"Physical uncertainty doesn't exist. Mental uncertainty is what exists"

The word physics means "real, certain, existent"

Uncertainty Principle?

According to the Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg (Schrodinger) the behaviour of particles (for example, electrons) it is uncertain because if we try to measure them, the same physical methods to measure them will change the state of these particles.
I'm sorry very much for my expression, but I can should define this conclusion as "quite stupid" because this conclusion would also take us to deduce that if we don't try to measure its behaviour, then this would be certain and invariable.
This supposition and conclusion is unacceptable since all atoms and particles are ALWAYS subjected to the energy variations of the place where they are, so much if we are measuring them as if not.
This way an atom or an electron is always subjected to the temperature of its place of situation and to the contributions of solar light or of any other energy that can affect them.
So in all the cases the energy changes are constant and therefore these elements or particles are changing constantly and adapting to these circumstances, but always completing all the physical laws and been its behaviour always real and certain.
If for example we notice some water, this, so much inwardly (at subatomic level) as outwardly, it is affected by the changes of temperature, light etc., changing its state according to the circumstances and received energy (Ice, liquid, vapour).
But at the same time we see that its behaviour is completely certain and predictable following all the well-known physical laws. And what is what happens in the particles? Because that to be very small we don't have the necessary physical instrumental to measure their changes neither the theoretical knowledge to deduce them. But their behaviour will never be physically uncertain, but unknown for us.
Then, which the correct form of proceeding on particles would be to measure them and to find their correct actuation?
Because to subject them to measure in their different and changing energy states -include the interactions taken place by us in these measures- so this way to be able to understand their states and movements in the different circumstances.
Every necessary study, but never treat them as uncertain, virtual elements and evaders of the laws and physical forces. Let us be a little modest and let us don't try to imply and to attribute our limited capacities to the physical behaviour of the Cosmos.
If there was not physical certainty, there would not be exact execution of the physical laws and the Cosmos could not exist simply.

CERTAINTY PRINCIPLE.

As it is exposed above, uncertainty is not a problem that the physical elements suffer. Uncertainty is a problem that the human beings suffer, when we try to know physical phenomena and we don't have the necessary means for it.
In the drawing a simple device with the one we can make rotate any mass element (from a matter piece until a quark or more) is detailed, and by means of counters we can know the rotations that they have: the laps, speed and momentum that they have in any moment.
If we didn't have counters, when the particle (blue) rotated to several revolutions per second, we would stop to observe it and starting from then its situation would be uncertain.
Uncertain? Yes, uncertain for us because we have leaved to see it. But its physical situation: state, speed, momentum, etc. they last being completely real and certain.
Nevertheless, as we have counters that show us, so much its turn frequency, speed, and momentum are known in any moment.
All this demonstrates that the states and physical phenomena don't have uncertainty. The uncertainty is in us when we don't have the appropriate means of measure.
But also, to apply a uncertainty measure on a physical phenomenon it is necessary to know the physical laws that this phenomenon must complete, because otherwise we can be looking for results in the wrong place and in the wrong time.
Therefore, apart from having exposed in the page of quantum mechanics, the most important errors in the uncertainty application would be:
--To attribute uncertainty to the physical phenomena and not to us. And
--To forget and refuse physical laws when we find results on the physical phenomena and to apply uncertainly elements only.
Therefore uncertainty just as it is treated now, on estrangement of reality consists, diving in an imaginary world in which we don't have to know the physical foundations, and using simply mathematics formulas we can forge an imaginary physics to which some people could understand -they say- with easiness. But clear everything will be an illusion; nothing is real.
Therefore "any resemblance with the reality will be pure coincidence."
So, Quantum Mechanics and its Principle of Uncertainty are virtual mathematics only, but not physical reality.

Therefore it is necessary to establish the Certainty Principle in the field of the physics, since if the physical elements complete all physical laws, then their state are completely certain and defined by these laws.

And predictable if we have the knowledge enough to make it.
If not, it is a human problem, not a physics problem.

When much, we can say:
"In many cases and due to our short knowledge, we are unable of adjusting the physical and certain state of the physical elements"

* Valid digits are those that represent a measurement made including the unit of measurement, such as:
Being equal, 5 decimeters has a valid digit when measuring in decimeters; while 50 centimeters has two digits because here we have measured in centimeters.
And therefore if we measure a length of 0.5 meters, it will have greater certainty if we express or measure it in centimeters than if we express it in decimeters.

I think certainty and probability should be a somewhat different concept.
Certainty is the knowledge we have of something, and probability is the speculation we can make of the uncertain.
For example, and referring to the possibility of existence of aliens, we can speculate with the possibility that they exist or not, and we can even consider that they must exist due to the large number of planets that exist. (And I would like to state here that I think that the formula that I put adapts well to our human reality)
With certainty/uncertainty, the problem of the existence of aliens is analysed in another way.
Currently, we do not "know" the existence of aliens and therefore everything is uncertainty, (formula certainty C = 0.0, uncertainty = 1.)
But if at any given moment an alien were to come to our planet, we could already verify that they exist, the certainty would change almost to the maximum (C = 0.91 and uncertainty = 0.09)
If aliens of many types and civilizations continue to come, the certainty will increase and the uncertainty will decrease. (C = 0.9995, U = 0.0005). In other words, the formula adapts well to our mentality about certainty.

