The Unity of SRT and Quantum theory.
By the end of the 19th century many of physicists considered,
that physics was almost completed. It was necessary only to resolve two problems:
1) to explain radiation of an absolutely black body
(it has resulted in development of the Quantum theory),
2)and to explain a constancy of velocity of light in Michelson,s experiences
(it has resulted in creation the SRT).
It is more than hundred years since it was considered that these two theories are different.
But from the perspective of the 21st century we can understand, that there are not two problems, that there are not two different theories. SRT and the Quantum theory are initially united.
* * *
Michelson,s quantum of light flies rectilinearly with constant velocity c =1.
If it is in an area of an absolute black body, it will not be reflected, and it becomes dead
(thermal and electric).
To insure this does not take place, Planck had assumed that Michelson,s
light quantum is radiated from an absolutely black body and flies rectilinearly.
In this flight its spin (impulse) is constant, h =1.
For Michelson's quantum of light to fly with constant velocity it is necessary
to have a constant impulse.
Therefore constant velocity c =1 has a constant spin (impulse) of h =1.
Now it is clear, why physicists have given to a constant velocity c =1
the constant spin (impulse) h =1.
But such interrelation between velocity and spin is valid only for
the rectilinear movement of a quantum of light.
Since SRT and Quantum theory study the behaviour
of one particle - the quantum of light, they must represent only one theory.
* * *
If you have time and desire, I ask you to visit my site
http://www.socratus.com
Best wishes.
Socratus.
The Vacuum and Special Relativity Theory.
Special Relativity Theory examines the behaviour of a quantum of light in the vacuum.
1) The First law of SRT - the speed of a quantum of light in vacuum has
a maximal magnitude (constant, absolute) of c=1.
2) SRT is not considered a gravitational field.
For this reason, Einstein created General Relativity Theory in 1915.
The field in which there is no gravitation is a vacuum.
3) This asserts that action in SRT occurs with particles in
negative four-dimensional (Minkowski) space. This space is absolute.
Mathematicians have constructed its model and speak
of this negative space as completely abstract.
Nobody sees that it has no connection to real existence.
This is similar to a sad joke.
For 100 years everyone has admired SRT.
Millions of articles, reviews and books have been written
and the United Nations has decided to establish 2005 as the centennial year of SRT.
Consider that all that is clear in this theory
is that negative four-dimensional space is abstract and has no real existence.
My God! There does not appear to be anyone to laugh at this joke!
Everyone searches for complex models of four-dimensional space, but truth lies in simplicity. All is very simple.
We meet the negative characteristic of space only in the vacuum, and in the vacuum,
space is merged with time (negative four-dimensional space).
According to the first law, the speed of light is absolute and movement occurs
in the absolute vacuum. So why does everyone speak and write that there is no
absolute movement; that only relative movement v =s/t is real?
Why does everyone say that there is no absolute reference system,
if the absolute speed can be only in absolute space?
Here we have one of the paradoxes in human intelligence.
* * *
If you have time and desire, I ask you to visit my site
http://www.socratus.com
Best wishes.
Socratus.
Special Relativity Theory examines the behaviour of a quantum of light in the vacuum.
1) The First law of SRT - the speed of a quantum of light in vacuum has
a maximal magnitude (constant, absolute) of c=1.
2) SRT is not considered a gravitational field.
For this reason, Einstein created General Relativity Theory in 1915.
The field in which there is no gravitation is a vacuum.
3) This asserts that action in SRT occurs with particles in
negative four-dimensional (Minkowski) space. This space is absolute.
Mathematicians have constructed its model and speak
of this negative space as completely abstract.
Nobody sees that it has no connection to real existence.
This is similar to a sad joke.
For 100 years everyone has admired SRT.
Millions of articles, reviews and books have been written
and the United Nations has decided to establish 2005 as the centennial year of SRT.
Consider that all that is clear in this theory
is that negative four-dimensional space is abstract and has no real existence.
My God! There does not appear to be anyone to laugh at this joke!
Everyone searches for complex models of four-dimensional space, but truth lies in simplicity. All is very simple.
We meet the negative characteristic of space only in the vacuum, and in the vacuum,
space is merged with time (negative four-dimensional space).
According to the first law, the speed of light is absolute and movement occurs
in the absolute vacuum. So why does everyone speak and write that there is no
absolute movement; that only relative movement v =s/t is real?
Why does everyone say that there is no absolute reference system,
if the absolute speed can be only in absolute space?
Here we have one of the paradoxes in human intelligence.
* * *
If you have time and desire, I ask you to visit my site
http://www.socratus.com
Best wishes.
Socratus.
"According to the first law, the speed of light is absolute and movement occurs in the absolute vacuum. So why does everyone speak and write that there is no absolute movement; that only relative movement v =s/t is real?"[/QUOTE]
I believe The Theory states that c is constant from ALL reference frames, not just one. This in itself suggests that there is no absolute (non-accelerated) motion when considering the speed of light.
"Why does everyone say that there is no absolute reference system,
if the absolute speed can be only in absolute space?"
Again, c is assumed constant from ALL reference frames.
I believe The Theory states that c is constant from ALL reference frames, not just one. This in itself suggests that there is no absolute (non-accelerated) motion when considering the speed of light.
"Why does everyone say that there is no absolute reference system,
if the absolute speed can be only in absolute space?"
Again, c is assumed constant from ALL reference frames.
You should pay more attention in class.
Pythagoras, theory, Electrodynamics and SRT.
Pythagoras' theory applies equally to the largest and smallest triangle.
So mathematicians had decided, that this applies also to
the electromagnetic phenomena;
that the laws of a nature in the macrocosm and in a microcosm are identical.
It appears that this is not so.
In the macrocosm, Maxwell's laws apply
and in the microcosm, other laws, the laws of SRT operate.
These laws are interconnected.
SRT is a continuation of the development of electrodynamics.
* * *
1)What is the make up of the electron in Maxwell's theory?
Maxwell's equations have no relation to the movement of the electron.
They describe the distribution of electromagnetic waves
but not the movement of a particle such as an electron.
In Maxwell's theory, the charge - electron is considered local,
as though the particle is "at rest".
This means that it particle does not move rectilinearly,
but rotates around the diameter (has the form of a sphere).
The rotation of the electron creates electrical waves.
* * *
2) What is the make up of the electron in SRT?
At the beginning of the last century many scientists
(Einstein, Lorents, Fitzgerald, Poincare, Abraham) were interested in the question:
What will take place, if the electron (Maxwell's) , creating an electrical field,
begins to move - rectilinearly?
All of them came to the conclusion that there would be radical changes with the electron.
These changes are described by the Lorentz transformations.
That is, when the originally rotating electron (sphere) begins to move rectilinearly,
during movement it gradually will change its geometrical form.
Having reached constant speed of c=1, its form will become a circle.
In such condition it is called a "quantum of light ",” photon”.
And when a quantum of light rotates around its diameter its name is “electron “
An "electron" is an actively working “quantum of light”.
With such an interpretation, electrodynamics and SRT become one general theory.
Socratus.
Pythagoras' theory applies equally to the largest and smallest triangle.
So mathematicians had decided, that this applies also to
the electromagnetic phenomena;
that the laws of a nature in the macrocosm and in a microcosm are identical.
It appears that this is not so.
In the macrocosm, Maxwell's laws apply
and in the microcosm, other laws, the laws of SRT operate.
These laws are interconnected.
SRT is a continuation of the development of electrodynamics.
* * *
1)What is the make up of the electron in Maxwell's theory?
Maxwell's equations have no relation to the movement of the electron.
They describe the distribution of electromagnetic waves
but not the movement of a particle such as an electron.
In Maxwell's theory, the charge - electron is considered local,
as though the particle is "at rest".
This means that it particle does not move rectilinearly,
but rotates around the diameter (has the form of a sphere).
The rotation of the electron creates electrical waves.
* * *
2) What is the make up of the electron in SRT?
At the beginning of the last century many scientists
(Einstein, Lorents, Fitzgerald, Poincare, Abraham) were interested in the question:
What will take place, if the electron (Maxwell's) , creating an electrical field,
begins to move - rectilinearly?
All of them came to the conclusion that there would be radical changes with the electron.
These changes are described by the Lorentz transformations.
That is, when the originally rotating electron (sphere) begins to move rectilinearly,
during movement it gradually will change its geometrical form.
Having reached constant speed of c=1, its form will become a circle.
In such condition it is called a "quantum of light ",” photon”.
And when a quantum of light rotates around its diameter its name is “electron “
An "electron" is an actively working “quantum of light”.
With such an interpretation, electrodynamics and SRT become one general theory.
Socratus.
100 years of Einstein's SRT.
100 years have passed from the date of creation of SRT.
Millions of articles, reviews and books have been written and the
United Nations has decided to establish 2005 as the centennial year of SRT.
Considering all that is clear in this theory, one must still
continue to be surprised by its unusual aspects
Lets review it again:
1. SRT is based on two postulates:
a) According to classical mechanics, physical processes,
which occur in rest or in a rectilinearly driven reference system
are described under the same laws.
The rectilinear - uniform propagation of a quantum of light (c=1) in vacuo
has a constant magnitude and does not depend on the source of radiation.
These two postulates would be proven if in the final analysis, they corresponded
with Galilean transformations. However, the result appears negative.
Galilean transformations do not unite these two theories. Why?
2. The rectilinear - uniform motion of a quantum of light (c=1) is connected with
Maxwell's classical electrodynamics. SRT has grown from Maxwell's electrodynamics
and main component in it is the electron.
What describes the electron in Maxwell's electrodynamics?
It is natural, that this electron should be in motion, but it does not move rectilinearly.
It rotates around its own diameter ( spin of Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck)
and such a rotation creates electrical waves. In such rotation all geometrical
and physical parameters of the electron are changed.
It is for this reason Einstein utilized the Lorentz transformations.
And all that is sensible in SRT is that it examines two completely
different types of movement: rectilinear (quantum of light c=1)
and rotational (Maxwell's electron).
It examines the transformation of the electron into a quantum of light (photon)
or quantum of light into an electron .
3. According to classical electrodynamics, an electron in rectilinear motion
does not create electrical waves. Why?
Because the electron travels as a quantum of light (c=1).
In such movement its geometrical form is a circle.
In such movement its area of contact with the vacuum is minimal
and it is not capable of changing the uniformity of the vacuum.
4. When the electron rotates around its own diameter, its speed is more
than the rectilinear motion of a quantum of light. Its speed is c > 1.
For this reason physicists ascribe a huge frequency
to the electron which is the reason its energy E =ħw is higher.
100 years have passed from the date of creation of SRT.
Millions of articles, reviews and books have been written and the
United Nations has decided to establish 2005 as the centennial year of SRT.
Considering all that is clear in this theory, one must still
continue to be surprised by its unusual aspects
Lets review it again:
1. SRT is based on two postulates:
a) According to classical mechanics, physical processes,
which occur in rest or in a rectilinearly driven reference system
are described under the same laws.
The rectilinear - uniform propagation of a quantum of light (c=1) in vacuohas a constant magnitude and does not depend on the source of radiation.
These two postulates would be proven if in the final analysis, they corresponded
with Galilean transformations. However, the result appears negative.
Galilean transformations do not unite these two theories. Why?
2. The rectilinear - uniform motion of a quantum of light (c=1) is connected with
Maxwell's classical electrodynamics. SRT has grown from Maxwell's electrodynamics
and main component in it is the electron.
What describes the electron in Maxwell's electrodynamics?
It is natural, that this electron should be in motion, but it does not move rectilinearly.
It rotates around its own diameter ( spin of Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck)
and such a rotation creates electrical waves. In such rotation all geometrical
and physical parameters of the electron are changed.
It is for this reason Einstein utilized the Lorentz transformations.
And all that is sensible in SRT is that it examines two completely
different types of movement: rectilinear (quantum of light c=1)
and rotational (Maxwell's electron).
It examines the transformation of the electron into a quantum of light (photon)
or quantum of light into an electron .
3. According to classical electrodynamics, an electron in rectilinear motion
does not create electrical waves. Why?
Because the electron travels as a quantum of light (c=1).
In such movement its geometrical form is a circle.
In such movement its area of contact with the vacuum is minimal
and it is not capable of changing the uniformity of the vacuum.
4. When the electron rotates around its own diameter, its speed is more
than the rectilinear motion of a quantum of light. Its speed is c > 1.
For this reason physicists ascribe a huge frequency
to the electron which is the reason its energy E =ħw is higher.
Dualism of Light Quanta : Reality or Abstraction?
A quantum of light is a privileged particle.
No other particle can travel with the speed (c = 1).
There are two kinds of spins, as a result of which the particle attains motion.
1)Under the action of Planck,s spin, which is equal to the unit ( h =1)
aquantum of light flies rectilinearly with speed (c = 1).
The geometrical form of a circle: (C/D = 3,14).
A quantum of light behaves as a particle.
2) Under the action of Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck's spin, ( ħ = h / 2) a quantum of light
rotates around of the diameter and is known as electron.
The geometrical form of a circle is transformed into a sphere.
This kind of movement is described by Lorentz's transformations .
The wave properties of light quantum are shown.
The dualism of a particle becomes clear and the paradox disappears completely.
When the form of a circle is change into the form of a sphere, the transcendental
magnitude ( = 3,14) is change on another transcendental magnitude (е = 2,71).
The transformation of a circle to a sphere (spin) is described by
the geometry of N. Lobachevsky, F. Klein, A. Poincare.
The transformation of sphere into circle is algebraically
described by a formula, which was discovered by L. Euler in 1748.
cos j + i sin j = e ij
Best wishes
http://www.socratus.com
A quantum of light is a privileged particle.
No other particle can travel with the speed (c = 1).
There are two kinds of spins, as a result of which the particle attains motion.
1)Under the action of Planck,s spin, which is equal to the unit ( h =1)
aquantum of light flies rectilinearly with speed (c = 1).
The geometrical form of a circle: (C/D = 3,14).
A quantum of light behaves as a particle.
2) Under the action of Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck's spin, ( ħ = h / 2) a quantum of light
rotates around of the diameter and is known as electron.
The geometrical form of a circle is transformed into a sphere.
This kind of movement is described by Lorentz's transformations .
The wave properties of light quantum are shown.
The dualism of a particle becomes clear and the paradox disappears completely.
When the form of a circle is change into the form of a sphere, the transcendental
magnitude ( = 3,14) is change on another transcendental magnitude (е = 2,71).
The transformation of a circle to a sphere (spin) is described by
the geometry of N. Lobachevsky, F. Klein, A. Poincare.
The transformation of sphere into circle is algebraically
described by a formula, which was discovered by L. Euler in 1748.
cos j + i sin j = e ij
Best wishes
http://www.socratus.com
Sorry to correct you - but advance physics is a rising science . The definitions of Albert Einstein and Special Relativity Theory along with Maxwell Planck's knowledge of the Universe is just an on-going science. With a futuristic insight. It is our personal years that are growing short and not science. Nana physics is a new rising science. Where SRT and Quantaum Physics are earlier sciences of the 1900 decade.
I myself have developed new insight into the sciences of both Maxwell Planck, Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton. But like Newton was predicessed by Einstein in 1905. So, will the late ones by predicessed.
This year I have developed new formulas that through my individual research have learned that SRT is completely wrong ! Why would I say That ? Well. if you have read SRT clearly - and remeber when SRT was first written there were only five people in the whole world who understood the technical langauge Einstein was using. Now - college students are enjoyingb the topic of understanding his formulas through a well trained teacher.
Like I said. I have inquired new insight in special relativity and come with the conclusion that it is totally wrong. Except for E=mc2.
TO ILLUSTRATE i WILL TELL YOU THIS - TODAY SCIENCE HAS THE ABILITY TO TRAVEL INTO DEEP SPACE. WELL. EINSTEIN AND I will let you know where I got the information !!!
The expeiments done by Michelson and Morley - Lorentz and Thondike and more all researched the data information Einstein was involved in - in his hypothesis. As a result and yopu will read this. The results ofb the experiments were null. There was no effect. The idea was that try and create a space atmosphere in a laboratory equal to the conditions in space. They created a vacuum tube.
As a result of this - they experimented in trying to visualize an effect to prove Einstein's 'ether' hypothesis. The results were there was no effect.
The reason being that since there was no effect ment that (E=Mc2) particle masses in a vacuum were not effected by the empty space. In his jounals on infinite masses he claimed that in space or in the Earth's surface garvity - that tyhe effects were the same. Well, like I have just explained to you - they weren't Right !
Along with this Maxwell Planck secured the same findings as Einstein in his special theory on realtivity. But his infinite mass theory - as you have just learned is just not true.
There are the other titles in SRT that are equal in nature to the truth. Because of what I have just read to you - otherparts of SRT are as well guilty.
This is the reason - science is oin the verge on being changed over and over again. WQhat is thought as being correct at the time - just might not be. That's why the Earth is in need of learning all it can about space and exploration. So futuristic corrections can endure in the future.
The evidence I said that I would give is in the internet dialogues. The web site is " Einstein's Discovery on Relativity, by John Stachel "...Its a dialogue about Einstein's life and discovery of SRT. Hope you like it...My personal theory I hope will be accepted by the community as wel;l as they liked Einstein's. Except for E=Mc2... I'm sorry to say - but SRT is full of holes''''
Watch out for "" Quanta' Physics "" by Prof. Rodney Kawecki 2005 or ''The Expanding Epodes UnivErse "".... :
Vacuum and Electron.
All know, that electron not a firm sphere.
All know, that its form can be change.
But nobody understands borders of the change of the geometrical form
of electron.
And so, what is the borders of this change?
The Quantum theory gives the answer to this question.
The Quantum theory approves, that at interaction electron with Vacuum
energy and mass of electron get infinite meanings.
Physics do not understand what to do with infinite sizes and
therefore have thought up " a method of renormalization ",
method " to clean dust under a carpet "/ Feynman / .
