H
[email protected]
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
Hi all,
I intend to email the address of the site containing the articles
of my book
to real and serious physicists, who apparently don't refer to
newsgroups normally,
and invite them to study and criticize them. So, I request every one
who have any
email addresses of any of them to send their email addresses to my
email address:
hamidvansari<at>yahoo<dot>com or hvansari<at>gmail<dot>com
Thanks
Introduction and Abstract of the book "Great mistakes of the
physicists"
Introduction of the book
------------------------
History of science tells us that there were many theories having
widespread acceptability during long times such that based on their
acceptability many additions were added to them till finally a research
or a scrutiny showed their invalidity and contrary to all of their
additions and widespread acceptability sent them easily to the archives
of history, what has remained being more solid and more scientific
superseding theories or at least those seeming to be so. Let's see
that,
contrary to all of the apparent validity and acceptability and
additions,
what would cause a researcher to dare to oppose a theory and to
scrutinize
its bases succeeding in changing the theory in this way. The answer is
clear: The researcher firstly looks into the theory with an acceptance
view. Secondly, he or she tries to become thoroughly conversant with
all
the details of the theory. Thirdly, in the case of weakness of the
theory,
the points of weakness, like some tied knots, find an annoying state in
the mind of the researcher, and he or she spends all his or her mind
and
time to obviate them. Fourthly, little by little the knots are untied
and the difficulties are solved and logical supersedings appear.
What can be said about the contemporary theoretical physicists is that
many of them are practically content with only the first phase; they
accept many of the current theories only because of their widespread
acceptability and add more and more additions to them without any
serious
scrutinizing of their details in order to find out their validity or
invalidity. A smaller group of the physicists proceed to these
scrutinies,
but don't attach any importance to the mental knots created for them
and charge them to the weakness of man's perception or of the logic of
the mathematics!
This book is a collection of some physical articles searched on the
basis of some scrutinizing in the above-mentioned manner. Each of them
has been a set of knots that for their untying a great logical endeavor
has been made. In this explanatory introduction, we introduce them in
three categories.
Contemporary physics, ie the physics related chiefly to the last
century, has been extremely associated with two subjects which at
present bear the much familiar titles of Quantum Physics and
Relativistic Physics. These physicses are still presented under
the title of Modern Physics although they were born many years
ago, and it seems that their novelty is not because of their lateness
but is because of the difference they have with the logic of the
classical physics. It is said that for perception of these physicses
one must go out of the frame of the classical logic. There will be no
problem in this act if firstly superseding frame exists, secondly it is
logical ie in principle is really (not only seemingly) a frame, and
thirdly in principle this act is necessary ie really there exit some
phenomena which the logic of the classical physics is not able to
justify them and it is proven that such a justification is not
possible,
not after encountering a phenomenon which we are not able to justify it
by the classical physics at present we merely try immediately to create
new frames of logic or try to find a position for it in the numerous
current frames of non-classical logic without trying to think
that whether it has any position in the frame of the classical physics
or not. In other words it is not true that the physicist to hide his or
her inability to justify a phenomenon by trying to justify it in any
probable possible way by retouching the logics by their inconsistency
there won't remain any basis for any genuine work. Is it difficult to
be said that we now don't know or only know a little but we are trying
to know, without any haste and trying to disturb everything?
A group of the articles of this book proceeds chiefly with what on
which
the quantum physics has been based. In an article the famous relation
E=h<nu> is rejected analytically (11); in another article we proceed
with
the real justification of the photoelectric effect, and the
justification
of this relation by this way is also rejected (10). With a full beauty
and
simplicity the Compton effect is justified in the classical manner (2),
and
this is the case for the Stern-Gerlach experiment (5) and Franck-Hertz
experiment (16) in two other articles. Some other phenomena which are
thought
as quantum phenomena are also justifed classically in an article (12).
It is tried that the wave equation to be solved for the cylindrical
wave, and in this way it is shown that how weak the bases of the
struggles for solving the Schrodinger wave equation are (14). We
justify
the Hall effect and we see that maybe no longer it is necessary that
the
twentieth century physicists believe in forces exerted on "nothing"
according to their belief (8)!