The principle of certainty will tell us that:
"All the measurements and observations of any particle parameters will help us to find other complementary parameters and complete the total certainty of the particle Cx + Cp = Ct."
"The certainty about the different parameters of any particle do not devaluate each other, but they add certainty"
The Uncertainty Principle is FALSE AND WRONG, since to measure the momentum of any particle it is essential and basic to know and use the position parameters (location, position changes and deviation, etc.). Some support and adjust to the others as it happens daily in particle accelerators.

Preamble: Uncertainty Principle

I understand that Werner Karl Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is just an imaginary theory, poorly formulated and lacking a minimum logic that a similar theory should contain.
The first "condition" that this postulate seems to put, is that to observe and measure a particle we must emit certain waves or certain particles that interact with the one we want to measure, and that give us an answer, but having already distorted the parameters of the particle to measure.
Nothing is further from reality, because whenever we observe correctly we do so with the qualities of the observed element without distorting it, be it light emitted by it, fluorescence when passing through a suitable medium (particle accelerators), use of the charges and magnetic fields that emits the particle to be measured, etc.
Therefore, and with all due respect to its supporters, I understand that his explanations are simple attempts to evade the work and responsibility of facing a serious and fruitful discussion about these events.

Uncertainty example of the electron and photon that measures it

Here the previous explanation is observed, where the example of the photon that interacts with the electron to find its location is put, and the photon destabilizes it, not being able to measure it later to find its moment.
But can its momentum be measured with a photon?
How?
But if we can accept that it can be done, then let's measure firstly the momentum of the electron and we will verify that we have also found the place (situation) to be able to measure it in that place.
In other words, the Principle of Certainty of this particle is fulfilled.

Harsh criticism of the uncertainty principle

No, I'm sorry, this quantum principle of Uncertainty seems only a mental manipulation so that we close our eyes to critical discussion, and then accept new laws and magical quantum formulas that will discover all the truths of the Cosmos.
Once the quantum formulas are magical and you don't have to understand them, everything they say will be extraordinary and magical as well.

Principle of Certainty (Figure 1,2)

Thus, simplified as it is in this article and simply looking at the observer of particles and on the observations of these in various media such as particle accelerators, we can say that contrary to what the Uncertainty Principle postulates, all the observations and measurements that we do on particles using non-harmful means*, they are complementary to each other, and any measurements help to check and adjust the others.

* In any case, if we use harmful means we can first measure the momentum, with which we will also obtain the situation.
Therefore, the principle of certainty will tell us "that all the measurements and observations of the particle parameters will help us to find other complementary parameters and complete the total certainty of the particle Cx + Cp = Ct."

"Therefore, the sum of the certainty value of each parameter will give us the total certainty value of the particle, that is:
The total certainty of a particle is directly proportional to the certainty that we have about each of its parameters."

In drawing 2, we see how in particle accelerators the Certainty Principle is fulfilled since all the parameters of the particles created or measured there are supported by each other to make the correct adjustments.
In this sense, the logic and practice are clear and forceful, and discredit the erroneous logic that the Uncertainty Principle tries to impose.

The Principle of Certidimbre can also be explained with the example and quantum vision of Schrodinger's cat, within which and for a new observer (who does not know the details of the experiment) there exists in it a quantum superposition with all possible possibilities, ( that there is a cat, a mouse, a cake, a coin, etc.).
But by opening the box and collapsing the wave function, this new observer will be able to measure the situation and the momentum (if the cat is alive and moving, if it is hungry and meows, if it has good blood pressure, etc.), with what will be verified that the sum of certainty data will give us the total certainty of the content of the experiment.

Wave function collapse = Observation of any event.

* Very importante: this consideration is essential to understand, since all the inconsistency and deviation of Quantum Mechanics and Relativity derive from it.
And of course the unconscious idea that we are the "center of the Universe" and that everything depends on us and that it bends and obey to our desires and understanding.

The wave function collapses (and changes or distorts) on our brain by the information received by any means of communication, such as light and its speed of emission.
But the wave function never collapses the physical events of the cosmos that follow its continuous rate of transformation and physical evolution.
Our mind or we do not emit information towards the events that can affect them and make them appear or disappear.
It is the physical events that emit information to our brain, and it is within this where the supposed collapse of the wave function occurs, which produces our erroneous and distorted realities.
In Relativity the astronaut does not age, where he does not age he is in our brain, because the speed of the light received (when come delayed) distorts our perception.
Relativity and quantum mechanics seem to pretend that we are Gods since for them our mental perspective makes physical events change and transform.
That is why I sometimes ask myself: It will be that we are extremely pretentious, having grandiose delusions, or just a little short of intelligence?
Can we really believe that it is our observation of the physical phenomena that can give reality and consistency to the Cosmos.? Is it our observation that gives life or death to Schrodinger's cat?
Is it our observation that makes the astronaut grows old?
Really?
Forgive me lovers of the quantum world, but I can't believe.

* Always relativistic observation (and the supposed quantum waves) come and impact towards us.
They never go from us to events.

Thanks friends