But the situation can be understood on another.
Electron, having the geometrical form of sphere, loses his volume and
turns in an indefinitely flat circle. In it is the reason of occurrence
infinite sizes of the electron.
But in physics we know only one particle, which has the form of a flat circle.
It is quantum of light flies rectilinearly with speed с = 1.
Hence, electron turns to quantum of light.
Hence, electron and quantum of light is a same particle in different condition.
* * *
In the books is write, that electrons interact
among themselves with the help of quantum of light.
In the books is write, that electron in atom passing with one orbits
into other orbit radiate quantum of light.
It should be understood so.
Electron holds at itself in a pocket or under a shirt quantum of light
and from time to time lets out it on freedom.
Interestingly.
What for it is necessary to electron to hide in a pocket or under a shirt
the quantum of light?
All know, that electron not a firm sphere.
All know, that its form can be change.
But nobody understands borders of the change of the geometrical form
of electron.
And so, what is the borders of this change?
The Quantum theory gives the answer to this question.
The Quantum theory approves, that at interaction electron with Vacuum
energy and mass of electron get infinite meanings.
Physics do not understand what to do with infinite sizes and
therefore have thought up " a method of renormalization ",
method " to clean dust under a carpet "/ Feynman / .
But the situation can be understood on another.
Electron, having the geometrical form of sphere, loses his volume and
turns in an indefinitely flat circle. In it is the reason of occurrence
infinite sizes of the electron.
But in physics we know only one particle, which has the form of a flat circle.
It is quantum of light flies rectilinearly with speed с = 1.
Hence, electron turns to quantum of light.
Hence, electron and quantum of light is a same particle in different condition.
* * *
In the books is write, that electrons interact
among themselves with the help of quantum of light.
In the books is write, that electron in atom passing with one orbits
into other orbit radiate quantum of light.
It should be understood so.
Electron holds at itself in a pocket or under a shirt quantum of light
and from time to time lets out it on freedom.
Interestingly.
What for it is necessary to electron to hide in a pocket or under a shirt
the quantum of light?
Quantum of light.
To study properties of the initial particle means to understand what quantum of light is. During all the history of his activity, the person was interested in a problem: « What is primary particle? What is light? » It turned out that these problems are interconnected. It turned out that the Bible was right, claiming, that in the beginning God has created quantum of light as initial particle. But God has forgotten to explain physical properties of quantum of light; therefore scientists of all times were aimed to solve this secret. However, for many millenniums this secret remained «under seven seals ». One of the most genius physicists, Einstein, all his life dreamed to solve the mystery of light. However, at old age, he had to state: « All these fifty years of persistent speculations did not approach me to the answer what light quanta are. Certainly, today everybody thinks that he knows the answer, but he deceives himself. ». This expression of the Einstein about a quantum of light is true even today. Is not it strange? The quantum of light is actual particle, initial particle. It plays a major role in nature. And we do not realize its essence. How can human society look, which does not perceive the bases of Genesis? Can we call this society a full one?
Writer Arthur Kestler said concerning this that such society goes by "a track of dinosaurs". And "the track of dinosaurs" conducts into evolutionary impasse. It will be lost before time if it does not understand the fundamental principles.
* * *
The person always aimed to understand: « What is light? », because the life without it is inconceivable. They know much about light. Ray optics and electrodynamics, and STR, and quantum theory tell about it. But the paradox of modern science is in the fact that all huge information about it comprises inconsistencies. Reason for these inconsistencies is absence of visual performance about quantum of light.
To study properties of the initial particle means to understand what quantum of light is. During all the history of his activity, the person was interested in a problem: « What is primary particle? What is light? » It turned out that these problems are interconnected. It turned out that the Bible was right, claiming, that in the beginning God has created quantum of light as initial particle. But God has forgotten to explain physical properties of quantum of light; therefore scientists of all times were aimed to solve this secret. However, for many millenniums this secret remained «under seven seals ». One of the most genius physicists, Einstein, all his life dreamed to solve the mystery of light. However, at old age, he had to state: « All these fifty years of persistent speculations did not approach me to the answer what light quanta are. Certainly, today everybody thinks that he knows the answer, but he deceives himself. ». This expression of the Einstein about a quantum of light is true even today. Is not it strange? The quantum of light is actual particle, initial particle. It plays a major role in nature. And we do not realize its essence. How can human society look, which does not perceive the bases of Genesis? Can we call this society a full one?
Writer Arthur Kestler said concerning this that such society goes by "a track of dinosaurs". And "the track of dinosaurs" conducts into evolutionary impasse. It will be lost before time if it does not understand the fundamental principles.
* * *
The person always aimed to understand: « What is light? », because the life without it is inconceivable. They know much about light. Ray optics and electrodynamics, and STR, and quantum theory tell about it. But the paradox of modern science is in the fact that all huge information about it comprises inconsistencies. Reason for these inconsistencies is absence of visual performance about quantum of light.
"Professor" Rodney Kawecki ?
More like "certified cook" (as in insane) Rodney Kawecki.
More like "certified cook" (as in insane) Rodney Kawecki.
guest.
If you have read conclusively the works of Albert Einstein etc...you will find that the experiments performed to gain the results needed to confirm Einstein's formulas were found to be inconclusive.
You will also find that the measures used to gain the results were based on a different labratory experiment equiptment toll foundation. What I mean is that the information recieved even though no results were achieved. The foundation to the experiment (s) were based on a totally different labratory experiment guideline. Meaning that the results were given with the results not appropreated with the true experiment.
The conclusions based on Einstein's theory and done by associate scientist in 1903 gave the result conclusions based on the results of a different experiment guideline then was done. The fact that Einstein published his work on SRT in 1905 as a result of E=Mc2. Special Relativity was published on unconclusive information. As a result ! The SRT is wrong ! One illustration can be found in an experiment done in August.2005, where the speed of light was clinical passed up in a labratory. This means that the 'universal constant' is no more accepteable.
Sorry if I hurt your feelings but its the truth !!
Prof. Rodney Kawecki
physicist
As a real theoretical physicist, I will not dignify this `anti-relativity' drivel by even commenting upon its `veracity'...On the contrary, to ALL reading this HS, who wonder if any of it has a grain of truth, I would direct you to the following websites: http://www.aiaa.us , or http://www.blacklightpower.com . Here, there are published, PhD scientists, with cadres of colleagues, & even technology companies backing them. Their product: SNAKEOIL PHYSICS, in copious amounts, for all to consume....and boy, do people consume it. Science gauged in `website hits per month'. They all claim miraculous new physics....And they are just two of 100's of mavericks world-wide, who promulagate their special brand of HS physics.
It seems that everybody has a breakthru theory of how physics really is, based upon current fallacies, insights, fads, ad nauseam. Particularly vile, in this year of Einstein's annus mirabulus, are attacks on special relativity, reminiscent of those by distinguished German scientists, jockeying for power, in then Hitler's new govnt.
Fact: SR has NEVER failed an expt. test. Fact: E=mc^2 was deduced in 1907, two yrs after SR was first published. Fact: Nature is more bizarre & wonderful than most cretin's `common sense' can tolerate, so they go `ostrich'. Wake up, smell the coffee, and do a reality check people.
It seems that everybody has a breakthru theory of how physics really is, based upon current fallacies, insights, fads, ad nauseam. Particularly vile, in this year of Einstein's annus mirabulus, are attacks on special relativity, reminiscent of those by distinguished German scientists, jockeying for power, in then Hitler's new govnt.
Fact: SR has NEVER failed an expt. test. Fact: E=mc^2 was deduced in 1907, two yrs after SR was first published. Fact: Nature is more bizarre & wonderful than most cretin's `common sense' can tolerate, so they go `ostrich'. Wake up, smell the coffee, and do a reality check people.
« We wish to protect ourselves from too literal
And consequently vulgar understanding ».
/ Institute of physical problems. Moscow/
Why the simple, literal explanation is considered as vulgar?
And consequently vulgar understanding ».
/ Institute of physical problems. Moscow/
Why the simple, literal explanation is considered as vulgar?
« We wish to protect ourselves from too literal
And consequently vulgar understanding ».
/ Institute of physical problems. Moscow/
Why the simple, literal explanation is considered as vulgar?
And consequently vulgar understanding ».
/ Institute of physical problems. Moscow/
Why the simple, literal explanation is considered as vulgar?
The Vacuum and Electron.
All know, that electron not a firm sphere.
All know, that its form can be change.
But nobody understands borders of the change of the geometrical form
of electron.
And so, what is the borders of this change?
The Quantum theory gives the answer to this question.
The Quantum theory approves, that at interaction electron with Vacuum
energy and mass of electron get infinite meanings.
Physics do not understand what to do with infinite sizes and
therefore have thought up " a method of renormalization ",
method " to clean dust under a carpet "/ Feynman / .
But the situation can be understood on another.
Electron, having the geometrical form of sphere, loses his volume and
turns in an indefinitely flat circle. In it is the reason of occurrence
infinite sizes of the electron.
But in physics we know only one particle, which has the form of a flat circle.
It is quantum of light flies rectilinearly with speed с = 1.
Hence, electron turns to quantum of light.
Hence, electron and quantum of light is a same particle in different condition.
* * *
In the books is write, that electrons interact
among themselves with the help of quantum of light.
In the books is write, that electron in atom passing with one orbits
into other orbit radiate quantum of light.
It should be understood so.
Electron holds at itself in a pocket or under a shirt the quantum of light
and from time to time lets out it on freedom.
Interestingly.
What for it is necessary to electron to hide in a pocket or under a shirt
the quantum of light?
All know, that electron not a firm sphere.
All know, that its form can be change.
But nobody understands borders of the change of the geometrical form
of electron.
And so, what is the borders of this change?
The Quantum theory gives the answer to this question.
The Quantum theory approves, that at interaction electron with Vacuum
energy and mass of electron get infinite meanings.
Physics do not understand what to do with infinite sizes and
therefore have thought up " a method of renormalization ",
method " to clean dust under a carpet "/ Feynman / .
But the situation can be understood on another.
Electron, having the geometrical form of sphere, loses his volume and
turns in an indefinitely flat circle. In it is the reason of occurrence
infinite sizes of the electron.
But in physics we know only one particle, which has the form of a flat circle.
It is quantum of light flies rectilinearly with speed с = 1.
Hence, electron turns to quantum of light.
Hence, electron and quantum of light is a same particle in different condition.
* * *
In the books is write, that electrons interact
among themselves with the help of quantum of light.
In the books is write, that electron in atom passing with one orbits
into other orbit radiate quantum of light.
It should be understood so.
Electron holds at itself in a pocket or under a shirt the quantum of light
and from time to time lets out it on freedom.
Interestingly.
What for it is necessary to electron to hide in a pocket or under a shirt
the quantum of light?
SRT .
SRT are based on two laws.
1) The First law of SRT - the speed of a quantum of light in vacuum has
a maximal magnitude (constant, absolute) of c=1.
2) The second law - no other particle can travel with the speed c = 1.
Hence, a quantum of light is a privileged particle and SRT
examines the behaviour of a quantum of light in the Vacuum. SRT solve the problem:
that will take place, if quantum of light will change the rectilinear movement c=1.
He can change the rectilinear movement c=1 only on rotary movement.
And then these changes are described by the Lorentz transformations.
The circle turns to a sphere. And he works as electron .
And in this item electron is connected to electrodynamics of Maxwell.
In Maxwell's theory, the electron is considered local,
as though the particle is "at rest".
This means that it particle does not move rectilinearly,
but rotates around the diameter (has the form of a sphere).
The rotation of the electron creates electrical waves.
And then at the beginning of the last century many scientists
(Einstein, Lorents, Fitzgerald, Poincare, Abraham) were interested in the question:
What will take place, if the electron (Maxwell's) begins to move - rectilinearly?
All of them came to the conclusion that there would be radical changes with the electron.
These changes are described by the Lorentz transformations.
* * *
What borders of change of its parameters?
The Quantum theory approves, that at interaction electron with Vacuum
its parameters get infinite magnitudes.
It is possible only then the geometrical form of electron - sphere will be
transformed in flat phantom - circle.
Electron and quantum of light is one particle, which can be in different physical condition.
* * *
Such simple explanation seems surprising.
But business that the Quantum theory and SRT describe the beginning conditions
of Existence .
And beginning conditions can not be complex (difficult).
The development and evolution of Existence goes from simple to complex .
The complexity begins with the theory of stars formation under the scheme:
(e- k He II He I rotating He thermonuclear reaction р) .
And for an explanation of this process the special knowledge is required.
SRT are based on two laws.
1) The First law of SRT - the speed of a quantum of light in vacuum has
a maximal magnitude (constant, absolute) of c=1.
2) The second law - no other particle can travel with the speed c = 1.
Hence, a quantum of light is a privileged particle and SRT
examines the behaviour of a quantum of light in the Vacuum. SRT solve the problem:
that will take place, if quantum of light will change the rectilinear movement c=1.
He can change the rectilinear movement c=1 only on rotary movement.
And then these changes are described by the Lorentz transformations.
The circle turns to a sphere. And he works as electron .
And in this item electron is connected to electrodynamics of Maxwell.
In Maxwell's theory, the electron is considered local,
as though the particle is "at rest".
This means that it particle does not move rectilinearly,
but rotates around the diameter (has the form of a sphere).
The rotation of the electron creates electrical waves.
And then at the beginning of the last century many scientists
(Einstein, Lorents, Fitzgerald, Poincare, Abraham) were interested in the question:
What will take place, if the electron (Maxwell's) begins to move - rectilinearly?
All of them came to the conclusion that there would be radical changes with the electron.
These changes are described by the Lorentz transformations.
* * *
What borders of change of its parameters?
The Quantum theory approves, that at interaction electron with Vacuum
its parameters get infinite magnitudes.
It is possible only then the geometrical form of electron - sphere will be
transformed in flat phantom - circle.
Electron and quantum of light is one particle, which can be in different physical condition.
* * *
Such simple explanation seems surprising.
But business that the Quantum theory and SRT describe the beginning conditions
of Existence .
And beginning conditions can not be complex (difficult).
The development and evolution of Existence goes from simple to complex .
The complexity begins with the theory of stars formation under the scheme:
(e- k He II He I rotating He thermonuclear reaction р) .
And for an explanation of this process the special knowledge is required.
About Reference Systems: Vacuum and Space.
From times of Newton in classical physics the principle worked:
" Until the reference system is specified, any conversations on movement
are completely deprived the contents."
Newton, first of all physicists realized, what a main role a reference system has.
The choice of reference system is a central, basic question at the commencement of any task
But the founders of the “Big Bang” theory have forgotten this.
Nowhere do they write in what reference system the "Big Bang" took place,
and in what reference system the substance of the "single point " is distributed.
And consequently, the theory of the "Big Bang" is constructed on a sand.
* * *
The astronomers have established the fact of galaxy rotation
but nobody speaks of the reference system in which they rotate.
Without the inclusion of a reference system the rotation of galaxies
is deprived of any content. To avoid this problem, write:
Each Galaxy is surrounded by an "accompanying reference system",
and the "accompanying reference system" is extended.
/ The Physics of Space. is a small Soviet encyclopedia published in 1986./
This is a joke!
For example, I am at home and I am surrounded by an "accompanying reference system";
my house. Then I go to work surrounded by an "accompanying reference system";
And when I have arrived on the job, I am surrounded by an
"accompanying reference system", the university.
But if we do not understand that we work in the reference system of the Earth,
and the astronomers do not understand in what reference system
the billions of galaxies rotate, any statement is meaningless.
Only when the reference system is specified, then the words "galaxies rotate"
and "Big Bang" make sense.
The first problem in the discussion of the laws of motion is to answer the question,
"In what reference system does this motion occur?
In what reference system are the laws of motion formulated?"
This question is most unpleasant for the amateurs in abstract reasoning and conjecture.
God teaches man to think particularly and logically.
The Devil teaches man to speak with beautiful, general and abstract phrases.
By such method he easily hides the truth from the people.
* * *
The main paradox in physics is not understanding reference systems.
Einstein and Infeld wrote:
“We have the laws, but are not aware what the body of reference system they belong to,
and all our physical construction appears erected on sand”.
They are right. The essence is that now there is no precise border
which divides two different frame of reference:
1) System of Vacuum and
2) Gravitational frame of reference.
Now these two systems are considered as though they were common.
But they are completely different systems.
There, where there is a vacuum - there is no gravitation.
In the vacuum, one set of laws - the laws of the vacuum work
( not taking into account external influences).
Where there is gravitation, there is no vacuum.
In a gravitational reference system
a complete set of other laws apply.
These laws are connected and take into account external influences.
How these two systems cooperate between themselves is explained on the following site.
From times of Newton in classical physics the principle worked:
" Until the reference system is specified, any conversations on movement
are completely deprived the contents."
Newton, first of all physicists realized, what a main role a reference system has.
The choice of reference system is a central, basic question at the commencement of any task
But the founders of the “Big Bang” theory have forgotten this.
Nowhere do they write in what reference system the "Big Bang" took place,
and in what reference system the substance of the "single point " is distributed.
And consequently, the theory of the "Big Bang" is constructed on a sand.
* * *
The astronomers have established the fact of galaxy rotation
but nobody speaks of the reference system in which they rotate.
Without the inclusion of a reference system the rotation of galaxies
is deprived of any content. To avoid this problem, write:
Each Galaxy is surrounded by an "accompanying reference system",
and the "accompanying reference system" is extended.
/ The Physics of Space. is a small Soviet encyclopedia published in 1986./
This is a joke!
For example, I am at home and I am surrounded by an "accompanying reference system";
my house. Then I go to work surrounded by an "accompanying reference system";
And when I have arrived on the job, I am surrounded by an
"accompanying reference system", the university.