Another group of the articles proceeds chiefly to the bases of the
relativistic physics. In an article the electromagnetic theory is
generally
revised in details and in an interesting manner it is seen that how
easy the relativity is hindered from resorting to this theory in its
justification (13). In another article we see that attraction of the
stars
light passing beside the sun is simply optical and it is not necessary
to consider it as gravitational (3). By investigating the stellar
aberration in rejecting the existence of ether we shall see in another
article that how surprising the current reasonings in support of the
relativity are involved in apparent weakness (4).
Another group of the articles proceeds chiefly with some material which
are basically not related to the modern physics although more or less
will
be related to it. Some quite sure mistakes in the electrostatics will
be
shown in a detailed article study of which should be done with great
attention (6). In some articles it is shown that how some quite open
mistakes are still current in the world of physics (7 and 9), and
because of the cursory passing of the physicists over them, their
existence in the preliminary textbooks has exposed the prestige of the
physics to danger. And in a very important, brief and simple article
(1),
existence of the geomagnetic field has been justified careful and deep
study of which is recommended particularly in comparison with the
current unsatisfactory theories in this respect (including the theory
of dynamo). In an article we try to see what mass and force are, and we
shall see that distinguishing between inertial and gravitational
masses is invalid (15). We try to find out what actually the conductor
is and in this respect we discover that probably volume of the electron
is so much bigger than what is thought at present (18). It is
shown that in a polished surface, solid matter has not flowed and
filled
unevennesses of the surface as the current theories state (17). That
the
torque exerted on a stationary body is zero must not be presented as an
axiom (19). As appendices (A1 and A2), the simple solution
to the famous four-color problem is presented and Goldbach's conjecture
is proven.
What remain are non-few other phenomena of the kind of the first and
second categories, which we don't proceed to their
classicaljustification,
just as there are many other phenomena of the third kind that we don't
proceed to their classical justification or to obviating the mistakes
from their justifications. Namely, after careful studying of the
articles
of this book, maybe you can believe that those unconsidered phenomena
of
the first and second categories must have the same sensitivity as
unconsidered phenomena of the third category, and no more. And maybe it
can also be understood that we can have confidence in the frame of the
classical logic trying to justify the unknowns in this frame. Rush of
the plentiful empirical results of the physics of the 20th century
cannot
justify destruction of the frame of home, but we should look for the
places of the existent things in the home and if we are not able to
find
the position of a phenomenon at present, we must commit this work to
posterity.
If, after careful studying of this book, you are made aware that much
of its contents proceeding to the bases and being in the level of the
first years of the undergraduate courses of physics, just because of
this very reason and without any scientific encountering and because
they are not in the category of the material being published enormously
in the international journals of physics chiefly in praise and
admiration of the modern physics, are rejected by some international
first-rate physicists, won't you entitle the author to select the title
on the cover of his book? Should the writers of the history of science
confine lonliness of science to only the past eras? We read in the
history of science that Fresnel, who was diligently defending the
wave theory of light, answered Poisson, who was defending the
corpuscular theory of light, when he had said to him "Your theory
is not in accordance with my equations", that "The remedy is that you
change your equations". Now, if by this book, we become able to prove
that we cannot ignore so easily the logic of the classical physics,
can it be said that what we can do with the huge amount of the
material published in support of the modern physics? Logic, and only
logic, must be the only guide. What presented as nonclassical logic
will be acceptable only if it is really logic; but we believe that
this is not really the case.
I hope that, in next editioins of the articles of this book, in
addition
to the inclusion of new materials, I can proceed to the improvement of
and necessary changes in the articles criticism of which by the readers
is requested insistently.
In the articles of this book there are many proposals for experiments
related to the theoretical contents of the articles that since
performing
of them has not been possible by the author, accomplishing of them is
left to the interested readers as a test for the validity of the
articles.
Hamid V. Ansari
Abstract of the book
--------------------
We use the following terminology here:
~A means the vectot A.
