Random Thinking— The foundation of
      (Now Antiquated) Quantum Mechanics

This poem explains how we know that field systems are NOT based on truly random subquantum events from below the "quantum limit," but must be generated by reliable, reproducible, consistent, pseudorandom, subquantum events.


1 Resonant fields do generate
Everything we see
We wonder how it does it
With such reliability

2 At the heart of what is popular
The Principle of Uncertainty
A major part of science
Quantum Mechanics potpourri?

3 Since Max Planck began his work
Quantum theory he laid out
So we know that Resonant Fields are in
Lumps of quanta without doubt

4 But are they developed over time
A full period— wavelength long?
Or do they arrive in rapid spikes
That must be fully strong?

5 These spike “particles” it’s said
Come at random, from below
That “quantum limit,” yet produce
Wave-functions of field flow *

6 For they build the Universe
With a working guarantee
Cause-and-effect it operates
We can measure, even see

7 But—
This “deterministic# nature
They claim’s above that quantum limit
Which "can only be examined
By statistics* from within it"

8 The question we should ask right here:
Is that true randomness? Alas,
It don’t sound like the definition
We studied in math class

9 If you take some random tables
Then statistically analyze
You get different answers for each one
From the random data each supplies

10 In a dynamic system,
Random data is a pest
‘cause it makes a different table
Every time you do the test

11 Below that quantum limit
Is where its data does come from
To make up that statistic *
So what will it become?

12 From a dynamic underworld
That changes constantly
If it has true randomness
It can’t make consistency

13 For that’s what “randomness” does mean
Makes it different every time
It cannot do the same thing twice
Or it’s pseudorandom like this rhyme

14 So could his random underworld
Produce what we observe
Does it generate consistency
To make us a fine curve? *

15 Or could it be what’s happening
Isn’t random, though complex?
Just to humans it looks random
Thus, so many are perplexed

16 The answer is quite simple
Though folks don’t like to hear
That Heisenberg just got it wrong
Now under his limit we CAN peer

17 It may have hampered Heisenberg
But now we are set free
To examine things below that line
What happens we shall see

18 And everything that’s based on it
Which requires randomness
To make it work from physics
Is left completely baseless

19 If wave-functions are valuable
Reliable in each case
They must be generated by
A pseudorandom base

20 That clears up analysis
It helps us learn thereof
Consistency below that line
Generates consistency above

So at the base of Everything
We should've discerned
Consistency is opposite
Of that “random” stuff we learned

22 So what's the logical conclusion
What should we now discern
That randomness don’t happen
Resonant Fields are reliable we learn

Exciting isn't it!

by John N. Hait

* Statistical analyses are used to generate “wave function” curves that mathematically define how a particle or other resonant field system will operate. They are reliable and repeatable, but in disagreement with the claim that they are generated from “random” subquantum events, as taught by Warner Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty.

# Deterministic = cause-and-effect operations, the opposite of random.


More Poetic Memory Aids
More on Einstein Codes
Find out more about Resonant Fields

Update 1-20-2010