But if we do not understand that we work in the reference system of the Earth,
and the astronomers do not understand in what reference system
the billions of galaxies rotate, any statement is meaningless.
Only when the reference system is specified, then the words "galaxies rotate"
and "Big Bang" make sense.
The first problem in the discussion of the laws of motion is to answer the question,
"In what reference system does this motion occur?
In what reference system are the laws of motion formulated?"
This question is most unpleasant for the amateurs in abstract reasoning and conjecture.
God teaches man to think particularly and logically.
The Devil teaches man to speak with beautiful, general and abstract phrases.
By such method he easily hides the truth from the people.
* * *
The main paradox in physics is not understanding reference systems.
Einstein and Infeld wrote:
“We have the laws, but are not aware what the body of reference system they belong to,
and all our physical construction appears erected on sand”.
They are right. The essence is that now there is no precise border
which divides two different frame of reference:
1) System of Vacuum and
2) Gravitational frame of reference.
Now these two systems are considered as though they were common.
But they are completely different systems.
There, where there is a vacuum - there is no gravitation.
In the vacuum, one set of laws - the laws of the vacuum work
( not taking into account external influences).
Where there is gravitation, there is no vacuum.
In a gravitational reference system
a complete set of other laws apply.
These laws are connected and take into account external influences.
How these two systems cooperate between themselves is explained on the following site.
Hi s0cratus,
I think we've got enough new threads from you and it seems you mostly talk to yourself.
I combined you threads to this one and I suggest that you post all your new ideas here.
I think we've got enough new threads from you and it seems you mostly talk to yourself.
I combined you threads to this one and I suggest that you post all your new ideas here.
QUOTE (Heavyside+Sep 2 2005, 06:11 PM)
As a real theoretical physicist, I will not dignify this `anti-relativity' drivel by even commenting upon its `veracity'...On the contrary, to ALL reading this HS, who wonder if any of it has a grain of truth, I would direct you to the following websites: http://www.aiaa.us , or http://www.blacklightpower.com . Here, there are published, PhD scientists, with cadres of colleagues, & even technology companies backing them. Their product: SNAKEOIL PHYSICS, in copious amounts, for all to consume....and boy, do people consume it. Science gauged in `website hits per month'. They all claim miraculous new physics....And they are just two of 100's of mavericks world-wide, who promulagate their special brand of HS physics.
It seems that everybody has a breakthru theory of how physics really is, based upon current fallacies, insights, fads, ad nauseam. Particularly vile, in this year of Einstein's annus mirabulus, are attacks on special relativity, reminiscent of those by distinguished German scientists, jockeying for power, in then Hitler's new govnt.
Fact: SR has NEVER failed an expt. test. Fact: E=mc^2 was deduced in 1907, two yrs after SR was first published. Fact: Nature is more bizarre & wonderful than most cretin's `common sense' can tolerate, so they go `ostrich'. Wake up, smell the coffee, and do a reality check people.
P
redictions made by Einstein were based on conclusional aspects to the results of certain activities entangled 'with' the experiments. Not the founadtion of the theory as a whole, Einstein's predictions coming true are not based on the physical study of the formual itself.
" Because a bird can fly - doesn't mean it will land " professor.
Let's look at E=mc2... based on the formula...the square root mathematical sum is not used..you will find this in illudstrations to his formula equated by other people in his mathematical terms. Hence, the square root is canceled out by E=mv2 .. c=v...understand. This is why the speed of light is solo as 186,000 mps/
stop.... squared it would raise the energy frequency of a particle mass.
The square root formula can not be canceled out based on the result that velocity can be considered infinite absent energy-mass equivalence in outer space. Space is weightless. DM IntroAether is empty from substante to a 1.04 direct energy ZPE range. Because of this - finite velocities can be violated and superluminal speeds allowed.
The mathematical equations are under copyright...sorry. Quanta' Physics technologies r.kawecki 2005
It seems that everybody has a breakthru theory of how physics really is, based upon current fallacies, insights, fads, ad nauseam. Particularly vile, in this year of Einstein's annus mirabulus, are attacks on special relativity, reminiscent of those by distinguished German scientists, jockeying for power, in then Hitler's new govnt.
Fact: SR has NEVER failed an expt. test. Fact: E=mc^2 was deduced in 1907, two yrs after SR was first published. Fact: Nature is more bizarre & wonderful than most cretin's `common sense' can tolerate, so they go `ostrich'. Wake up, smell the coffee, and do a reality check people.
P
redictions made by Einstein were based on conclusional aspects to the results of certain activities entangled 'with' the experiments. Not the founadtion of the theory as a whole, Einstein's predictions coming true are not based on the physical study of the formual itself. " Because a bird can fly - doesn't mean it will land " professor.
Let's look at E=mc2... based on the formula...the square root mathematical sum is not used..you will find this in illudstrations to his formula equated by other people in his mathematical terms. Hence, the square root is canceled out by E=mv2 .. c=v...understand. This is why the speed of light is solo as 186,000 mps/
stop.... squared it would raise the energy frequency of a particle mass.
The square root formula can not be canceled out based on the result that velocity can be considered infinite absent energy-mass equivalence in outer space. Space is weightless. DM IntroAether is empty from substante to a 1.04 direct energy ZPE range. Because of this - finite velocities can be violated and superluminal speeds allowed.
The mathematical equations are under copyright...sorry. Quanta' Physics technologies r.kawecki 2005
Hi Prof. Rodney Kawecki,
I refer to your posting on 2 Sep 05.
[QUOTE]
“If you have read conclusively the works of Albert Einstein etc...you will find that the experiments performed to gain the results needed to confirm Einstein's formulas were found to be inconclusive.
You will also find that the measures used to gain the results were based on a different labratory experiment equiptment toll foundation. What I mean is that the information recieved even though no results were achieved. The foundation to the experiment (s) were based on a totally different labratory experiment guideline. Meaning that the results were given with the results not appropreated with the true experiment.
The conclusions based on Einstein's theory and done by associate scientist in 1903 gave the result conclusions based on the results of a different experiment guideline then was done. The fact that Einstein published his work on SRT in 1905 as a result of E=Mc2. Special Relativity was published on unconclusive information. As a result ! The SRT is wrong ! One illustration can be found in an experiment done in August.2005, where the speed of light was clinical passed up in a labratory. This means that the 'universal constant' is no more accepteable.”
[ End of QUOTE]
I wish to learn a little more pertaining to this experiment that you mentioned was done in August 2005. If it is not too excessive, I would appreciate that you could share the details of this experiment which I will presume must have been published in some reputable journals.
I refer to your posting on 2 Sep 05.
[QUOTE]
“If you have read conclusively the works of Albert Einstein etc...you will find that the experiments performed to gain the results needed to confirm Einstein's formulas were found to be inconclusive.
You will also find that the measures used to gain the results were based on a different labratory experiment equiptment toll foundation. What I mean is that the information recieved even though no results were achieved. The foundation to the experiment (s) were based on a totally different labratory experiment guideline. Meaning that the results were given with the results not appropreated with the true experiment.
The conclusions based on Einstein's theory and done by associate scientist in 1903 gave the result conclusions based on the results of a different experiment guideline then was done. The fact that Einstein published his work on SRT in 1905 as a result of E=Mc2. Special Relativity was published on unconclusive information. As a result ! The SRT is wrong ! One illustration can be found in an experiment done in August.2005, where the speed of light was clinical passed up in a labratory. This means that the 'universal constant' is no more accepteable.”
[ End of QUOTE]
I wish to learn a little more pertaining to this experiment that you mentioned was done in August 2005. If it is not too excessive, I would appreciate that you could share the details of this experiment which I will presume must have been published in some reputable journals.
What's wrong with today's physics is that it relys on infirmation that has been rejected later in the century. That'a the problem. But as a part of college text thgese same studies continue to be studied in class - even though they have been served wrong. Melba Phillips says it well : The trouble with problems in physics education is they don't stay solved'.
My work if you have said more in Physics@w,babin.net 'commons' and my own web pages. You can understant that the work I am appling to is the develoement of the same studies but updated through my works. Yes - the lightspeed barrier has been passed up in laboratory assignment. But if relativistic mass recends by acceleration then what is the limit? In my up coming book - I formulate these equations and theorize the purpose of their meanings.
The thing is that relativistic mass does not apply to deep space media. Outer space is empty. Relativistic mass in deep space is miminal due to the loss of the EMF Field energy. The confusion with Einstein's work is that he rejects this idea about empty space weightlessness as a vector to his own theory. 'Anywhere anytime he says. His 'ether' research was an investigation to this problem in SRT. Note that Einstein's theory E=Mc2 is actually read E=Mc1..his work is public novice. His patent is public record and as a result his theory can be changed. The problem with physics is that its wrong. In my special theory if I am right which I am - relativistic theory becomes renounced. The Lorentz Contraction Theory recieves a basis of renouncement in Quanta Physics. The speed of light is changed by Newton Law and 'duel acceleration' based on the E=Mc(2) component. Where E=equals mc(2) squared - as it hasn't been being that it is cancelled out by his same formula thereby not used. Changing the equation is quite simple really.
"" The Einstein Formula in Advance Physics is never squared "" r.kawecki 2006
My work if you have said more in Physics@w,babin.net 'commons' and my own web pages. You can understant that the work I am appling to is the develoement of the same studies but updated through my works. Yes - the lightspeed barrier has been passed up in laboratory assignment. But if relativistic mass recends by acceleration then what is the limit? In my up coming book - I formulate these equations and theorize the purpose of their meanings.
The thing is that relativistic mass does not apply to deep space media. Outer space is empty. Relativistic mass in deep space is miminal due to the loss of the EMF Field energy. The confusion with Einstein's work is that he rejects this idea about empty space weightlessness as a vector to his own theory. 'Anywhere anytime he says. His 'ether' research was an investigation to this problem in SRT. Note that Einstein's theory E=Mc2 is actually read E=Mc1..his work is public novice. His patent is public record and as a result his theory can be changed. The problem with physics is that its wrong. In my special theory if I am right which I am - relativistic theory becomes renounced. The Lorentz Contraction Theory recieves a basis of renouncement in Quanta Physics. The speed of light is changed by Newton Law and 'duel acceleration' based on the E=Mc(2) component. Where E=equals mc(2) squared - as it hasn't been being that it is cancelled out by his same formula thereby not used. Changing the equation is quite simple really.
"" The Einstein Formula in Advance Physics is never squared "" r.kawecki 2006
QUOTE (s0cratus+Sep 6 2005, 10:34 AM)
The Physics is first of all Vacuum.
Many of physics consider, that: " the Physics is first of all Vacuum. "
P. Dirac wrote:
" Òhe problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem worth now before physics.
Really, if you can’t correctly describe vacuum,
how it is possible expect for the correct description something more complex? ".
It is completely correct.
Physics in Vacuum have groped true and condition
of infinite / eternal Vacuum characterized
with one simple physical parameter T=0K.
The philosophy of science begins from T=0K .
The physics begins from T=0K.
The religion begins from T=0K .
The origin of Existence begins from T=0K .
The Physics is first of all Vacuum.
Many of physics consider, that: " the Physics is first of all Vacuum. "
P. Dirac wrote:
" Òhe problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem worth now before physics.
Really, if you can’t correctly describe vacuum,
how it is possible expect for the correct description something more complex? ".
It is completely correct.
Physics in Vacuum have groped true and condition
of infinite / eternal Vacuum characterized
with one simple physical parameter T=0K.
The philosophy of science begins from T=0K .
The physics begins from T=0K.
The religion begins from T=0K .
The origin of Existence begins from T=0K .
The Physics is first of all Vacuum.
Quantum of Light and Life.
Question.
What inhale Life in the formulas and in the equations ?
What must be present in a body to make it alive ?
The answer.
Soul. Quantum of Light.
Question.
What inhale Life in the formulas and in the equations ?
What must be present in a body to make it alive ?
The answer.
Soul. Quantum of Light.
More on E=Mv2,,,
"The equation is never squared"!! Einstein based his E=Mv2 square formula on the mathematical precurement that it is cancelled out in the bio-mayrix of the equation when used. This means that his patent - does not rely on the equation iyself but the meaning in the equation it is used with. In other words it does not equal Mc2,,v2 but equals c1 or v1. cancelled out by its vector velocity c=v.
This can't be done if the element of the velocity which is equal to c .. is cancelled out by its equal component. Squaring the equation surely gives us the resistyence of the particle - but not if c=v are not equal componentry. Meaning if c does not equal v than one vector is greater and the equation is wrong. This is read in " Quanta Physics "" where relativity and the use of E=-Mv2 is retrieved through the higher mandate its component velocity. If they are not equal as insisted by Einstein then the equation is mathematically wrong. As insisted in Quanta Physics. In Quanta Physics Theory " velocity is measured to a greater componentry by the lifting of relativistic mass theorized by Einstein. If in any sence the velocity in the equation becomes greater then "c" then the formula is wrong. Velocity relative to particle (square) interaction can be raised from the confusion relativity illustrates to the public. Einstein was genius because his equation was wrong but under the meaning it couldn't be proven except in the Michelson Morley Experiment but was rejected under those circumstances in 1908.
Quanta Physics and physicist R.kawecki phd has reinvestigated this phenomyna and has raised the issue. Where relativistic mass can be ceased in particle interaction during acceleration - under these circumstances velocity is raised to be greater then 'c'. It is raised when the interaction is ceased by vacuum element introAether elements proceeding empty space. A confusion led by Einstein in
1906. Where relativistic mass is slowed or ceased during acceleration - "v" becomes greater. This can be seen in the M/M Experiment and is a therum of ZPE theory. Based on these hypothesis " Quanta Physics Theory " has designed a new theory in physics. Relativity tells us that this ib just no so - but relativity is wrong !!! Thats the problem. Relatividstic mass has been illustrated as being independent of itself but it isn't.. This has been proven in modern advance physics. Thereby E=Mv2 (v1) is raised to E=Mqt-1second. ( q=372,000 m.s)..
"The equation is never squared"!! Einstein based his E=Mv2 square formula on the mathematical precurement that it is cancelled out in the bio-mayrix of the equation when used. This means that his patent - does not rely on the equation iyself but the meaning in the equation it is used with. In other words it does not equal Mc2,,v2 but equals c1 or v1. cancelled out by its vector velocity c=v.
This can't be done if the element of the velocity which is equal to c .. is cancelled out by its equal component. Squaring the equation surely gives us the resistyence of the particle - but not if c=v are not equal componentry. Meaning if c does not equal v than one vector is greater and the equation is wrong. This is read in " Quanta Physics "" where relativity and the use of E=-Mv2 is retrieved through the higher mandate its component velocity. If they are not equal as insisted by Einstein then the equation is mathematically wrong. As insisted in Quanta Physics. In Quanta Physics Theory " velocity is measured to a greater componentry by the lifting of relativistic mass theorized by Einstein. If in any sence the velocity in the equation becomes greater then "c" then the formula is wrong. Velocity relative to particle (square) interaction can be raised from the confusion relativity illustrates to the public. Einstein was genius because his equation was wrong but under the meaning it couldn't be proven except in the Michelson Morley Experiment but was rejected under those circumstances in 1908.
Quanta Physics and physicist R.kawecki phd has reinvestigated this phenomyna and has raised the issue. Where relativistic mass can be ceased in particle interaction during acceleration - under these circumstances velocity is raised to be greater then 'c'. It is raised when the interaction is ceased by vacuum element introAether elements proceeding empty space. A confusion led by Einstein in
1906. Where relativistic mass is slowed or ceased during acceleration - "v" becomes greater. This can be seen in the M/M Experiment and is a therum of ZPE theory. Based on these hypothesis " Quanta Physics Theory " has designed a new theory in physics. Relativity tells us that this ib just no so - but relativity is wrong !!! Thats the problem.
Relatividstic mass has been illustrated as being independent of itself but it isn't.. This has been proven in modern advance physics. Thereby E=Mv2 (v1) is raised to E=Mqt-1second. ( q=372,000 m.s)..
“ Henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself,
are doomed to fade away into mere shadows,
and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.”
/ Herman Minkowski. /
* * *
Question.
What is the “a kind of union of the two “?
The answer.
It is Vacuum. T=0K.
What is a quantum of light?
Quantum of light is a particle and wave simultaneously.
Exact there is a simultaneity of space and time.
For me such explanation is unsatisfactory.
It just as to speak, that the logic information and
the senseless message are the same simultaneously.
To say half truth is worse then to say lie.
* * *
Quantum of light is a privileged particle.
Only the speed of a light quantum in Vacuum has
a maximal, constant, absolute quantity of c=1.
No other particle can travel with the speed c = 1.
If quantum of light flies always rectilinearly c=1, it is a mad one.
Is he really mad?
Quantum of light is a particle and wave simultaneously.
Exact there is a simultaneity of space and time.
For me such explanation is unsatisfactory.
It just as to speak, that the logic information and
the senseless message are the same simultaneously.
To say half truth is worse then to say lie.
* * *
Quantum of light is a privileged particle.
Only the speed of a light quantum in Vacuum has
a maximal, constant, absolute quantity of c=1.
No other particle can travel with the speed c = 1.
If quantum of light flies always rectilinearly c=1, it is a mad one.
Is he really mad?
What is the electron?
Robert Milliken, who weighed electron, in his Nobel speech ( 1923)
told, that he knew nothing about “last essence of electron”.
In that case there is one old joke.
One professor asked a student:
“ What is a electron?”
“ Ah, God damn it! I have forgotten. And in fact even in the morning I knew it. ”-
the student answered.
“ You should recollect it without fail, - professor said – because you were
the unique person who knew, what electron was, and you had suddenly forgotten!”
This old joke does not grow old.
And today a question: “What is the electron?” remains without answer.
How the electron “looks” nobody knows.
* * *
According to the Maxwell,s theory electron has the form of a sphere.
But everybody knows, that an electron is not a firm sphere.