[] indicates subscript.
<four> means 4.
0 Great misakes of the physicists
_Return to logic.
1 Geomagnetic field determines ionization energy
_Magnetic field of the earth comes into existence due to the movement
of
the freed electrons of the hot core of the earth along with the earth
rotation.
2 Compton effect is a Doppler effect
_Compton effect is completely a Doppler effect.
3 Deviation of light by Sun is optical
_Deviation and speed reducion of the stars light passing beside the
sun is completely an optical phenomenon.
4 Stellar aberration with ether drag
_Stellar aberration is not in any contradiction with the ether drag.
5 Stern-Gerlach experiment is not quantized
_Classical physics does not at all predict a uniform distribution
for magnetic atoms of the beam in the Stern-Gerlach experiment.
6 Obvious mistakes in Electrostatics
_The famous formula of the electrostatic potential energy in the
current form U=1/2<integral>~D.~Edv is completely wrong and in it
~E must be replaced by ~E[<rho>]. Then, capacitance of a capacitor
does not at all depend on its dielectric which indeed acts as a source
of potential. Besides, there are two different kinds of potential
difference for a capacitor; thus the results of the experiments of
Millikan and Thomson to determine the charge and mass of the electron
must be revised.
7 Surface tension theory; Glaring mistakes
_Current relations <capital delta>p=4<gamma>/R and
<capital delta>=2<gamma>/R for pressure difference between inside and
outside of a bubble and a solid drop respectively are completely wrong.
8 Logical justification of the Hall effect
_To justify the Hall effect it is not necessary to suppose existence of
hole and of magnetic force being exerted on it (ie in fact on nothing).
9 Actuality of the electric current
_Countrary to the current belief, existence of the electric conduction
currnt is not because of the existence of any electric field in the
conductor.
10 Photoelectric effect is not quantized
_Empirical results of the photoelectric effect have a perfect classical
justification, thus cannot result in the relation E=h<nu> exclusively.
11 Wrong construing of the Boltzmann factor
_A quite wrong construing of the Boltzmann factor is current that just
on the basis of this wrong construing the famous relation E=h<nu> has
been derived (by Planck). Correct form of this factor is presented.
12 Wavy behavior of electron beams is classical
_Gas molecules existent in the electric discharge tubes play role
of a medium for the electron beams which thereby propagate as
longitudinal waves showing wave phenomena; thus there is no need
to suppose existence of matter waves.
13 Electromagnetic theory from a new viewpoint
_Considering point magnetic charges fundamental equations of
electromagnetism and Maxwell's equations are completed and modified.
Therefore, no longer the action-reaction law is breached, form of the
electromagnetic wave motion throughout its carrier medium is justified
beautifully, and the relativity is hindered from resorting to the
electromagnetism.
14 Cylindrical wave, wave equation, and mistakes
_Wave equation (eg cylindrical wave equation or Schrodinger equation)
cannot be solved for general spreading of the wave by using the method
of
separation of variables.
15 Definitions of mass and force; A critique
_Mass is an undefined concept, and force is not anything but prevention
of masses against each other, and separation of mass into inertial and
gravitational is a wrong and useless act.
16 Franck-Hertz experiment is not quantized
_What we see in the Franck-Hertz experiment isn't anything but a
regular
repetition of a breakdown voltage.
17 A wave-based polishing theory
_In a polished surface, solid matter has not flowed and filled
unevennesses of the surface.
18 What the electric conductor is
_Probably the volume of electron is very larger than what is
thought at present.
19 Why torque on stationary bodies is zero
_That the torque exerted on a stationary body is zero must not be
presented as an axiom.
a1 Solution to four-color problem
_The four-color problem is simple and solved easily.
a2 A proof for Goldbach's conjecture
_A busy problem solved by a systematic mind.
