Albert Einstein did not accept the impossibility for quantum mechanics to identify the position of a particle with classical precision. For that reason, he made his famous quote “God does not play dice with the universe.” Einstein evidently accepted the validity of quantum mechanics for point particles in vacuum but believed that quantum mechanics is an “incomplete theory” in the sense that it could be broadened into such a form to recover classical determinism under appropriate new conditions.
Einstein communicated this view to B. Podolsky and N. Rosen at the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study, and all three together published in May 15, 1935, the historical paper known as the EPR argument (http://www.galileoprincipia.org/docs/epr-argument.pdf).
Five months later, the Danish scientist Neil Bohr published a strong rejection of the EPR argument. A number of mathematicians supported of Bohr’s rejection, including J. S. Bell, J. von Neumann and others. Thereafter, academia settled the issue with the rejection of the EPR argument in favor of the universal validity of quantum mechanics for whatever conditions exist in the universe.
“To put it boldly, it is the attempt at a posterior reconstruction of existence by the process of conceptualization“, Albert Einstein
The Italian American scientist Sir Ruggero Maria Santilli (http://www.i-b-r.org/Dr-R-M-Santilli-Bio-1-10-18.pdf), when at Harvard University under DOE support, discovered in the late 1970s that, while being exactly valid for the atomic structure and approximately valid for the nuclear structure, quantum mechanics is unable to represent the synthesis of the neutron from the hydrogen in the core of stars because of various technical reasons.
This insufficiency established the need for a ‘completion’ of quantum mechanics along Einstein’s vision. Jointly with various colleagues, Santilli initiated a long-term research aimed at the confirmation of EPR argument including the construction of a ‘completion’ of quantum mechanics into a broader theory known as hadronic mechanics for the representation of extended particles under mutual entanglement. Following decades of studies, Santilli published the 1998 paper confirming the EPR argument (http://www.galileoprincipia.org/santilli-confirmation-of-the-epr-argument.php).
Thereafter, Santilli initiated tests on the laboratory synthesis of the neutron from the hydrogen that led to the production and sale by the U. S. publicly traded company Thunder Energies Corporation (http://thunder-energies.com/) of an equipment producing on demand a flux of neutrons synthesized from a hydrogen gas (http://thunder-energies.com/docs/TEC-DNS-3Za.pdf).
The lack of completion of quantum mechanics appears to be Einstein’s most important prediction due to far reaching implications in all sciences. As an illustration, following the achievement of ‘Rutherford’s compression’ of the electron inside the proton needed for the neutron synthesis, Thunder Energies Corporation has achieved the ‘compression’ of electrons, this time, inside the neutron, resulting in a negatively charged proton called Santilli pseudoproton. Jointly, Thunder Energies Corporation is developing the synthesis of negatively charged nuclei, such as the pseudodeuteron, that are attracted by natural nuclei, thus eliminating the biggest obstacle for the achievement of the controlled fusion, which is given by the extremely large Coulomb repulsion between nuclei to due to their equal charge (http://www.santilli-foundation.org/purelco-interview-1-2-19.php).
Following the question on how the electron ‘compressed’ inside the neutron verifies the EPR argument, Santilli states: “The distance of the electron from the center of the neutron approaches Einstein’s vision of classical determinism since the smallest change of said distance causes the neutron decay into the proton and the electron. Similar conditions appear to occur for electrons inside the pseudoproton and the pseudodeuteron, and for other cases.”
SOURCE Santilli Foundation