Everybody knows, that its form can be changed.
But nobody understands the borders of the electron,s changes.
So, what are the borders of this change?
Quantum theory gives an answer to this question.
It says that at the interaction of the electron with the vacuum, his energy and mass
become infinite. Physicists do not understand what to do with infinite sizes,
and therefore they have invented "a method of renormalization",
a method "to sweep the dust under the carpet" / Feynman./
This method is abstract.
The situation can be understood in another way.
Electrons, having the geometrical form of a sphere, lost their volume and turned
into an indefinitely flat circle. In this reason, infinite sizes of the electron occurred.
But in physics we know only one particle which has the form of a flat circle.
It is a quantum of light, which flies rectilinearly with speed c= 1.
Therefore, the electron can turns only into a quantum of light.
That is why, the electron and a quantum of light is the same particle in different states.
* * *
It is proved, when electron leaves atom, its electric field changes.
The spherical field will be transformed to an ellipse field.
And in process of his removal the ellipse field is more and more extended.
And in a limit (at the moment of breaking-off ) the electron gets the form of a string.
(String theory).
Therefore, electron can have the different geometrical form: circle, sphere and string.
Robert Milliken, who weighed electron, in his Nobel speech ( 1923)
told, that he knew nothing about “last essence of electron”.
In that case there is one old joke.
One professor asked a student:
“ What is a electron?”
“ Ah, God damn it! I have forgotten. And in fact even in the morning I knew it. ”-
the student answered.
“ You should recollect it without fail, - professor said – because you were
the unique person who knew, what electron was, and you had suddenly forgotten!”
This old joke does not grow old.
And today a question: “What is the electron?” remains without answer.
How the electron “looks” nobody knows.
* * *
According to the Maxwell,s theory electron has the form of a sphere.
But everybody knows, that an electron is not a firm sphere.
Everybody knows, that its form can be changed.
But nobody understands the borders of the electron,s changes.
So, what are the borders of this change?
Quantum theory gives an answer to this question.
It says that at the interaction of the electron with the vacuum, his energy and mass
become infinite. Physicists do not understand what to do with infinite sizes,
and therefore they have invented "a method of renormalization",
a method "to sweep the dust under the carpet" / Feynman./
This method is abstract.
The situation can be understood in another way.
Electrons, having the geometrical form of a sphere, lost their volume and turned
into an indefinitely flat circle. In this reason, infinite sizes of the electron occurred.
But in physics we know only one particle which has the form of a flat circle.
It is a quantum of light, which flies rectilinearly with speed c= 1.
Therefore, the electron can turns only into a quantum of light.
That is why, the electron and a quantum of light is the same particle in different states.
* * *
It is proved, when electron leaves atom, its electric field changes.
The spherical field will be transformed to an ellipse field.
And in process of his removal the ellipse field is more and more extended.
And in a limit (at the moment of breaking-off ) the electron gets the form of a string.
(String theory).
Therefore, electron can have the different geometrical form: circle, sphere and string.
Situation in the physics.
A simple question:
can "material entities", like photon, electron, atom
exist in two different "states of reality":
1)
"wave" - a "non-local" state that has no specific location,
can be more than one place at a time,
and transform instantaneously into a particle; or
2)
"particle" - a "local" state of substance that must
occupies a specific location at a specific time,
must travel at a speed less than the speed of light and
may change back into a wave.
3)
Somebody said that "material entities" are really just "states of
information" - but then, information about "what" known by "who"?
4)
However, if science is going to talk about the "nature of reality" using
the "silly ideas" expressed in QM theory, then religion and philosophy
certainly has an equal justification for talking about the "nature of
reality" using "silly ideas" like souls, spirits, and life after death.
5)
Physics are just a set of theories trying to explain phenomena.
Thus they can change with time.
Mathematics only the support of physics.
But mathematics by itself is incomplete (refer to Kurt Gedel's famous theorem).
* * *
It is not my article.
It is a part from clause of a scientist, which name I have forgotten.
But this clause is not unique.
There are many articles like this.
A simple question:
can "material entities", like photon, electron, atom
exist in two different "states of reality":
1)
"wave" - a "non-local" state that has no specific location,
can be more than one place at a time,
and transform instantaneously into a particle; or
2)
"particle" - a "local" state of substance that must
occupies a specific location at a specific time,
must travel at a speed less than the speed of light and
may change back into a wave.
3)
Somebody said that "material entities" are really just "states of
information" - but then, information about "what" known by "who"?
4)
However, if science is going to talk about the "nature of reality" using
the "silly ideas" expressed in QM theory, then religion and philosophy
certainly has an equal justification for talking about the "nature of
reality" using "silly ideas" like souls, spirits, and life after death.
5)
Physics are just a set of theories trying to explain phenomena.
Thus they can change with time.
Mathematics only the support of physics.
But mathematics by itself is incomplete (refer to Kurt Gedel's famous theorem).
* * *
It is not my article.
It is a part from clause of a scientist, which name I have forgotten.
But this clause is not unique.
There are many articles like this.
Hi Socratus,
Quote Socratus:
However, if science is going to talk about the "nature of reality" using
the "silly ideas" expressed in QM theory, then religion and philosophy
certainly has an equal justification for talking about the "nature of
reality" using "silly ideas" like souls, spirits, and life after death.
and
and
Quote Socratus:
Physics are just a set of theories trying to explain phenomena.
Thus they can change with time.
Mathematics only the support of physics.
But mathematics by itself is incomplete (refer to Kurt Gedel's famous theorem).
I fully agreed with your proposition.
I am also curious to know your view with regards to dimensions beyond the 3-spatial dimensions (since only in a 3-spatial dimensional frame can we locate anything real with absolute certainty). Multi-dimensional world (as many as 10 or more dimensions) seems to be fashionable with contemporary theoretical physicsists--many of whom are respectable gurus of the physics community.
Cheers.
Can we, in some way, to observe processes in
this 4th dimensional space?
Can we in some way to observe holography processes in the nature ?
Can we have parapsychology abilities?
Maybe.
If we can use ability of our light quanta at a higher frequency .
Parapsycological ability....It happens all the time!
Stories about such things are not lies, they are truths that people do not want to believe. I have done things no man will understand and this leads to difficulty, in the explanations which science does not recognise as valid and valuable. Telekinesis...Levitation...Astral travelling...Time travel...Mind reading...X-ray vision...participation in Parallel Realities and Channeling information, I have done, self-hypnosis and trance induction are easy, meditation is a given, I have done these sometimes by accident and sometimes by force of will.
These ability are scoffed at and people prefer to laugh at what the adept has learned from lifes offerings.
I continue to make forward strides in my abilities but not many believe that I have done these things or will again, when conditions are right.
I am very alone but not lonely because i am content that I am a particularly open mind and heart in a world that is very much afraid of persons like myself.
One day the average person will do these things and life will be more open and aware of the forces of energy we have at our fingertips.
Until then...I will remain a leper to science...until then i can only try to open minds and aid in any understanding of the phenomenon I have touched....funny thing is not many even wish to know the extent of the things I have partaken.
They believe me to be a liar and a fake, i may be assured. It is a joy to know though, that I am not. What I am is something of an alchemist and self-healing magician, what I am is a human who lacks so much need of control and limitations in the life. What I am is a (soul) explorer who is courageous and unafraid to try what most will only laugh at.
The paranormal awaits any one willing to take some time to understand and participate with it. The paranormal is part of lifes conditions. Light is understanding the gulf between Science and Godhead. At least you sir have the brave heart to try and inquire about the gulf, as I have.
Peace!
QUOTE
Quote Socratus:
However, if science is going to talk about the "nature of reality" using
the "silly ideas" expressed in QM theory, then religion and philosophy
certainly has an equal justification for talking about the "nature of
reality" using "silly ideas" like souls, spirits, and life after death.
and
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
Quote Socratus: However, if science is going to talk about the "nature of reality" using the "silly ideas" expressed in QM theory, then religion and philosophy certainly has an equal justification for talking about the "nature of reality" using "silly ideas" like souls, spirits, and life after death. |
and
Quote Socratus:
Physics are just a set of theories trying to explain phenomena.
Thus they can change with time.
Mathematics only the support of physics.
But mathematics by itself is incomplete (refer to Kurt Gedel's famous theorem).
I fully agreed with your proposition.
I am also curious to know your view with regards to dimensions beyond the 3-spatial dimensions (since only in a 3-spatial dimensional frame can we locate anything real with absolute certainty). Multi-dimensional world (as many as 10 or more dimensions) seems to be fashionable with contemporary theoretical physicsists--many of whom are respectable gurus of the physics community.
Cheers.
Two views on the space and time.
1.
There are an independent space and independent time.
We notice it on our planet - Earth.
2.
There is simultaneous union of space and time.
Herman Minkowski :
“ Henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself,
are doomed to fade away into mere shadows,
and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.”
Question.
What is the “a kind of union of the two “?
The answer.
It is Vacuum. T=0K.
Logic.
Physicists do not dictate to Nature their laws.
Laws of nature are reality, which exists independently from the researcher,
and the person only perceives them. The nature develops from simple to difficult;
the evolution of the world goes from the lowest condition to the highest one.
Therefore, initial conditions of the origin of Genesis cannot be complex.
They should be elementary and simple, as a multiplication table: 2.2=4, 2.3=6 etc.
Such simple laws of nature can and should be realized by each person from a school bench.
1.
There are an independent space and independent time.
We notice it on our planet - Earth.
2.
There is simultaneous union of space and time.
Herman Minkowski :
“ Henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself,
are doomed to fade away into mere shadows,
and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.”
Question.
What is the “a kind of union of the two “?
The answer.
It is Vacuum. T=0K.
Logic.
Physicists do not dictate to Nature their laws.
Laws of nature are reality, which exists independently from the researcher,
and the person only perceives them. The nature develops from simple to difficult;
the evolution of the world goes from the lowest condition to the highest one.
Therefore, initial conditions of the origin of Genesis cannot be complex.
They should be elementary and simple, as a multiplication table: 2.2=4, 2.3=6 etc.
Such simple laws of nature can and should be realized by each person from a school bench.
Evolution.
The most simple design, which was created by the God, is atom of hydrogen.
The most complex design, which was created by the God, is the Man.
The Man is alive essence.
Animals, bird, fish are alive essences.
And an atom?
And atom is also alive design.
The atom of hydrogen lives 12 minutes.
And someone a long time ago has already said, that if
to give suffices time to atom of hydrogen, he will turn into Man.
Therefore, the one, who creates a general picture of Life,
must consider development of evolution of Life from atom up to the Man.
* * *
Once upon a time, in the beginning, there was one "single point " accidentally.
Then it has caught a cold accidentally and has blown up: Big Bang " has taken place.
It was the reason of accidental creation of some hundreds
(thousands) kinds of elementary particles and their girlfriends - antiparticles.
Then stars were formed accidentally.
Then the Planet the Earth was formed accidentally.
Then atom of hydrogen was accidentally formed.
Then complex atom was accidentally formed.
Then was accidentally formed vegetative and fauna.
Then the man was created accidentally.
And this man can accidentally think logically.
But of course, unfortunately, not always.
* * *
What was one "single point " surrounded with?
EMPTINESS- NOTHING….!!!
Ok!
But why does everyone speak about EMPTINESS- NOTHING
In common phrases rather than in specific, concrete terms?
I wonder why nobody has written down this EMPTINESS- NOTHING
in the form of a physical formula ? You see, every schoolboy knows that
is possible to express the EMPTINESS- NOTHING condition
by the formula T=0K.
From only this simple physical parameter I create a general picture of Genesis.
Best wishes.
Socratus
The most simple design, which was created by the God, is atom of hydrogen.
The most complex design, which was created by the God, is the Man.
The Man is alive essence.
Animals, bird, fish are alive essences.
And an atom?
And atom is also alive design.
The atom of hydrogen lives 12 minutes.
And someone a long time ago has already said, that if
to give suffices time to atom of hydrogen, he will turn into Man.
Therefore, the one, who creates a general picture of Life,
must consider development of evolution of Life from atom up to the Man.
* * *
Once upon a time, in the beginning, there was one "single point " accidentally.
Then it has caught a cold accidentally and has blown up: Big Bang " has taken place.
It was the reason of accidental creation of some hundreds
(thousands) kinds of elementary particles and their girlfriends - antiparticles.
Then stars were formed accidentally.
Then the Planet the Earth was formed accidentally.
Then atom of hydrogen was accidentally formed.
Then complex atom was accidentally formed.
Then was accidentally formed vegetative and fauna.
Then the man was created accidentally.
And this man can accidentally think logically.
But of course, unfortunately, not always.
* * *
What was one "single point " surrounded with?
EMPTINESS- NOTHING….!!!
Ok!
But why does everyone speak about EMPTINESS- NOTHING
In common phrases rather than in specific, concrete terms?
I wonder why nobody has written down this EMPTINESS- NOTHING
in the form of a physical formula ? You see, every schoolboy knows that
is possible to express the EMPTINESS- NOTHING condition
by the formula T=0K.
From only this simple physical parameter I create a general picture of Genesis.
Best wishes.
Socratus
Universe and Vacuum. Abstraction and reality .
Now we build the base of a science on abstract ideas.
The base of the classical mechanics is constructed on abstract
separate absolute space and abstract separate absolute time of Newton.
The base of thermodynamics is constructed on the abstract
ideal gas theory.
The base of the theory of radiation is constructed on
the abstract black body theory.
The base of SRT is constructed on the abstract theory
of four-dimensional space theory.
On this abstract base, physicists build a concrete building of
science and are surprised when they discover paradoxes in it.
But may be the abstract ideas are not abstract ones.
* * *
It is consider now, that absolute temperature of the Universe is Т=2,7К.
It is an absolute reference system (now).
But we all know that our Universe is expanding......
This temperature ( Т=2,7К ) is not constant, and continues to decrease and,
hence, in the future will decrease down to Т=0К.
* * *
In the physics models of the Vacuum have been created long time ago.
These are:
1) the Theory of ideal gas.
2) the Theory of absolutely black body.
3) Negative four-dimensional space (Minkowski space - SRT).
There is no need to discover America again,
to build new theories of the Vacuum.
If we want to understand Vacuum it is necessary to ask:
“ What a geometrical and physical parameters
the particles in Vacuum T=0K can have?”
Thanks.
Best wishes.
Socratus.
Now we build the base of a science on abstract ideas.
The base of the classical mechanics is constructed on abstract
separate absolute space and abstract separate absolute time of Newton.
The base of thermodynamics is constructed on the abstract
ideal gas theory.
The base of the theory of radiation is constructed on
the abstract black body theory.
The base of SRT is constructed on the abstract theory
of four-dimensional space theory.
On this abstract base, physicists build a concrete building of
science and are surprised when they discover paradoxes in it.
But may be the abstract ideas are not abstract ones.
* * *
It is consider now, that absolute temperature of the Universe is Т=2,7К.
It is an absolute reference system (now).
But we all know that our Universe is expanding......
This temperature ( Т=2,7К ) is not constant, and continues to decrease and,
hence, in the future will decrease down to Т=0К.
* * *
In the physics models of the Vacuum have been created long time ago.
These are:
1) the Theory of ideal gas.
2) the Theory of absolutely black body.
3) Negative four-dimensional space (Minkowski space - SRT).
There is no need to discover America again,
to build new theories of the Vacuum.
If we want to understand Vacuum it is necessary to ask:
“ What a geometrical and physical parameters
the particles in Vacuum T=0K can have?”
Thanks.
Best wishes.
Socratus.
Twin Paradox.
Einstein's Special Relativity Theory / Twin Paradox does not have
any relation to a man.
Special Relativity Theory only examines the behaviour
of a quantum of light / electron.
Twin Paradox has relation only to a light quantum / electron.
SRT/ Twin Paradox had grown from Maxwell's theory.
And only an electron is a main and single hero in the Maxwell's theory and SRT.
Socratus.
Einstein's Special Relativity Theory / Twin Paradox does not have
any relation to a man.
Special Relativity Theory only examines the behaviour
of a quantum of light / electron.
Twin Paradox has relation only to a light quantum / electron.
SRT/ Twin Paradox had grown from Maxwell's theory.
And only an electron is a main and single hero in the Maxwell's theory and SRT.
Socratus.
Only the speed of a light quantum has
a absolute quantity of c=1.
No other particle can travel with the speed c = 1.
And I was taught at school from the first class:
that the incommensurable quantities cannot be compared.
To connect incommensurable quantities it
is similar to the decision of a problem:
“What will be if the whale will attacks the elephant?”
Millions books and articles about the “ twins brothers” are fantasy.
Socratus.
a absolute quantity of c=1.
No other particle can travel with the speed c = 1.
And I was taught at school from the first class:
that the incommensurable quantities cannot be compared.
To connect incommensurable quantities it
is similar to the decision of a problem:
“What will be if the whale will attacks the elephant?”
Millions books and articles about the “ twins brothers” are fantasy.
Socratus.
About absolute reference frame……
1 Ptolemee considered, that reference frame connected with the Earth
is absolute.
2. Copernicus proved, that reference frame connected with the Sun
is absolute.
3. Then they began to consider, that reference frame connected with far stars
is absolute.
4. Now it is consider, that reference frame connected with relict isotropic radiation
T = 2,7K is absolute.
And if has the scientific idea stopped in this point?
What is farther?
1 Ptolemee considered, that reference frame connected with the Earth
is absolute.
2. Copernicus proved, that reference frame connected with the Sun
is absolute.
3. Then they began to consider, that reference frame connected with far stars
is absolute.
4. Now it is consider, that reference frame connected with relict isotropic radiation
T = 2,7K is absolute.
And if has the scientific idea stopped in this point?
What is farther?
Epoches and the reference frames.
1 Ptolemee considered, that reference frame connected with the Earth
is absolute.