My email addresses: hamidvansari<at>yahoo<dot>com or
hvansari<at>gmail<dot>com
To see all the articles send an email to one of my above-mentioned
email addresses.
http://www.mountainman.com.au/news97_k.html
I intend to email the address of the site containing the articles
of my book
to real and serious physicists, who apparently don't refer to
newsgroups normally,
and invite them to study and criticize them. So, I request every one
who have any
email addresses of any of them to send their email addresses to my
email address:
hamidvansari<at>yahoo<dot>com or hvansari<at>gmail<dot>com
Thanks
Introduction and Abstract of the book "Great mistakes of the
physicists"
Introduction of the book
------------------------
History of science tells us that there were many theories having
widespread acceptability during long times such that based on their
acceptability many additions were added to them till finally a research
or a scrutiny showed their invalidity and contrary to all of their
additions and widespread acceptability sent them easily to the archives
of history, what has remained being more solid and more scientific
superseding theories or at least those seeming to be so. Let's see
that,
contrary to all of the apparent validity and acceptability and
additions,
what would cause a researcher to dare to oppose a theory and to
scrutinize
its bases succeeding in changing the theory in this way. The answer is
clear: The researcher firstly looks into the theory with an acceptance
view. Secondly, he or she tries to become thoroughly conversant with
all
the details of the theory. Thirdly, in the case of weakness of the
theory,
the points of weakness, like some tied knots, find an annoying state in
the mind of the researcher, and he or she spends all his or her mind
and
time to obviate them. Fourthly, little by little the knots are untied
and the difficulties are solved and logical supersedings appear.
What can be said about the contemporary theoretical physicists is that
many of them are practically content with only the first phase; they
accept many of the current theories only because of their widespread
acceptability and add more and more additions to them without any
serious
scrutinizing of their details in order to find out their validity or
invalidity. A smaller group of the physicists proceed to these
scrutinies,
but don't attach any importance to the mental knots created for them
and charge them to the weakness of man's perception or of the logic of
the mathematics!
This book is a collection of some physical articles searched on the
basis of some scrutinizing in the above-mentioned manner. Each of them
has been a set of knots that for their untying a great logical endeavor
has been made. In this explanatory introduction, we introduce them in
three categories.
Contemporary physics, ie the physics related chiefly to the last
century, has been extremely associated with two subjects which at
present bear the much familiar titles of Quantum Physics and
Relativistic Physics. These physicses are still presented under
the title of Modern Physics although they were born many years
ago, and it seems that their novelty is not because of their lateness
but is because of the difference they have with the logic of the
classical physics. It is said that for perception of these physicses
one must go out of the frame of the classical logic. There will be no
problem in this act if firstly superseding frame exists, secondly it is
logical ie in principle is really (not only seemingly) a frame, and
thirdly in principle this act is necessary ie really there exit some
phenomena which the logic of the classical physics is not able to
justify them and it is proven that such a justification is not
possible,
not after encountering a phenomenon which we are not able to justify it
by the classical physics at present we merely try immediately to create
new frames of logic or try to find a position for it in the numerous
current frames of non-classical logic without trying to think
that whether it has any position in the frame of the classical physics
or not. In other words it is not true that the physicist to hide his or
her inability to justify a phenomenon by trying to justify it in any
probable possible way by retouching the logics by their inconsistency
there won't remain any basis for any genuine work. Is it difficult to
be said that we now don't know or only know a little but we are trying
to know, without any haste and trying to disturb everything?
A group of the articles of this book proceeds chiefly with what on
which
the quantum physics has been based. In an article the famous relation
E=h<nu> is rejected analytically (11); in another article we proceed
with
the real justification of the photoelectric effect, and the
justification
of this relation by this way is also rejected (10). With a full beauty
and
simplicity the Compton effect is justified in the classical manner (2),
and
this is the case for the Stern-Gerlach experiment (5) and Franck-Hertz
experiment (16) in two other articles. Some other phenomena which are
thought
as quantum phenomena are also justifed classically in an article (12).
It is tried that the wave equation to be solved for the cylindrical
wave, and in this way it is shown that how weak the bases of the
struggles for solving the Schrodinger wave equation are (14). We
justify
the Hall effect and we see that maybe no longer it is necessary that
the
twentieth century physicists believe in forces exerted on "nothing"
according to their belief (8)!
