On Quantum Physics (2)

When it comes to physics, most explanations are just theories and the problem is that arranging several explanations gives almost the same equations as when using the right explanations (right being the simpler explanation), which means that you can build very complex theories and everytime something can't be explanied, you simply make more complex equations and problem solved.

Physics right now is building progressively more complex equations, giving progressively more complex explanations.

The Occam Razor is one possible way to detect what we find better theories. Does inertia exist or objects tend to stop? A priori you can't know, but when applying equations, inertia is a better model, because it can explain more phenomena and therefore our limited brains can get better conclusions.

It doesn't matter if one theory is the right one or the incorrect one. The important matter is that you can predict accurately what's going to happen under different configurations. If one theory requires you to think for 2 minutes and another requires you to think for 2 years, the correct one is the one that requires less time.

Now in the software business you sometimes end up without a job if you solve the problem in minutes, since developers are paid by the time they work, not by the complexity of what they are fixing. If the problem is not complex enough you can always make it harder by writing the same code over and over using copy and paste.

In the case of physics, if you can do a quantum entanglement, you can build better computers and a better internet (always connected, even when outside the solar system). Can you imagine how much you could ask for a 100% uptime internet?

Orbits

Planets have orbits and electrons have orbits. Why don't we have a theory explaning why planets and electrons are alike?

The universe expands?

Isn't it getting too easy to put one idea over the other to explain what can't be explained? Maybe the problem is not that we have too many explanations but that we don't have enough data to disregard the wrong theories.

The big bang created matter in an instant, so it was a black hole. If nothing can escape a black hole, how did we escape the black hole?

The solution? The universe expanded faster than light. Does that mean that there is a fabric of the universe? Isn't that the original ether that was proved incorrect?

I doubt that it is incorrect. In fact I think the ether exist because the experiment to show that the speed of light was the same in all directions is wrong, IMHO.

But it really doesn't matter. Physics have been rejecting the idea of the ether and they came up with ether again and again, disguised in different ways. It is obvious, at least to me, that ether exists. The problem is how to measure it, to know their real properties.

Gravitational Waves

So far gravitational waves have not been measured. I already mentioned that if gravitation traveled, it wouldn't be faster than light, and therefore it would escape black holes. It is nonsense. All the intent to measure the gravitational waves will show that gravitation does not travel, or that we don't have equipement precise enough.