2. Copernicus proved, that reference frame connected with the Sun
is absolute.
3. Then they began to consider, that reference frame connected with
far stars is absolute.
4. Now it is consider, that reference frame connected with
relict isotropic radiation T = 2,7K is absolute.
5.
But T = 2,7K is not a constant factor.
This relict isotropic radiation continues to extend and decrease
and, hence, approximately over a period of
20 billions years will reach T=0K.
* * *
From the Relativity theory we know, that “time” is a relative concept.
Therefore, dear reader, while you read these lines, the time
compressed up to zero t=0 and T=0K has already come.
1 Ptolemee considered, that reference frame connected with the Earth
is absolute.
2. Copernicus proved, that reference frame connected with the Sun
is absolute.
3. Then they began to consider, that reference frame connected with
far stars is absolute.
4. Now it is consider, that reference frame connected with
relict isotropic radiation T = 2,7K is absolute.
5.
But T = 2,7K is not a constant factor.
This relict isotropic radiation continues to extend and decrease
and, hence, approximately over a period of
20 billions years will reach T=0K.
* * *
From the Relativity theory we know, that “time” is a relative concept.
Therefore, dear reader, while you read these lines, the time
compressed up to zero t=0 and T=0K has already come.
The world of electron.
But maybe these electrons are World,
where there are five continents:
the art,
knowledge,
wars,
thrones
and the memory of forty centuries.
/ Russian poet V. Brusov./
But maybe these electrons are World,
where there are five continents:
the art,
knowledge,
wars,
thrones
and the memory of forty centuries.
/ Russian poet V. Brusov./
Incorrect measurements found in modern physics experimenet and formula developements of SRT GRT and QED.
The SRT equations using e-mc2 have been discovered to have used an element field range in measuring the speed of light. Using such a force should have been exempted from finished work. As a result - the measurement is wrong.
In researchimg a measurement of length in any certainty. It is the full length and not the distance with an added force such as gravity or energy that the length is measured true.
SRT GRT QED in all instances have used an energy screen with their equation results. The bottom line is that the length of the body which is light in this case. Should have been measured exempt the shortened length of gravity in SRT or energy in QED formulas.
As a result - the figure for lightspeed relative to its true length is 372,000 m/s. And not 186,000 m/s. The discrepenency of gravity as an ending result to measuring the equation in 1905 with physicists were incorrect.
It is true that light speed is the speed of light. But the speed of light constant relative the adjoining elements - atomic energy and its potential propulsion, the net of the field, and all adjoining elements that have been included with the figure are the result of the equation measuring incorrect.
Read more in physicisamerica.com r.kawecki
The SRT equations using e-mc2 have been discovered to have used an element field range in measuring the speed of light. Using such a force should have been exempted from finished work. As a result - the measurement is wrong.
In researchimg a measurement of length in any certainty. It is the full length and not the distance with an added force such as gravity or energy that the length is measured true.
SRT GRT QED in all instances have used an energy screen with their equation results. The bottom line is that the length of the body which is light in this case. Should have been measured exempt the shortened length of gravity in SRT or energy in QED formulas.
As a result - the figure for lightspeed relative to its true length is 372,000 m/s. And not 186,000 m/s. The discrepenency of gravity as an ending result to measuring the equation in 1905 with physicists were incorrect.
It is true that light speed is the speed of light. But the speed of light constant relative the adjoining elements - atomic energy and its potential propulsion, the net of the field, and all adjoining elements that have been included with the figure are the result of the equation measuring incorrect.
Read more in physicisamerica.com r.kawecki
rod kawecki...quanta wrote:
It is true that light speed is the speed of light.
========
Is it truth?
It is true that light speed is the speed of light.
========
Is it truth?
THE SPIN.
M. Planck in 1900 offered to examine the radiation emanating from
absolutely black body, as separate portions (quantum).
This value is described with a formula (h=Et) and has a title
of «the least quantum of action», “ internal impulse of particle”, “ spin”.
================================
First physicist, who enthusiastically met the theory of Planck,
the discovery of elementary quantum of action, was Einstein.
But very fast he found out its «latent imperfection» and
decided to consider the radiation problem in a new way.
And, 17.03.1905 in his work:
«About one heuristic point of view concerning
the origin and transformation of light »
he decided to discoverthe structure of quantum of light from a new point of view..
For the basic point of his argumentations, Einstein
took the constant of Boltzmann R/N = k
and coefficient ( from the formula of radiation of Wien.
The product of these values makes quantum of light.
In the beginning, Einstein supposed that his theory of radiation
does not converge with the theory of radiation of Planck.
However, already in one year (in 1906)
he came to conviction that his formula of radiation is equivalent
to the formula of radiation of Planck.
As a result, the internal impulse (spin) of light quantum
can be described by two formulas:
1) Plank in 1900 wrote it down with the formula h = Et,
2) Einstein in 1905 wrote it down with formula h = kb.
The quantity of this particle, s impulse is h=1.
Under influence of this impulse the particle moves with speed c=1.
The particle has the form of a circle.
3) Another impulse (spin) in 1925 was found by
Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck impulse : ћ = h/ 2 π,
forcing a particle to rotate around his diameter.
This means that it particle does not move rectilinearly,
but rotates around the diameter (has the form of a sphere).
The rotation of these particle creates electrical waves.
=============================
Thus, Planck ,Einstein, Goudsmit, and Uhlenbeck each in his own way,
discovered that the micro particle should possess internal impulse.
But they did not particularly explain its origin.
And scientists do not understand deep qualitative distinction between
these two kinds of action.
I explain how this internal impulse of a particle originated.
M. Planck in 1900 offered to examine the radiation emanating from
absolutely black body, as separate portions (quantum).
This value is described with a formula (h=Et) and has a title
of «the least quantum of action», “ internal impulse of particle”, “ spin”.
================================
First physicist, who enthusiastically met the theory of Planck,
the discovery of elementary quantum of action, was Einstein.
But very fast he found out its «latent imperfection» and
decided to consider the radiation problem in a new way.
And, 17.03.1905 in his work:
«About one heuristic point of view concerning
the origin and transformation of light »
he decided to discoverthe structure of quantum of light from a new point of view..
For the basic point of his argumentations, Einstein
took the constant of Boltzmann R/N = k
and coefficient (
from the formula of radiation of Wien.The product of these values makes quantum of light.
In the beginning, Einstein supposed that his theory of radiation
does not converge with the theory of radiation of Planck.
However, already in one year (in 1906)
he came to conviction that his formula of radiation is equivalent
to the formula of radiation of Planck.
As a result, the internal impulse (spin) of light quantum
can be described by two formulas:
1) Plank in 1900 wrote it down with the formula h = Et,
2) Einstein in 1905 wrote it down with formula h = kb.
The quantity of this particle, s impulse is h=1.
Under influence of this impulse the particle moves with speed c=1.
The particle has the form of a circle.
3) Another impulse (spin) in 1925 was found by
Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck impulse : ћ = h/ 2 π,
forcing a particle to rotate around his diameter.
This means that it particle does not move rectilinearly,
but rotates around the diameter (has the form of a sphere).
The rotation of these particle creates electrical waves.
=============================
Thus, Planck ,Einstein, Goudsmit, and Uhlenbeck each in his own way,
discovered that the micro particle should possess internal impulse.
But they did not particularly explain its origin.
And scientists do not understand deep qualitative distinction between
these two kinds of action.
I explain how this internal impulse of a particle originated.
From ancient times the man aspired to understand the reason
of movement. Gradually in physics there were two points
of view on the reason of movement.
1. In classical physics the reason of movement of bodies
owing to external influence is considered.
2. In quantum physics it was required to enter the term
"an internal impulse of a particle". It is not me, who has entered
into physics representation about an internal pulse of a particle.
This term is used in all textbooks and books about physics.
But spelling these words nobody represents this process evidently.
I have simply decided to imagine, as this term,
this impulse looks evidently.
And with the claims I ask you to address to physicists.
They, to be honest before themselves, should decide:
a) or to refuse the term "an internal impulse of a particle".
or to accept this term as a reality, and then it is necessary
to understand its origin.
If we refuse a terminology "an internal impulse of a particle",
we shall transform into the people unable to express their ideas.
If we accept this term as a reality, then it is necessary
to reconsider the sights on the world.
of movement. Gradually in physics there were two points
of view on the reason of movement.
1. In classical physics the reason of movement of bodies
owing to external influence is considered.
2. In quantum physics it was required to enter the term
"an internal impulse of a particle". It is not me, who has entered
into physics representation about an internal pulse of a particle.
This term is used in all textbooks and books about physics.
But spelling these words nobody represents this process evidently.
I have simply decided to imagine, as this term,
this impulse looks evidently.
And with the claims I ask you to address to physicists.
They, to be honest before themselves, should decide:
a) or to refuse the term "an internal impulse of a particle".
or to accept this term as a reality, and then it is necessary to understand its origin.
If we refuse a terminology "an internal impulse of a particle",
we shall transform into the people unable to express their ideas.
If we accept this term as a reality, then it is necessary
to reconsider the sights on the world.
Many years ago man has accustomed some wild
animals (wolf, horse, cat, bull , etc.)
and has made them domestic ones.
But the man understands badly the four-footed friends.
In 1897 J. J. Thomson opened new particle - electron.
Gradually man has accustomed electron to work for him.
But the man does not understand what an electron is.
animals (wolf, horse, cat, bull , etc.)
and has made them domestic ones.
But the man understands badly the four-footed friends.
In 1897 J. J. Thomson opened new particle - electron.
Gradually man has accustomed electron to work for him.
But the man does not understand what an electron is.
...the electron and the photon are the same particle in different states.
My version of this idea is in a paper "Superluminal quantum models of the electron and the photon" at www.superluminalquantum.org .
Richard Gauthier
My version of this idea is in a paper "Superluminal quantum models of the electron and the photon" at www.superluminalquantum.org .
Richard Gauthier
QUOTE (socratus+)
...the electron and the photon are the same particle in different states.
Is that right? How is this, again?
Is that right? How is this, again?
What is the difference between unit: h and unit : ħ =h/ 2pi?
1.
Many years M. Planck was attracted with the
absolutely black body problem.
If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls
in area of absolutely black body and does not
radiate back, then “ terminal dead “ comes.
In 1900 Planck decided:
to save the quantum of light from death is possible
that quantum of light will radiate with unit h=Et.
Physicists say, that Planck,s unit is one: h=1.
Having this unit h=1 quantum of light flies
with speed c=1.
2.
In 1925 Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck decided that
Electron has its own unit : ħ =h /2pi.
Unit : ħ = h/ 2pi shows that electron has own
angular momentum ( own inner impulse).
Thanks to its own inner impulse electron
rotates around its diameter.
3.
These units do not come from any
formulas or equation.
Planck, Goudsmit , Uhlenbeck and Bohr introduced
These units in the physics intuitively.
4.
These units work, so they are recognized.
1.
Many years M. Planck was attracted with the
absolutely black body problem.
If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls
in area of absolutely black body and does not
radiate back, then “ terminal dead “ comes.
In 1900 Planck decided:
to save the quantum of light from death is possible
that quantum of light will radiate with unit h=Et.
Physicists say, that Planck,s unit is one: h=1.
Having this unit h=1 quantum of light flies
with speed c=1.
2.
In 1925 Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck decided that
Electron has its own unit : ħ =h /2pi.
Unit : ħ = h/ 2pi shows that electron has own
angular momentum ( own inner impulse).
Thanks to its own inner impulse electron
rotates around its diameter.
3.
These units do not come from any
formulas or equation.
Planck, Goudsmit , Uhlenbeck and Bohr introduced
These units in the physics intuitively.
4.
These units work, so they are recognized.
1.
In classical physics this law exactly is not observed.
Only in quantum physics this law is exactly observed.
The observance of this law is connected to the formula E=Mc^2
2.
Quantum theory says that at the interaction of the electron
with the vacuum, the energy and mass of it become infinite.
It means that the law of conservation and transformation energy is broken.
Unless can it be?
No.
Honor and glory to mathematicians.
They thought up " a method of renormalization ", a method
" to sweep the dust under the carpet " / Feynman./ and so
they solved this problem.
But what process is really connected with
the " method of renormalization "?
Please, remember, electron is not a professional mathematician,
but it maybe a particle, maybe a wave.
3.
The physicists say that electron is eternal particle because
it has less electric charge and therefore it cannot break-up.
So, how can electron keep its eternal condition?
How can electron escape its infinity?
How to understand the fact of
“conservation and transformation energy” of electron?
4.
Electron is the particle which has a form of a sphere
(geoid), having energy E=hw.
But everybody knows that an electron is not a firm sphere.
Everybody knows that its form can be changed.
But nobody understands the borders of its change.
Electron cannot disappear .
Electron can only change its form.
So, what are the borders of this change?
5.
According to the law of conservation and transformation energy:
a)
Electron, having the geometrical form of a sphere,
loses their volume (density) and turns into an indefinitely
flat circle (C/D=pi).
What does “indefinitely flat circle “ mean?
It means, that we cannot reach Absolute Vacuum T=0K
and we cannot reach density of the electron in the rest .
In the interaction of the electron with vacuum
transformation of the kinetic energy of an electron ( E=hw)
in its potential energy E=Mc^2 take place.
c)
It is impossible to understand the “last essence of electron”
dividing its geometrical form from energy.
The geometrical form and energy of electron
are united together inseparably .
To the various forms of an electron
the various kinds of energy correspond.
==================
Another example.
SRT says mass and energy become infinite at the speed of light c=1.
But only quantum of light has speed c=1.
All other particles have speed v=s/t and they cannot reach speed c=1.
Quantum of light is a real particle.
Its parameters are not infinity but limited.
So, which form does a quantum of light have?
Only form of a indefinitely flat circle (C/D=pi).
What does "an indefinitely flat circle " mean?
It means, that we cannot reach Absolute Vacuum T=0K
and we cannot reach density of the quantum of light .
================
Nowadays, the law of preservation and transformation of energy is
received in physics as a simple bookkeeping calculation of debit-credit.
It is a primitive judgment about one of the most important Law in Nature.
Why?
Because debit-credit is “ a bookkeeping symmetry law”.
And the life begins with disturb of symmetry.
The occurrence of Life is connected not with symmetry,
but with breaking of symmetry.
For something to happen there has to be a "broken symmetry".
In classical physics this law exactly is not observed.
Only in quantum physics this law is exactly observed.
The observance of this law is connected to the formula E=Mc^2
2.
Quantum theory says that at the interaction of the electron
with the vacuum, the energy and mass of it become infinite.
It means that the law of conservation and transformation energy is broken.
Unless can it be?
No.
Honor and glory to mathematicians.
They thought up " a method of renormalization ", a method
" to sweep the dust under the carpet " / Feynman./ and so
they solved this problem.
But what process is really connected with
the " method of renormalization "?
Please, remember, electron is not a professional mathematician,
but it maybe a particle, maybe a wave.
3.
The physicists say that electron is eternal particle because
it has less electric charge and therefore it cannot break-up.
So, how can electron keep its eternal condition?
How can electron escape its infinity?
How to understand the fact of
“conservation and transformation energy” of electron?
4.
Electron is the particle which has a form of a sphere
(geoid), having energy E=hw.
But everybody knows that an electron is not a firm sphere.
Everybody knows that its form can be changed.
But nobody understands the borders of its change.
Electron cannot disappear .
Electron can only change its form.
So, what are the borders of this change?
5.
According to the law of conservation and transformation energy:
a)
Electron, having the geometrical form of a sphere,
loses their volume (density) and turns into an indefinitely
flat circle (C/D=pi).
What does “indefinitely flat circle “ mean?
It means, that we cannot reach Absolute Vacuum T=0K
and we cannot reach density of the electron in the rest .
In the interaction of the electron with vacuum
transformation of the kinetic energy of an electron ( E=hw)
in its potential energy E=Mc^2 take place.
c)
It is impossible to understand the “last essence of electron”
dividing its geometrical form from energy.
The geometrical form and energy of electron
are united together inseparably .
To the various forms of an electron
the various kinds of energy correspond.
==================
Another example.
SRT says mass and energy become infinite at the speed of light c=1.
But only quantum of light has speed c=1.
All other particles have speed v=s/t and they cannot reach speed c=1.
Quantum of light is a real particle.
Its parameters are not infinity but limited.
So, which form does a quantum of light have?
Only form of a indefinitely flat circle (C/D=pi).
What does "an indefinitely flat circle " mean?
It means, that we cannot reach Absolute Vacuum T=0K
and we cannot reach density of the quantum of light .
================
Nowadays, the law of preservation and transformation of energy is
received in physics as a simple bookkeeping calculation of debit-credit.
It is a primitive judgment about one of the most important Law in Nature.
Why?
Because debit-credit is “ a bookkeeping symmetry law”.
And the life begins with disturb of symmetry.
The occurrence of Life is connected not with symmetry,
but with breaking of symmetry.
For something to happen there has to be a "broken symmetry".
1.
That would have to be the initial force which acted upon the object –
i.e. the bow string, the sling shot, etc.....
or, if there was no differential force,
it's just the nature of the object to sit awhile and just rest in place - kind of like me.
2.
Thus...inertia can be briefly described as the nature of an object to resist changes
to its current state. (rotating, moving in a straight line, or stationary)
3.
An old professor of mine used to say
that anyone who can answer that question (the one you posed) would win a Nobel Prize.
So we can offer explanations in terms of energy, momentum,
or the Higgs Boson, but what it comes down to
is that Nature just behaves that way. Why? We're working on it...
That would have to be the initial force which acted upon the object –
i.e. the bow string, the sling shot, etc.....
or, if there was no differential force,
it's just the nature of the object to sit awhile and just rest in place - kind of like me.
2.
Thus...inertia can be briefly described as the nature of an object to resist changes
to its current state. (rotating, moving in a straight line, or stationary)
3.
