Originally Posted By: Orac

No you are trying to squeeze through the cracks again in many versions of QM and string theory there are no particles only waves or forces.
So show me some proof that there is such thing as a particle, scientific references or observations please.
You can't simply say what this or that science believes I want to see your observations and reasonings.

'A theory has no proof' that is what Stephen Hawking says. The QM has indeed no proof. However, when certain observations can be explained on the basis of QM, we call it a good theory. This is what I meant when I said that the same observations can be regarded as proof of my theory.

It is the loop holes or the cracks in the theory that render it imperfect. The progress in physics can be regarded as a continuous effort to plug the loop holes in Newtons theory, which can be regarded as the basic standard model. I don't claim that I am a physicist; I am only a layman interested in physics, but I follow the same strategy as the physicists and try to plug the loop holes.

So, when I say that electron and positron are actually particles and form a pair, and the pairs integrate into neutrons, I have to provide a logical structure of neutron. Neutron contains 919 pairs packed closely around a vacant centre. Why is it 919 and not any other number? It is the value of 'Pi' that decides this. The smallest whole number fraction for the value of 'Pi' is 22/7. This means that a circle of radius 7 particles can accommodate 22 particles in the circumference, thus forming a nearly perfect circle. Applying this to a sphere, it can be shown that the minimum number of double particles (electron-positron pairs) required to form a nearly perfect sphere is 919. And, the mass of 919 pairs is nearly equal to that of a neutron. This is one of the mathematical proofs that supports my theory.