Another group of the articles proceeds chiefly to the bases of the
relativistic physics. In an article the electromagnetic theory is
generally
revised in details and in an interesting manner it is seen that how
easy the relativity is hindered from resorting to this theory in its
justification (13). In another article we see that attraction of the
stars
light passing beside the sun is simply optical and it is not necessary
to consider it as gravitational (3). By investigating the stellar
aberration in rejecting the existence of ether we shall see in another
article that how surprising the current reasonings in support of the
relativity are involved in apparent weakness (4).
Another group of the articles proceeds chiefly with some material which
are basically not related to the modern physics although more or less
will
be related to it. Some quite sure mistakes in the electrostatics will
be
shown in a detailed article study of which should be done with great
attention (6). In some articles it is shown that how some quite open
mistakes are still current in the world of physics (7 and 9), and
because of the cursory passing of the physicists over them, their
existence in the preliminary textbooks has exposed the prestige of the
physics to danger. And in a very important, brief and simple article
(1),
existence of the geomagnetic field has been justified careful and deep
study of which is recommended particularly in comparison with the
current unsatisfactory theories in this respect (including the theory
of dynamo). In an article we try to see what mass and force are, and we
shall see that distinguishing between inertial and gravitational
masses is invalid (15). We try to find out what actually the conductor
is and in this respect we discover that probably volume of the electron
is so much bigger than what is thought at present (18). It is
shown that in a polished surface, solid matter has not flowed and
filled
unevennesses of the surface as the current theories state (17). That
the
torque exerted on a stationary body is zero must not be presented as an
axiom (19). As appendices (A1 and A2), the simple solution
to the famous four-color problem is presented and Goldbach's conjecture
is proven.
What remain are non-few other phenomena of the kind of the first and
second categories, which we don't proceed to their
classicaljustification,
just as there are many other phenomena of the third kind that we don't
proceed to their classical justification or to obviating the mistakes
from their justifications. Namely, after careful studying of the
articles
of this book, maybe you can believe that those unconsidered phenomena
of
the first and second categories must have the same sensitivity as
unconsidered phenomena of the third category, and no more. And maybe it
can also be understood that we can have confidence in the frame of the
classical logic trying to justify the unknowns in this frame. Rush of
the plentiful empirical results of the physics of the 20th century
cannot
justify destruction of the frame of home, but we should look for the
places of the existent things in the home and if we are not able to
find
the position of a phenomenon at present, we must commit this work to
posterity.
If, after careful studying of this book, you are made aware that much
of its contents proceeding to the bases and being in the level of the
first years of the undergraduate courses of physics, just because of
this very reason and without any scientific encountering and because
they are not in the category of the material being published enormously
in the international journals of physics chiefly in praise and
admiration of the modern physics, are rejected by some international
first-rate physicists, won't you entitle the author to select the title
on the cover of his book? Should the writers of the history of science
confine lonliness of science to only the past eras? We read in the
history of science that Fresnel, who was diligently defending the
wave theory of light, answered Poisson, who was defending the
corpuscular theory of light, when he had said to him "Your theory
is not in accordance with my equations", that "The remedy is that you
change your equations". Now, if by this book, we become able to prove
that we cannot ignore so easily the logic of the classical physics,
can it be said that what we can do with the huge amount of the
material published in support of the modern physics? Logic, and only
logic, must be the only guide. What presented as nonclassical logic
will be acceptable only if it is really logic; but we believe that
this is not really the case.
I hope that, in next editioins of the articles of this book, in
addition
to the inclusion of new materials, I can proceed to the improvement of
and necessary changes in the articles criticism of which by the readers
is requested insistently.
In the articles of this book there are many proposals for experiments
related to the theoretical contents of the articles that since
performing
of them has not been possible by the author, accomplishing of them is
left to the interested readers as a test for the validity of the
articles.
Hamid V. Ansari
Abstract of the book
--------------------
We use the following terminology here:
~A means the vectot A.