An old professor of mine used to say
that anyone who can answer that question (the one you posed) would win a Nobel Prize.
So we can offer explanations in terms of energy, momentum,
or the Higgs Boson, but what it comes down to
is that Nature just behaves that way. Why? We're working on it...
What is the first law of Universe ?
============
Now it is consider that Newton / Einstein,s laws
of gravitation are the first laws of Universe.
============
1.
Newton was a clever man therefore when he discovered his
" law of gravitation" he quickly understood that
soon or later the all matter in the Universe had to gather
in the " singular point".
And because this effect does not happen in the Nature,
Newton , being very religius man , thought that only God,s
power did not give the matter to gather in a " singular point".
2.
And then atheistic time came .
They decided :
As God does not exist, so the all matter in Universe
must gather in a " singular point".
================
I don,t agree that Newton / Einstein,s laws
of gravitation are the first laws of Universe.
Why?
1.
Take simple atom: proton and electron,( small distances).
Nobody interests in gravitation interaction between
proton and electron . There is not any theory about
gravitation interaction between proton and electron .
Everybody interests only in electrical ( nuclear)
interaction between them.
It means that Newton / Einstein,s laws of gravitation
are local and limited.
This law in the small ( nuclear) distance does not work.
2.
Take Universe ( cosmic distances).
There is not theory about gravitation interaction between
galaxy A. and galaxy Z. We don,t need it.
Why? For example.
Let,s imagine of all apple- trees on our Earth
as a galaxy, and apples as stars.
Nobody will interest in the interaction between
an apple- tree in New York ( galaxy A.) and
an apple- tree (cherry-tree) in Varanasi (galaxy Z.).
It means that Newton / Einstein,s laws of gravitation
are local and limited.
This law in the big cosmic distance does not work.
3.
Conclusion.
Newton / Einstein,s laws of gravitation cannot be
“The first law of Universe.”
================
What can be the first law of Universe?
1.
All galaxyies (gravitation fields) exist in Vacuum (T=0K)
therefore Vacuum can be “The first law of Universe.”
Then we must ask questions:
" How is it possible to break homogeneous
and symmetric Vacuum: T=0K ?”,
“How in Vacuum could gravitation fields be created?”,
“How in Vacuum can the process of star formation begin?”
===================
If somebody doubt that from cold Vacuum T=0K
the hot stars can be created, please, remember that
The Second law of thermodynamics does not forbid this possibility.
============
Now it is consider that Newton / Einstein,s laws
of gravitation are the first laws of Universe.
============
1.
Newton was a clever man therefore when he discovered his
" law of gravitation" he quickly understood that
soon or later the all matter in the Universe had to gather
in the " singular point".
And because this effect does not happen in the Nature,
Newton , being very religius man , thought that only God,s
power did not give the matter to gather in a " singular point".
2.
And then atheistic time came .
They decided :
As God does not exist, so the all matter in Universe
must gather in a " singular point".
================
I don,t agree that Newton / Einstein,s laws
of gravitation are the first laws of Universe.
Why?
1.
Take simple atom: proton and electron,( small distances).
Nobody interests in gravitation interaction between
proton and electron . There is not any theory about
gravitation interaction between proton and electron .
Everybody interests only in electrical ( nuclear)
interaction between them.
It means that Newton / Einstein,s laws of gravitation
are local and limited.
This law in the small ( nuclear) distance does not work.
2.
Take Universe ( cosmic distances).
There is not theory about gravitation interaction between
galaxy A. and galaxy Z. We don,t need it.
Why? For example.
Let,s imagine of all apple- trees on our Earth
as a galaxy, and apples as stars.
Nobody will interest in the interaction between
an apple- tree in New York ( galaxy A.) and
an apple- tree (cherry-tree) in Varanasi (galaxy Z.).
It means that Newton / Einstein,s laws of gravitation
are local and limited.
This law in the big cosmic distance does not work.
3.
Conclusion.
Newton / Einstein,s laws of gravitation cannot be
“The first law of Universe.”
================
What can be the first law of Universe?
1.
All galaxyies (gravitation fields) exist in Vacuum (T=0K)
therefore Vacuum can be “The first law of Universe.”
Then we must ask questions:
" How is it possible to break homogeneous
and symmetric Vacuum: T=0K ?”,
“How in Vacuum could gravitation fields be created?”,
“How in Vacuum can the process of star formation begin?”
===================
If somebody doubt that from cold Vacuum T=0K
the hot stars can be created, please, remember that
The Second law of thermodynamics does not forbid this possibility.
The words “God”, “soul”, “religion”,
“ dualism of consciousness”, “human being”
are possible to explain with the physical formulas and laws.
===============
THE GENESIS.
==============
1.
T = 0K.
2.
C/D=pi , E=Mc^2, R/N=k , h = 0 , i^2=-1 .
3.
h = 1, c=1. ( light quanta).
4.
h = h /2pi , c>1.
E = hw, e^2 = hca ( electron).
The Lorentz transformations.
5.
Star formation:
e- - k - He II - He I - rotating He - thermonuclear reaction:
a) hw > kT
hw = kT
c) kT > hw
6.
p ( proton)
7.
Evolution of interaction:
a) electromagnetic,
nuclear,
c) biological.
8.
Laws:
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy.
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / law.
c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ law.
9.
Psychology: dualism of consciousness.
The theory and practice.
===================
“ dualism of consciousness”, “human being”
are possible to explain with the physical formulas and laws.
===============
THE GENESIS.
==============
1.
T = 0K.
2.
C/D=pi , E=Mc^2, R/N=k , h = 0 , i^2=-1 .
3.
h = 1, c=1. ( light quanta).
4.
h = h /2pi , c>1.
E = hw, e^2 = hca ( electron).
The Lorentz transformations.
5.
Star formation:
e- - k - He II - He I - rotating He - thermonuclear reaction:
a) hw > kT
hw = kTc) kT > hw
6.
p ( proton)
7.
Evolution of interaction:
a) electromagnetic,
nuclear,c) biological.
8.
Laws:
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy.
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / law. c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ law.
9.
Psychology: dualism of consciousness.
The theory and practice.
===================
Subconsciousness and Quantum theory.
Some psychologists compare our consciousness with iceberg.
The small visible part of this iceberg is our logical consciousness.
And the unseen (underwater) greater part of the iceberg is
our subconsciousness. Therefore they say, the man uses
only 10% of possibility of his brain.
And if it so, why doesn,t anybody teach us how
to develop our subconsciousness.
I think it is because there are few people who understand
that the processes of subconsciousness are connected
with quantum processes. The subconsciousness theory
closely united with quantum theory.
These quantum processes which take place in lifeless
(inanimate) nature also take place in our brain.
Our brain can be the laboratory in which we can
test the truth of quantum theory.
=============
1. Nonlinear dynamic process.
2. Vacuum process.
3. Superconductive process.
4. Holographic process.
5. etc.
=================
Dr. G. Sergeev (admiral of navy USSR)
in the beginning of 80 years wrote:
‘Experiences of study the electrical power of a human brain
show that the brain of the man is capable to create effect
of superconductivity similar to electrical phenomena
in a lifeless nature ‘.
Some psychologists compare our consciousness with iceberg.
The small visible part of this iceberg is our logical consciousness.
And the unseen (underwater) greater part of the iceberg is
our subconsciousness. Therefore they say, the man uses
only 10% of possibility of his brain.
And if it so, why doesn,t anybody teach us how
to develop our subconsciousness.
I think it is because there are few people who understand
that the processes of subconsciousness are connected
with quantum processes. The subconsciousness theory
closely united with quantum theory.
These quantum processes which take place in lifeless
(inanimate) nature also take place in our brain.
Our brain can be the laboratory in which we can
test the truth of quantum theory.
=============
1. Nonlinear dynamic process.
2. Vacuum process.
3. Superconductive process.
4. Holographic process.
5. etc.
=================
Dr. G. Sergeev (admiral of navy USSR)
in the beginning of 80 years wrote:
‘Experiences of study the electrical power of a human brain
show that the brain of the man is capable to create effect
of superconductivity similar to electrical phenomena
in a lifeless nature ‘.
A comment to one of my article.
===========
NOTHING LIKE A VACUUM is a great introduction to what we think we know
about the vacuum, Thanks!
http://www.calphysi cs.org/haisch/ matthews. html
(more interdispersed below)
On 30 Mar 2007 14:42:54 -0700, sadovnik <israsad@yahoo. com> wrote:
> Vacuum, ideal gas, radiation, virtuality.
> ===========
>
> At first let's think about radiation.
> The radiation is closely tied with thermodynamics.
> To understand the processes of thermodynamics the
> scientists used the conception of " ideal gas".
> What does " ideal gas" mean?
> Now everybody says the " ideal gas"
> is an abstract conception.
> I don't believe in it. I don't believe that real processes
> can be explained with the help of abstract conception.
> Now they say the abstract conception nearly coincided
> with the real processes in the nature.
> What is the result of this mentality?
> As a result of this mentality the conception of
> " virtuality", "viptual particles", " virtual displacement"
> in Quantum physics were absorbed. But Feynman said that
> the conception of " virtuality" is abstract. So, we see, the
> adoption of one abstraction gives birth to another one.
> And it may go on to infinity. To stop this senseless abstraction
> we must understand what the " ideal gas" really means.
> The " ideal gas " was given temperature zero degree Kelvin.
> ============
It is true, virtual particles lack absolute identity, they expose
their potentials briefly and do not persist, they lack "being". But
all electrons and positrons share this ghostly existence yet it is
useful to discus them.
> a)
> The Classical physics says, that when we reach
> the temperature T=0K all moving of particles
> stops, and the Energy of this space is equal to zero.
> It means that the space T=0K is died one.
> Therefore it is impossible something to say about T=0K.
>
> But Quantum physics says that the Energy of this space
> is not equal to zero. Quantum physics says that in T=0K
> " virtual" particles exist. Why does nobody recognize the
> geometrical and physical parameters of " virtual" particles?
> ============ ===
We know the behavior of these in quantum configuration state space
according to matrix mechanics. Each has two potentials, one right or
left handed and the other up or down, electrons ^>, v>, and positrons
^< and v<.
Electrons of like spin (up or down) interact by cancelling of equal
and opposite potentials via a virtual positron (vacuum energy), or
cross product of the two electrons, ^> X ^> = v<, there by occupying
independent state.
> Planck studied the space of an absolute black body.
> Laue called the model of absolute black body
> " Kirchhoff vacuum". Planck proposed , if light quanta
> comes to the space of absolute black body and does not
> reflect back the death of warmth and radiation will come.
> As such death isn't observed Planck suggested an idea:
> absolute black body radiates light quanta, which is called
> Planck,s coefficient (h).
> The Planck,s coefficient (h) means the inner impulse of particle.
Yes. it is units of action, or flux, Carver Mead calls them fluxoids.
> It means, it doesn't depend on another forces.
> The same is taken place with the speed of light quantum.
> Its speed doesn't depend on another forces, another sources.
> The physicists say that light quantum has Planck,s coefficient
> equal to one (h=1) and its speed is also equal to one (c=1).
We also see action at light speed locally, but action may be slower or
faster relatively.
Mead points out that the speed of quantum action is actually twice
light speed, but we only see light speed because the action has two
components, lateral and transverse such that the lateral speed is c=1.
> Thus we can understand the interaction between impulse
> and speed of light quanta, why light quanta has the same
> constant qualities of impulse and speed .
> But if the impulse and speed of light quanta don't depend
> on another forces and sources so, it means
> light quanta is independent , privileged particle.
I would disagree, or not say it that way. If it was independent we
could not slow light down, in a cold consondate. Locally it may still
be light speed, but what is manifest in our realm is slow light.
The light is not clocked independently but is clocked by its surroundings.
> ============ ==
> I tried to explain my ideas simply.
> I don't know if you understand me.
I think I understand you. Your metaphysical model is very cool.
However, when it comes to physics, I am not interested in metaphysical
models. Experiment is the only way to see exactly what is happening.
I do not expect that nature observes any such model.
> Maybe you, like others, will ignore my article.
> But it means nothing. I know that I am right.
> Why?
> Before everything has begun from VACUUM,
> and still nobody knows what it is.
I see no reason to not consider the vacuum ordinary energy from the
early universe consisting of uniform low frequency signals at about 3
degrees kelvin and down. It looks like zero because it is the lowest
energy. There is no lower energy it can flow to or be absorbed by.
I can't say how much of the 185 GeV/cm^3 is made of light (two
potentials) and how much is neutrinos (one potential) but I can say
with some confidence that it is composed of fluxoids or h units of
action.
We find increacing energy density of photons in an inverse relation,
from the highest energy down to the zero point. It is reasonable to
expect this relation to continue below the zero point down to the
energy of h, a single fluxoid. This is sufficient to account for the
vacuum energy. We can explain why we do not normally measure below
the zero point. There is no reason to think it is somehow different
than other energy.
> =========
http://www.socratus .com
What you say is true, for the most part, but is not the complete
truth. It may be suffucuent truth for most purposes but is not
sufficient to help me map quantum configuration state space to our
space and time.
For example, you make the quanta round so pi falls out easily. The
quanta is an orthogonal twist, not a circle, according to measurement,
I need to look a little more deeply to see how pi emerges. I will not
accept anything by definition.
I also object to putting God in the quanta. God gets in the quanta
because it's action is determined by the entire universe acting around
it. Its being is a simple propensity to act, consiousness or choice
belongs to the arrangement of the quantum system it belongs to, not
the quanta intrisically. Uncertainty is accounted for by missing
information about the quantum arrangement as we most often only
observe events representing a sparce random sampling of the quantum.
Where we have complete information, there is zero uncertainty.
I do think there is value in your model which is more sencible than
the standard model in my book. It just is not enough for me and I
choose to separate the spiriitual from the physical in the context of
science.
Jim
"Jim Whitescarver" <jimscarver@gmail.com>
===========
NOTHING LIKE A VACUUM is a great introduction to what we think we know
about the vacuum, Thanks!
http://www.calphysi cs.org/haisch/ matthews. html
(more interdispersed below)
On 30 Mar 2007 14:42:54 -0700, sadovnik <israsad@yahoo. com> wrote:
> Vacuum, ideal gas, radiation, virtuality.
> ===========
>
> At first let's think about radiation.
> The radiation is closely tied with thermodynamics.
> To understand the processes of thermodynamics the
> scientists used the conception of " ideal gas".
> What does " ideal gas" mean?
> Now everybody says the " ideal gas"
> is an abstract conception.
> I don't believe in it. I don't believe that real processes
> can be explained with the help of abstract conception.
> Now they say the abstract conception nearly coincided
> with the real processes in the nature.
> What is the result of this mentality?
> As a result of this mentality the conception of
> " virtuality", "viptual particles", " virtual displacement"
> in Quantum physics were absorbed. But Feynman said that
> the conception of " virtuality" is abstract. So, we see, the
> adoption of one abstraction gives birth to another one.
> And it may go on to infinity. To stop this senseless abstraction
> we must understand what the " ideal gas" really means.
> The " ideal gas " was given temperature zero degree Kelvin.
> ============
It is true, virtual particles lack absolute identity, they expose
their potentials briefly and do not persist, they lack "being". But
all electrons and positrons share this ghostly existence yet it is
useful to discus them.
> a)
> The Classical physics says, that when we reach
> the temperature T=0K all moving of particles
> stops, and the Energy of this space is equal to zero.
> It means that the space T=0K is died one.
> Therefore it is impossible something to say about T=0K.
>
> But Quantum physics says that the Energy of this space
> is not equal to zero. Quantum physics says that in T=0K
> " virtual" particles exist. Why does nobody recognize the
> geometrical and physical parameters of " virtual" particles?
> ============ ===
We know the behavior of these in quantum configuration state space
according to matrix mechanics. Each has two potentials, one right or
left handed and the other up or down, electrons ^>, v>, and positrons
^< and v<.
Electrons of like spin (up or down) interact by cancelling of equal
and opposite potentials via a virtual positron (vacuum energy), or
cross product of the two electrons, ^> X ^> = v<, there by occupying
independent state.
> Planck studied the space of an absolute black body.
> Laue called the model of absolute black body
> " Kirchhoff vacuum". Planck proposed , if light quanta
> comes to the space of absolute black body and does not
> reflect back the death of warmth and radiation will come.
> As such death isn't observed Planck suggested an idea:
> absolute black body radiates light quanta, which is called
> Planck,s coefficient (h).
> The Planck,s coefficient (h) means the inner impulse of particle.
Yes. it is units of action, or flux, Carver Mead calls them fluxoids.
> It means, it doesn't depend on another forces.
> The same is taken place with the speed of light quantum.
> Its speed doesn't depend on another forces, another sources.
> The physicists say that light quantum has Planck,s coefficient
> equal to one (h=1) and its speed is also equal to one (c=1).
We also see action at light speed locally, but action may be slower or
faster relatively.
Mead points out that the speed of quantum action is actually twice
light speed, but we only see light speed because the action has two
components, lateral and transverse such that the lateral speed is c=1.
> Thus we can understand the interaction between impulse
> and speed of light quanta, why light quanta has the same
> constant qualities of impulse and speed .
> But if the impulse and speed of light quanta don't depend
> on another forces and sources so, it means
> light quanta is independent , privileged particle.
I would disagree, or not say it that way. If it was independent we
could not slow light down, in a cold consondate. Locally it may still
be light speed, but what is manifest in our realm is slow light.
The light is not clocked independently but is clocked by its surroundings.
> ============ ==
> I tried to explain my ideas simply.
> I don't know if you understand me.
I think I understand you. Your metaphysical model is very cool.
However, when it comes to physics, I am not interested in metaphysical
models. Experiment is the only way to see exactly what is happening.
I do not expect that nature observes any such model.
> Maybe you, like others, will ignore my article.
> But it means nothing. I know that I am right.
