quantum Physics. Classical as well, though.
And besides, I gave the first experimental confirmation of String Theory! Now it’s proved experimentally and is the pinnacle of Physics.
There is no Math here, except Cantor’s Set Theory, because it comes later, after there is the understanding that photons are perfect (material points, Natural numbers) and the basis for my Quantitive; there instead of distance or speed i can say: “This has N photons with this increment); which is proved by periodical table.