[] indicates subscript.
<four> means 4.
0 Great misakes of the physicists
_Return to logic.
1 Geomagnetic field determines ionization energy
_Magnetic field of the earth comes into existence due to the movement
of
the freed electrons of the hot core of the earth along with the earth
rotation.
2 Compton effect is a Doppler effect
_Compton effect is completely a Doppler effect.
3 Deviation of light by Sun is optical
_Deviation and speed reducion of the stars light passing beside the
sun is completely an optical phenomenon.
4 Stellar aberration with ether drag
_Stellar aberration is not in any contradiction with the ether drag.
5 Stern-Gerlach experiment is not quantized
_Classical physics does not at all predict a uniform distribution
for magnetic atoms of the beam in the Stern-Gerlach experiment.
6 Obvious mistakes in Electrostatics
_The famous formula of the electrostatic potential energy in the
current form U=1/2<integral>~D.~Edv is completely wrong and in it
~E must be replaced by ~E[<rho>]. Then, capacitance of a capacitor
does not at all depend on its dielectric which indeed acts as a source
of potential. Besides, there are two different kinds of potential
difference for a capacitor; thus the results of the experiments of
Millikan and Thomson to determine the charge and mass of the electron
must be revised.
7 Surface tension theory; Glaring mistakes
_Current relations <capital delta>p=4<gamma>/R and
<capital delta>=2<gamma>/R for pressure difference between inside and
outside of a bubble and a solid drop respectively are completely wrong.
8 Logical justification of the Hall effect
_To justify the Hall effect it is not necessary to suppose existence of
hole and of magnetic force being exerted on it (ie in fact on nothing).
9 Actuality of the electric current
_Countrary to the current belief, existence of the electric conduction
currnt is not because of the existence of any electric field in the
conductor.
10 Photoelectric effect is not quantized
_Empirical results of the photoelectric effect have a perfect classical
justification, thus cannot result in the relation E=h<nu> exclusively.
11 Wrong construing of the Boltzmann factor
_A quite wrong construing of the Boltzmann factor is current that just
on the basis of this wrong construing the famous relation E=h<nu> has
been derived (by Planck). Correct form of this factor is presented.
12 Wavy behavior of electron beams is classical
_Gas molecules existent in the electric discharge tubes play role
of a medium for the electron beams which thereby propagate as
longitudinal waves showing wave phenomena; thus there is no need
to suppose existence of matter waves.
13 Electromagnetic theory from a new viewpoint
_Considering point magnetic charges fundamental equations of
electromagnetism and Maxwell's equations are completed and modified.
Therefore, no longer the action-reaction law is breached, form of the
electromagnetic wave motion throughout its carrier medium is justified
beautifully, and the relativity is hindered from resorting to the
electromagnetism.
14 Cylindrical wave, wave equation, and mistakes
_Wave equation (eg cylindrical wave equation or Schrodinger equation)
cannot be solved for general spreading of the wave by using the method
of
separation of variables.
15 Definitions of mass and force; A critique
_Mass is an undefined concept, and force is not anything but prevention
of masses against each other, and separation of mass into inertial and
gravitational is a wrong and useless act.
16 Franck-Hertz experiment is not quantized
_What we see in the Franck-Hertz experiment isn't anything but a
regular
repetition of a breakdown voltage.
17 A wave-based polishing theory
_In a polished surface, solid matter has not flowed and filled
unevennesses of the surface.
18 What the electric conductor is
_Probably the volume of electron is very larger than what is
thought at present.
19 Why torque on stationary bodies is zero
_That the torque exerted on a stationary body is zero must not be
presented as an axiom.
a1 Solution to four-color problem
_The four-color problem is simple and solved easily.
a2 A proof for Goldbach's conjecture
_A busy problem solved by a systematic mind.
My email addresses: hamidvansari<at>yahoo<dot>com or
hvansari<at>gmail<dot>com
To see all the articles send an email to one of my above-mentioned
email addresses.
http://www.mountainman.com.au/news97_k.html