> Why?
> Before everything has begun from VACUUM,
> and still nobody knows what it is.
I see no reason to not consider the vacuum ordinary energy from the
early universe consisting of uniform low frequency signals at about 3
degrees kelvin and down. It looks like zero because it is the lowest
energy. There is no lower energy it can flow to or be absorbed by.
I can't say how much of the 185 GeV/cm^3 is made of light (two
potentials) and how much is neutrinos (one potential) but I can say
with some confidence that it is composed of fluxoids or h units of
action.
We find increacing energy density of photons in an inverse relation,
from the highest energy down to the zero point. It is reasonable to
expect this relation to continue below the zero point down to the
energy of h, a single fluxoid. This is sufficient to account for the
vacuum energy. We can explain why we do not normally measure below
the zero point. There is no reason to think it is somehow different
than other energy.
> =========
http://www.socratus .com
What you say is true, for the most part, but is not the complete
truth. It may be suffucuent truth for most purposes but is not
sufficient to help me map quantum configuration state space to our
space and time.
For example, you make the quanta round so pi falls out easily. The
quanta is an orthogonal twist, not a circle, according to measurement,
I need to look a little more deeply to see how pi emerges. I will not
accept anything by definition.
I also object to putting God in the quanta. God gets in the quanta
because it's action is determined by the entire universe acting around
it. Its being is a simple propensity to act, consiousness or choice
belongs to the arrangement of the quantum system it belongs to, not
the quanta intrisically. Uncertainty is accounted for by missing
information about the quantum arrangement as we most often only
observe events representing a sparce random sampling of the quantum.
Where we have complete information, there is zero uncertainty.
I do think there is value in your model which is more sencible than
the standard model in my book. It just is not enough for me and I
choose to separate the spiriitual from the physical in the context of
science.
Jim
"Jim Whitescarver" <jimscarver@gmail.com>
is it possible that the things that we cannot observe are simply at a higher "octave" of light than is visible to the eye. Can Einsteins 4th dimensional space exist at a higher frequency of light?
To oracle 1
==========
1.
What is 4th dimensional space?
It is a Vacuum.
2.
Vacuum exist independently from everything.
3.
Can we, in some way, to observe processes in
this 4th dimensional space?
Can we in some way to observe holography processes in the nature ?
Can we have parapsychology abilities?
Maybe.
If we can use ability of our light quanta at a higher frequency .
==========
1.
What is 4th dimensional space?
It is a Vacuum.
2.
Vacuum exist independently from everything.
3.
Can we, in some way, to observe processes in
this 4th dimensional space?
Can we in some way to observe holography processes in the nature ?
Can we have parapsychology abilities?
Maybe.
If we can use ability of our light quanta at a higher frequency .
QUOTE (s0cratus+Apr 3 2007, 10:37 PM)
Can we, in some way, to observe processes in
this 4th dimensional space?
Can we in some way to observe holography processes in the nature ?
Can we have parapsychology abilities?
Maybe.
If we can use ability of our light quanta at a higher frequency .
Parapsycological ability....It happens all the time!
Stories about such things are not lies, they are truths that people do not want to believe. I have done things no man will understand and this leads to difficulty, in the explanations which science does not recognise as valid and valuable. Telekinesis...Levitation...Astral travelling...Time travel...Mind reading...X-ray vision...participation in Parallel Realities and Channeling information, I have done, self-hypnosis and trance induction are easy, meditation is a given, I have done these sometimes by accident and sometimes by force of will.
These ability are scoffed at and people prefer to laugh at what the adept has learned from lifes offerings.
I continue to make forward strides in my abilities but not many believe that I have done these things or will again, when conditions are right.
I am very alone but not lonely because i am content that I am a particularly open mind and heart in a world that is very much afraid of persons like myself.
One day the average person will do these things and life will be more open and aware of the forces of energy we have at our fingertips.
Until then...I will remain a leper to science...until then i can only try to open minds and aid in any understanding of the phenomenon I have touched....funny thing is not many even wish to know the extent of the things I have partaken.
They believe me to be a liar and a fake, i may be assured. It is a joy to know though, that I am not. What I am is something of an alchemist and self-healing magician, what I am is a human who lacks so much need of control and limitations in the life. What I am is a (soul) explorer who is courageous and unafraid to try what most will only laugh at.
The paranormal awaits any one willing to take some time to understand and participate with it. The paranormal is part of lifes conditions. Light is understanding the gulf between Science and Godhead. At least you sir have the brave heart to try and inquire about the gulf, as I have.
Peace!
Episode from the history of physics.
=============
It was time when idea of vacuum was clear to everybody
because if the planets travel without friction in it,
it means the vacuum is an empty space.
Then by practical experience it was discovered
that the light waves are transverse waves.
But the transverse waves can distribute only in solid environments.
Then there is a strange situation:
on one hand, for the light spreading in Vacuum there should
completely be absence of friction , i.e. space should be empty;
on the other hand Vacuum should have solid steel structure.
Such combination of different characteristics
of vacuum are not explained logically.
And then all physicists became crazy.
Why?
Because it has turned out as in an old joke:
" If on a cage of a tiger you will see
inscription “the cat” do not believe your eyes. "
All physicists see, that vacuum is an empty space,
but they did not believe their eyes and composed
new and new theories about it.
All these theories have appeared wrong and
they are covered with a dust on the shelves of a history of a science.
It is a pity, that there was nobody who could stop them
in that critical moment and say:
" Listen, friend.
You see, that all planets move without friction in vacuum.
It means that vacuum is an empty space.
So, don't touch vacuum, leave it in rest.
It is more cleverly to pay attention on the light,
on the quantum of light.
Think, what form quantum of light must have,
how it must act that you have an illusion
that vacuum is a firm, steel space.”
Р.S.
If you think that situation with vacuum
is clear and somebody understand the
structure of it, you are mistaken.
=====================
=============
It was time when idea of vacuum was clear to everybody
because if the planets travel without friction in it,
it means the vacuum is an empty space.
Then by practical experience it was discovered
that the light waves are transverse waves.
But the transverse waves can distribute only in solid environments.
Then there is a strange situation:
on one hand, for the light spreading in Vacuum there should
completely be absence of friction , i.e. space should be empty;
on the other hand Vacuum should have solid steel structure.
Such combination of different characteristics
of vacuum are not explained logically.
And then all physicists became crazy.
Why?
Because it has turned out as in an old joke:
" If on a cage of a tiger you will see
inscription “the cat” do not believe your eyes. "
All physicists see, that vacuum is an empty space,
but they did not believe their eyes and composed
new and new theories about it.
All these theories have appeared wrong and
they are covered with a dust on the shelves of a history of a science.
It is a pity, that there was nobody who could stop them
in that critical moment and say:
" Listen, friend.
You see, that all planets move without friction in vacuum.
It means that vacuum is an empty space.
So, don't touch vacuum, leave it in rest.
It is more cleverly to pay attention on the light,
on the quantum of light.
Think, what form quantum of light must have,
how it must act that you have an illusion
that vacuum is a firm, steel space.”
Р.S.
If you think that situation with vacuum
is clear and somebody understand the
structure of it, you are mistaken.
=====================
Socrates, I believe it is observable. A camera lens can capture light at a frequency higher than that of the human eye. A photograph freezes the light and allows us to view it from a different perspective. What is produced are holographic images that follow a geometric pattern of a spinning double helix. The helix are like fractals in that they exist themselves as whole but also as part of or within other helix. The images are best seen in grass or trees and are particularly clear around hard stones like granite. You may wonder why everyone doesn't see them, it's because we already assume what is in the photograph and there is an opaque quality to the images. It helps to lighten and darken the contrast of the photograph to see them. If you want an arbitrary example....look at Januarys national geographic magazine. Go to page 45. Turn the periodical towards your right so that the white words are on on their side on the left. keeping the book in this position put your thumb one inch from the top of the right side of the page so that the tip of your finger is on the shadow of the pole. Now look at the space between your finger, the top of the page, and the shadow of the pole in the photograph. You will see an image there. If you don't see it change your perspective slightly. It is not the only image. There are many. That one was just an easier one to point out.
Vacuum , “ideal gas “and particles.
===============
To solve some difficult problem the physicists
create a simple abstract model.
Beginning from this simple model they learned
to solve practical and difficult tasks.
In that time it was the right way to solve that problem.
Take, for example, the theory of “ideal gas “.
The " ideal gas " represents one theoretical model of gas
and the physicists say it does not exist in nature.
It was found, that properties of real gases are very close
to “ideal gas”. The result “ very close “ was quite satisfied
for physicists. But from time of creation the theory of
" ideal gas " about 100 years have passed and the
quantum theory was created. And from the quantum theory
we know that to use the expression "very close" it is impossible.
Why?
Because very small (insignificant) changes in the microworld
is a cause of radical transformation in system.
We must be very cautious, using words
"very close …, almost equally”.
=========…
I offer to consider model "ideal gas" as real model of the vacuum.
Why?
Because the temperature of " ideal gas " is equal to -273 degrees.
And temperature of pure vacuum is the same.
Now it is considered that the Universe,
as an absolute frame of reference is in a condition of T = 2,7K
(rests of relic radiation of the Big Bang ).
But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will change
and decrease down to Т=0К, isn’t it?
Now everyone knows, that absolute temperature T=0K
cannot be reached. But is it enough reason to think
that space T=0K doesn't exist?
If Columbus did not discover America,
there was not America, was it?
We have all theoretical and logical rights to investigate
the vacuum T=0K.
==========
Einstein said,
"… we have not proven that the Aether does not exist, we
have merely proven that we do not need it (for computations)"
It is correct.
Vacuum does not have influence on behaviour of particles.
Therefore we will say nothing about vacuum.
But...
What is it possible to say about particles in vacuum?
1.
The first question: “ Can they have volume?”
No.
Because according to J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
temperature reaches -273 degree the volume
disappears. The physicists say, if the particle
has completely lost its volume then:
a)
the substance, matter disappears
the physical parameters of particles becomes infinite.
But such statement contradicts the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy".
And then we must understand what the sense of the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy" is,
we should understand and accept that
when volume of the particles disappear
they become "indefinitely flat figures ".
What do "indefinitely flat figures " mean?
They mean, that we cannot reach Absolute Vacuum T=0K
and we also cannot reach density of the particle in the T=0K.
The “ Charles law” was confirmed by other physicists:
Gay-Lussac ( 1802), W. Nernst ( 1910), A. Einstein ( 1925) .
These "indefinitely flat figures " have the geometrical form
of a circle, as from all flat figures the circle has the most
optimal form: C/D=pi= 3,14.
P.S.
We can see the same situation in quantum theory too,
when electron interacts with vacuum, its physical parameters
become infinite. We see the “relay race” of misunderstanding
in the physics, which goes from one generation to another one,
only because at the beginning the " ideal gas " wasn’t understood.
2.
Let us take some area of Vacuum and mark it with letter R.
The number of particles in this area we will mark with letter N.
Then every particle of this area has gravity/ mass of rest: R/N= k.
3.
Classic physics asserts, that in a Vacuum T=0K the motion
of particles stops, and the energy of Vacuum is equal to zero.
The quantum physics asserts, that in a Vacuum T=0K there is
motion of particles, and the energy of Vacuum is not zero.
Therefore, let us take some energy area of Vacuum and
mark it with letter E.
The mass of this energy area of Vacuum we will
mark with letter M.
Then every particle of this area has energy/mass of rest:
E/M= c^2, ( E=Mc^2, M=Ec^2.)
4.
As these particles are in the state of rest condition
their impulse is equal to zero ( h=0).
5.
Mathematical point.
In mathematics, such condition of the particles in Vacuum
is characterized with the imaginary quantity : i^2 = -1.
==============================
Now we have the whole bouquet of formulas to begin
to paint the picture of creating the Existence.
P.S.
The quantum physics approves that “virtual particles”
exist in Vacuum
Astrophysics approve that “ latent mass, invisible
particles, dark matter ” exist in Vacuum.
Everything was created from them.
But nobody knows what they are.
Now maybe somebody will understand these
“virtual, invisible, latent particles”.
=====================
===============
To solve some difficult problem the physicists
create a simple abstract model.
Beginning from this simple model they learned
to solve practical and difficult tasks.
In that time it was the right way to solve that problem.
Take, for example, the theory of “ideal gas “.
The " ideal gas " represents one theoretical model of gas
and the physicists say it does not exist in nature.
It was found, that properties of real gases are very close
to “ideal gas”. The result “ very close “ was quite satisfied
for physicists. But from time of creation the theory of
" ideal gas " about 100 years have passed and the
quantum theory was created. And from the quantum theory
we know that to use the expression "very close" it is impossible.
Why?
Because very small (insignificant) changes in the microworld
is a cause of radical transformation in system.
We must be very cautious, using words
"very close …, almost equally”.
=========…
I offer to consider model "ideal gas" as real model of the vacuum.
Why?
Because the temperature of " ideal gas " is equal to -273 degrees.
And temperature of pure vacuum is the same.
Now it is considered that the Universe,
as an absolute frame of reference is in a condition of T = 2,7K
(rests of relic radiation of the Big Bang ).
But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will change
and decrease down to Т=0К, isn’t it?
Now everyone knows, that absolute temperature T=0K
cannot be reached. But is it enough reason to think
that space T=0K doesn't exist?
If Columbus did not discover America,
there was not America, was it?
We have all theoretical and logical rights to investigate
the vacuum T=0K.
==========
Einstein said,
"… we have not proven that the Aether does not exist, we
have merely proven that we do not need it (for computations)"
It is correct.
Vacuum does not have influence on behaviour of particles.
Therefore we will say nothing about vacuum.
But...
What is it possible to say about particles in vacuum?
1.
The first question: “ Can they have volume?”
No.
Because according to J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
temperature reaches -273 degree the volume
disappears. The physicists say, if the particle
has completely lost its volume then:
a)
the substance, matter disappears
the physical parameters of particles becomes infinite.
But such statement contradicts the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy".
And then we must understand what the sense of the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy" is,
we should understand and accept that
when volume of the particles disappear
they become "indefinitely flat figures ".
What do "indefinitely flat figures " mean?
They mean, that we cannot reach Absolute Vacuum T=0K
and we also cannot reach density of the particle in the T=0K.
The “ Charles law” was confirmed by other physicists:
Gay-Lussac ( 1802), W. Nernst ( 1910), A. Einstein ( 1925) .
These "indefinitely flat figures " have the geometrical form
of a circle, as from all flat figures the circle has the most
optimal form: C/D=pi= 3,14.
P.S.
We can see the same situation in quantum theory too,
when electron interacts with vacuum, its physical parameters
become infinite. We see the “relay race” of misunderstanding
in the physics, which goes from one generation to another one,
only because at the beginning the " ideal gas " wasn’t understood.
2.
Let us take some area of Vacuum and mark it with letter R.
The number of particles in this area we will mark with letter N.
Then every particle of this area has gravity/ mass of rest: R/N= k.
3.
Classic physics asserts, that in a Vacuum T=0K the motion
of particles stops, and the energy of Vacuum is equal to zero.
The quantum physics asserts, that in a Vacuum T=0K there is
motion of particles, and the energy of Vacuum is not zero.
Therefore, let us take some energy area of Vacuum and
mark it with letter E.
The mass of this energy area of Vacuum we will
mark with letter M.
Then every particle of this area has energy/mass of rest:
E/M= c^2, ( E=Mc^2, M=Ec^2.)
4.
As these particles are in the state of rest condition
their impulse is equal to zero ( h=0).
5.
Mathematical point.
In mathematics, such condition of the particles in Vacuum
is characterized with the imaginary quantity : i^2 = -1.
==============================
Now we have the whole bouquet of formulas to begin
to paint the picture of creating the Existence.
P.S.
The quantum physics approves that “virtual particles”
exist in Vacuum
Astrophysics approve that “ latent mass, invisible
particles, dark matter ” exist in Vacuum.
Everything was created from them.
But nobody knows what they are.
Now maybe somebody will understand these
“virtual, invisible, latent particles”.
=====================
When I read the articles and comments
about basic problemes in physics
(quantum of light, electron, dark matter,
vacuum and etc....) when I think,
how clever all these authors are .
I am surprised, reading that clever answers
everyone gives , protecting his correctness.
They give various examples (sometimes very practical,
sometimes abstract) to prove their truth
It is nice, it is wonderful.
But...
But when the speech goes about vacuum T=0K
in the physicists brains the screen flashes
" It is forbidden to think " and brains of these
clever people stop to work.
Why?
Maybe the interdiction of Official church of Physics works.
Maybe the law of ethics works:
" Good bourgeois families don't speak about it ".
Maybe our school, education can be guilty in it.
For some historian of science it will be interesting
to analyze, how in the brains of modern physicists
and philosophers this taboo was arisen.
===============
about basic problemes in physics
(quantum of light, electron, dark matter,
vacuum and etc....) when I think,
how clever all these authors are .
I am surprised, reading that clever answers
everyone gives , protecting his correctness.
They give various examples (sometimes very practical,
sometimes abstract) to prove their truth
It is nice, it is wonderful.
But...
But when the speech goes about vacuum T=0K
in the physicists brains the screen flashes
" It is forbidden to think " and brains of these
clever people stop to work.
Why?
Maybe the interdiction of Official church of Physics works.
Maybe the law of ethics works:
" Good bourgeois families don't speak about it ".
Maybe our school, education can be guilty in it.
For some historian of science it will be interesting
to analyze, how in the brains of modern physicists
and philosophers this taboo was arisen.
===============
How quantum of light can move in vacuum?
--------------------------
The planets travel without friction in vacuum,
it means the vacuum is an empty space.
The light waves are transverse waves therefore
it means the vacuum must be as firm as steel
How quantum of light can move in such
unintelligibly vacuum?
--------------------------------
The common answer is:
The point is that light consists actually of two waves,
an electric wave and a magnetic wave.
According to Maxwell's equations, both induce and thus
maintain each other mutually, and thus there is no need
for a medium and the light can propagate in a vacuum.
==========
I also studied this conception 50 years ago.
But ...50 years have pasted...
And now I cannot take the school conception as true one.
Why ? Because:
1.
I think it is impossible that electric and magnetic
waves are existed at the same time. Between them
very short rupture of time must be.
Then in some moment light will be an electrical wave,
and in another moment a magnetic wave will be .
But this electrical waves must be transverse waves,
it means, that vacuum is as firm as steel.
Unless, am I wrong ?
2.
It is 100% right that " an electric wave and a magnetic wave,
according to Maxwell's equations, both induce and thus
maintain each other mutually". But this statement
is right only according to classic ( macro) electrodynamics.
When Maxwell's electrodynamics is used in the microworld,
then it needs to take an idea of " quantum of light ".
3.
It is not correct to use common word "light" in the quantum theory.
The word "light" is possible to use on a beach, in a market
in every another place, but not in the quantum theory.
Here it is necessary to say " quantum of light ".
4.
And now everybody knows that light quanta is
a wave and particle at the same time.
And when somebody says : " that light consists actually
of two waves, an electric wave and a magnetic wave " ,
He forgets photon as a particle. The usage of only waves
abilities is not enough to explain photon’s moving.
The picture of photon acting is not full.
Then.......
If we want to see the whole picture of photon’s moving
we must imagine that photon in its moving jumps
from an electric wave to a magnetic wave and back,
from a magnetic wave to an electric wave and back,
and back........
I see my explanation is difficult.
Maybe it is better and simpler to imagine the photon
driving on a bicycle when one wheel is an electric wave
and another wheel is a magnetic wave.
Sorry.
I only want to say that to use sentences :
“ light quanta is wave and particle at the same time”,
“ light consists actually of two waves, an electric wave
and a magnetic wave in its moving in a vacuum “ is not correct.
P.S.
Imitating to some methodology.
There are birds who can walk, fly and swim.
The birds who don’t have one of these abilities
are not birds.
/ According to complementarity and the
Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics./
============ ..
--------------------------
The planets travel without friction in vacuum,
it means the vacuum is an empty space.
The light waves are transverse waves therefore
it means the vacuum must be as firm as steel
How quantum of light can move in such
unintelligibly vacuum?
--------------------------------
The common answer is:
The point is that light consists actually of two waves,
an electric wave and a magnetic wave.
According to Maxwell's equations, both induce and thus
maintain each other mutually, and thus there is no need
for a medium and the light can propagate in a vacuum.
==========
I also studied this conception 50 years ago.
But ...50 years have pasted...
And now I cannot take the school conception as true one.
Why ? Because:
1.
I think it is impossible that electric and magnetic
waves are existed at the same time. Between them
very short rupture of time must be.
Then in some moment light will be an electrical wave,
and in another moment a magnetic wave will be .
But this electrical waves must be transverse waves,
it means, that vacuum is as firm as steel.
Unless, am I wrong ?
2.
It is 100% right that " an electric wave and a magnetic wave,
according to Maxwell's equations, both induce and thus
maintain each other mutually". But this statement
is right only according to classic ( macro) electrodynamics.
When Maxwell's electrodynamics is used in the microworld,
then it needs to take an idea of " quantum of light ".
3.
It is not correct to use common word "light" in the quantum theory.
The word "light" is possible to use on a beach, in a market
in every another place, but not in the quantum theory.
Here it is necessary to say " quantum of light ".
4.
And now everybody knows that light quanta is
a wave and particle at the same time.
And when somebody says : " that light consists actually
of two waves, an electric wave and a magnetic wave " ,
He forgets photon as a particle. The usage of only waves
abilities is not enough to explain photon’s moving.
The picture of photon acting is not full.
Then.......
If we want to see the whole picture of photon’s moving
we must imagine that photon in its moving jumps
from an electric wave to a magnetic wave and back,
from a magnetic wave to an electric wave and back,
and back........
I see my explanation is difficult.
Maybe it is better and simpler to imagine the photon
driving on a bicycle when one wheel is an electric wave
and another wheel is a magnetic wave.
Sorry.
I only want to say that to use sentences :
“ light quanta is wave and particle at the same time”,
“ light consists actually of two waves, an electric wave
and a magnetic wave in its moving in a vacuum “ is not correct.
P.S.
Imitating to some methodology.
There are birds who can walk, fly and swim.
The birds who don’t have one of these abilities
are not birds.
/ According to complementarity and the
Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics./
============ ..
One brief thought.
============
1.
Where does the quanta h come from?
The constant h Planck took from heaven and
brought it into physics.
2.
At the interaction of the electron with the vacuum,
the energy and mass of it become infinite, it means
that electron disappeared in the heaven.
Maybe, therefore the energy of vacuum is not equal to zero.
3.
Between constant h and electron there is
constant a (fine structure constant) .
What does this constant mean?
This constant remained unknown in modern physics and
on Feynman's expression that this quantity is
" by the god given damnation to all physicists ".
4.
I want to say, that the constant h comes from heaven
and the electron goes to heaven and still nobody knows
what light quanta, electron and vacuum are.
Maybe, therefore the interpretation of physics
seems such paradoxical.
Maybe, therefore the physicists make measuring
not understanding the deep essence of the processes .
5.
We used to think that if we knew one, we knew two,
because one and one are two. We are finding
that we must learn a great deal more about `and'.
/Sir Arthur Eddington /
====================
============
1.
Where does the quanta h come from?
The constant h Planck took from heaven and
brought it into physics.
2.
At the interaction of the electron with the vacuum,
the energy and mass of it become infinite, it means
that electron disappeared in the heaven.
Maybe, therefore the energy of vacuum is not equal to zero.
3.
Between constant h and electron there is
constant a (fine structure constant) .
What does this constant mean?
This constant remained unknown in modern physics and
on Feynman's expression that this quantity is
" by the god given damnation to all physicists ".
4.
I want to say, that the constant h comes from heaven
and the electron goes to heaven and still nobody knows
what light quanta, electron and vacuum are.
Maybe, therefore the interpretation of physics
seems such paradoxical.
Maybe, therefore the physicists make measuring
not understanding the deep essence of the processes .
5.
We used to think that if we knew one, we knew two,
because one and one are two. We are finding
that we must learn a great deal more about `and'.
/Sir Arthur Eddington /
====================
Max Planck
Nobel Lecture, June 2, 1920
“There is in particular one problem whose exhaustive
solution could provide considerable elucidation.
What becomes of the energy of a photon after complete emission?”
This question still waits for its answer.
===============
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics...ck-lecture.html
Nobel Lecture, June 2, 1920
“There is in particular one problem whose exhaustive
solution could provide considerable elucidation.
What becomes of the energy of a photon after complete emission?”
This question still waits for its answer.
===============
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics...ck-lecture.html
Max Planck. "Scientific Autobiography".
===============.
I have reread the Planck’s article "Scientific Autobiography".
It is a small article of 10 pages, but how honesty and modest,
wise and beautiful it is.
I cannot give a whole deep explanation of this article,
therefore I will concentrate attention on a small part of it.
1.
In the beginning Planck wrote, that " From young years....
the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute,
seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist’s life."
And after some pages Planck wrote again, that
" the search for something absolute seemed to me the
most wonderful task for a researcher."
And after some pages Planck wrote again, that
“ the most wonderful scientific task for me was
searching of something absolute."
2.
And as for the relation between “relativity and absolute”
Planck wrote, that the fact of "relativity assumes the
existence of something absolute" ;
"the relativity has sense when something absolute resists it.”
Planck wrote that the phrase " all is relative " misleads us,
because it is nonsense, because there is something
absolute in SRT.
And the most attractive thing in SRT was for Planck
“to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation.”
3.
And than Planck explained what there is absolute
in the physics:
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy.
The negative 4D continuum.
c) The speed of light quanta.
d) The maximum entropy which is possible
at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K.
4.
My conclusion.
Dear Planck, if you live now many scientists
will consider you are a crazy man.
Many of them will not give you a hand.
Many of them will laugh at you.
Why?
Because you were convinced in existing of something Absolute.
Because you searched for Absolute all your life long.
And now it is forbidden to think about Absolute .
Now the search for absolute laws and objects
in Nature disappeared from the scientist’s brain.
Now the scientists say : " There isn't an absolute frame,
There isn't an absolute speed. There is nothing Absolute.
Everything is relativity. All is comparatively."
You wrote:
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing
its opponents and making them see the light, but rather
because its opponents eventually die, and
a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
How pity it is.
I want to hope that this sentence isn’t absolutely correct.
=====================.
P.S.
Does anybody know the website with
Max Planck’s "Scientific Autobiography"?
Thank you.
===============.
I have reread the Planck’s article "Scientific Autobiography".
It is a small article of 10 pages, but how honesty and modest,
wise and beautiful it is.
I cannot give a whole deep explanation of this article,
therefore I will concentrate attention on a small part of it.
1.
In the beginning Planck wrote, that " From young years....
the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute,
seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist’s life."
And after some pages Planck wrote again, that
" the search for something absolute seemed to me the
most wonderful task for a researcher."
And after some pages Planck wrote again, that
“ the most wonderful scientific task for me was
searching of something absolute."
2.
And as for the relation between “relativity and absolute”
Planck wrote, that the fact of "relativity assumes the
existence of something absolute" ;
"the relativity has sense when something absolute resists it.”
Planck wrote that the phrase " all is relative " misleads us,
because it is nonsense, because there is something
absolute in SRT.
And the most attractive thing in SRT was for Planck
“to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation.”
3.
And than Planck explained what there is absolute
in the physics:
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy.
The negative 4D continuum.c) The speed of light quanta.
d) The maximum entropy which is possible
at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K.
4.
My conclusion.
Dear Planck, if you live now many scientists
will consider you are a crazy man.
Many of them will not give you a hand.
Many of them will laugh at you.
Why?
Because you were convinced in existing of something Absolute.
Because you searched for Absolute all your life long.
And now it is forbidden to think about Absolute .
Now the search for absolute laws and objects
in Nature disappeared from the scientist’s brain.
Now the scientists say : " There isn't an absolute frame,
There isn't an absolute speed. There is nothing Absolute.
Everything is relativity. All is comparatively."
You wrote:
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing
its opponents and making them see the light, but rather
because its opponents eventually die, and
a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
How pity it is.
I want to hope that this sentence isn’t absolutely correct.
=====================.
P.S.
Does anybody know the website with
Max Planck’s "Scientific Autobiography"?
Thank you.
About i^2= -1, pi=3,14…, e=2,71…
=============.
My question is :
Can "imaginary and transcendental quantities"
belong to a real particle?
1.
Take, for example, Dirac,s sea.
The particles in this sea are negative, virtual, imaginary.
2.
The Dirac,s sea is not warm place, but very cold one.
In this cold space there are own laws.
For example.
According to J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
temperature reaches -273 degree the volume
disappears and particles become "flat figures ".
The " Charles law" was confirmed by other physicists:
Gay-Lussac, Planck, Nernst, Einstein .
These " flat figures " have the geometrical form of a circle,
as from all flat figures the circle has the most
optimal form: C/D=pi= 3,14.
This is one of condition of " imaginary" particles.
3.
Can these " imaginary" particles become "real" ?
Of course.
How?
To use Goudsmit - Uhlenbeck's impulse / spin (h = h/ 2pi).
And as result they acquire volume.
With volume they acquire also mass, charge, energy.
4.
Quantum theory says:
when electron interacts with vacuum, its physical parameters
become infinite. But such statement contradicts the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy".
And then we should understand and accept that when the
physical parameters of electron disappear (become infinite)
it become " flat figure ".
We don’t need to dream of "a method of renormalization".
5.
The " imaginary" particle is a "real " particle.
The numbers; i^2= -1, pi=3,14…, e=2,71…
belong to the " imaginary" particle.
6.
Mathematics is not written for mathematicians.
Mathematics is written for physics, for Nature.
The numbers do not exist only for itself.
The "real" numbers exist in connection with "real" particles.
And the "imaginary " numbers also exist in connection with
"imaginary " particles.
The "imaginary " particles are not hard, steel particles.
Their geometrical form can change.
This change is explained with Lobachevsky/ Bolyai geometry.
This change is explained with the Lorentz transformations.
==================..
Some quotations.
"A mathematician is a blind man in a dark room
looking for a black cat which isn't there"
/ Charles R. Darwin./
=================.
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,
they are not certain,
and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
/ Albert Einstein./
===========.
=============.
My question is :
Can "imaginary and transcendental quantities"
belong to a real particle?
1.
Take, for example, Dirac,s sea.
The particles in this sea are negative, virtual, imaginary.
2.
The Dirac,s sea is not warm place, but very cold one.
In this cold space there are own laws.
For example.
According to J. Charles law ( 1787),
when the temperature falls down on 1 degree
the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
temperature reaches -273 degree the volume
disappears and particles become "flat figures ".
The " Charles law" was confirmed by other physicists:
Gay-Lussac, Planck, Nernst, Einstein .
These " flat figures " have the geometrical form of a circle,
as from all flat figures the circle has the most
optimal form: C/D=pi= 3,14.
This is one of condition of " imaginary" particles.
3.
Can these " imaginary" particles become "real" ?
Of course.
How?
To use Goudsmit - Uhlenbeck's impulse / spin (h = h/ 2pi).
And as result they acquire volume.
With volume they acquire also mass, charge, energy.
4.
Quantum theory says:
when electron interacts with vacuum, its physical parameters
become infinite. But such statement contradicts the
"Law of conservation and transformation energy".
And then we should understand and accept that when the
physical parameters of electron disappear (become infinite)
it become " flat figure ".
We don’t need to dream of "a method of renormalization".
5.
The " imaginary" particle is a "real " particle.
The numbers; i^2= -1, pi=3,14…, e=2,71…
belong to the " imaginary" particle.
6.
Mathematics is not written for mathematicians.
Mathematics is written for physics, for Nature.
The numbers do not exist only for itself.
The "real" numbers exist in connection with "real" particles.
And the "imaginary " numbers also exist in connection with
"imaginary " particles.
The "imaginary " particles are not hard, steel particles.
Their geometrical form can change.
This change is explained with Lobachevsky/ Bolyai geometry.
This change is explained with the Lorentz transformations.
==================..
Some quotations.
"A mathematician is a blind man in a dark room
looking for a black cat which isn't there"
/ Charles R. Darwin./
=================.
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,
they are not certain,
and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
/ Albert Einstein./
===========.
And there I was, thinking that this thread was going to be a light hearted discussion about the nature of Justice 
The electron and the photon.
============
Interesting article by Richard Gauthier:
"Superluminal Quantum Models
of the Electron and the Photon."
www.superluminalquantum.org
Richard Gauthier.
===========
============
Interesting article by Richard Gauthier:
"Superluminal Quantum Models
of the Electron and the Photon."
www.superluminalquantum.org
Richard Gauthier.
===========
The numbers rule at Universe .
/ Pythagoras' theory /
Which numbers?
At first: h, h=h/2pi and electron’s parameters.
====================
/ Pythagoras' theory /
Which numbers?
At first: h, h=h/2pi and electron’s parameters.
====================
Who is for whom?
============.
Mathematics is not written for mathematicians.
Mathematics is written for physics, for Nature.
This simple fact is forgotten in the science now.
1.
After war, in Russia there were many thieves' gangs
And I, as a boy, rotated among one of them.
They had their own language, thieves' jargon.
Not anyone could understand them.
Now I read some mathematical articles and they
remind me forgotten thieves' slang.
Are you laughing? Is it ridiculous ?
For me it isn’t ridiculous .
Why?
Because , mathematicians stole the picture
of reality from us . Because they make us
poor and stupid.
Why do you say so?
OK. I will try to prove it and explain my point of view.
=========..
2.
It began in 1905 when Einstein created SRT,
( theory of photon/ electron’s behaviour ).
Minkowski, trying to understand SRT, used 4D space.
Poor young Einstein , reading Minkowski interpretation,
said, that now he couldn’t understand his own theory.
" You are right, it is difficult to understand SRT, using 4D space.
But using my 5D space it is possible" - said Kaluza in 1921.
This theory was checked up and recognized insufficient.
" Well, - said another mathematicians, - maybe 6D, 7D, 8D, 9D
spaces will explain it". And they had done it.
But the doubts still stay.
"OK,- they say, - we have only one way to solve this problem,
we must create more complex D spaces " .
And they do it, they use all their power, all their
super intellectuals
============.
Mathematics is not written for mathematicians.
Mathematics is written for physics, for Nature.
This simple fact is forgotten in the science now.
1.
After war, in Russia there were many thieves' gangs
And I, as a boy, rotated among one of them.
They had their own language, thieves' jargon.
Not anyone could understand them.
Now I read some mathematical articles and they
remind me forgotten thieves' slang.
Are you laughing? Is it ridiculous ?
For me it isn’t ridiculous .
Why?
Because , mathematicians stole the picture
of reality from us . Because they make us
poor and stupid.
Why do you say so?
OK. I will try to prove it and explain my point of view.
=========..
2.
It began in 1905 when Einstein created SRT,
( theory of photon/ electron’s behaviour ).
Minkowski, trying to understand SRT, used 4D space.
Poor young Einstein , reading Minkowski interpretation,
said, that now he couldn’t understand his own theory.
" You are right, it is difficult to understand SRT, using 4D space.
But using my 5D space it is possible" - said Kaluza in 1921.
This theory was checked up and recognized insufficient.
" Well, - said another mathematicians, - maybe 6D, 7D, 8D, 9D
spaces will explain it". And they had done it.
But the doubts still stay.
"OK,- they say, - we have only one way to solve this problem,
we must create more complex D spaces " .
And they do it, they use all their power, all their
super intellectuals