Download 39 Questionable Assumptions in Modern Physics

39 Questionable
Assumptions in Modern
Physics
•By Greg Volk
Paradigms
• Modern physics is messed up!
– Standard Model & String Theory
– Big Bang (or Big Dud!)
– New Energy anomalies
– Non-inertial propulsion
• Math isn’t the problem.
• Need MAJOR Kuhnian paradigm shifts.
Assumptions
• Necessary & practical
• Many are “obviously true”.
• Examples in history
– Flat Earth
– Acceleration and weight (Aristotle)
• Hard to spot
Goals
• Identify some “hard to spot”
assumptions.
• Define “light”, “mass”, “aether”, etc.
• Introduce alternate paradigms
– Mach’s Principle
– Toroidal, vortex particles
• This is NOT a complete theory.
Mach’s Principle
• Ernst Mach, George Berkeley, Aristotle
• "Local physical laws are determined by
the large-scale structure of the universe."
– Stephan Hawking, The Large Scale Structure
of Space-Time (1973).
• Matter there influences motion here.
• Motion is with respect to matter.
– Not space itself, not observer
Machian GedankenExperiment
• Imagine an element of matter.
• Is it moving? With respect to what?
– If space, by what mechanism?
– If observer, in what frame?
• If matter, then all other matter must
actually BE present at that location.
• Can matter be present where it is not?
Yes! … And No!
• It depends on the definition of matter.
• To exert its influence elsewhere, matter
must possess ‘fields’.
• If an element’s field is inseparable from it
(permanently attached), then it is
actually present throughout all space.
• Then all forces are ‘local contact forces’.
• Energy density: the influence a localized
Toroidal Particles
• History of Vortex Theory
– The Greeks, Kepler, Descartes, Leibniz,
Swedenbourg, Boskovic, Ampere, Kelvin
– Parson, Compton, Bostick, Krafft, Bergman,
Lucas, Ginzbburg, Kanarev, Sarg , Tewari
• Physical, finite model
• Obeys the laws of electrodynamics
Bergman CSS Model
• ±e = Net charge
• c = Speed of balance
• m = E / c2
• h ~ mcR
– electron, ferris wheel
– proton, tiny ring
• What’s ‘k’?
#1 - Light is a ‘thing’ in itself.
• “All the fifty years of conscious brooding
have brought me no closer to the answer
to the question: what are light quanta?
…..…… Of course, today every rascal
thinks he knows the answer, but he is
deluding himself.”
– Albert Einstein
What is ‘light’?
• Does ‘light’ travel from A to B? Or is it
permanently attach to both A and B?
• Could ‘light’ be an interaction rather than
an independent ‘thing’?
• Wavefronts interact to create wavefronts.
• Does the wavefront exist independently?
• Interference => Interaction.
History of the ‘thing’ idea
• Fermat’s Principle of Least Time (Action)
• Römer’s Jupiter moon calculations (1677)
• Bradley’s stellar aberration (1727)
• Young’s double slit (1801)
• Feynman’s sum of all paths
#2 - Energy (light) can exist
without matter.
• The quantum ‘free energy’ concept
• Has anyone ever isolated a quantum of
‘free energy’?
• Can ‘free energy’ be measured without
matter?
• ‘Free energy’ comes in bundles called
‘photons’.
#3 - Photons are ‘things’ in
themselves.
• Can ‘light’ be a wave and a corpuscle?
• Interactions are continuous and discreet.
• Phenomena described by photons:
– Photoelectric Effect
– Compton Effect (Ashworth & Jennison)
• Photons: the absence of discontinuities?
#4 - The constant ‘c’ is a
property of space.
• Does space itself impede motion?
• Constants e, m & h: properties of matter
• Planck derived k via particle interactions
• Is ‘c’ alone the only property of space?
• The Weber-Kohlrausch experiment
(1856).
• Toroidal particles explain c via matter.
#5 - Nothing travels faster
than ‘c’.
• First, with respect to what?
• Einsteinian relativity collapses with
superluminal velocities
• Orbital stability demands speeds 107 * c.
– LaPlace (1805), Van Flandern (1998)
• Quantum entanglement (Rodriguez)
More on superluminal
velocities
• Longitudinal forces: rope analogy
• Scalar waves: changes in scale
• Water arcing (Graneau & Graneau)
• Railguns (Graneau & Graneau)
• Homopolar induction
– Achilles & Guala-Valverde (2007)
#6 - Instantaneous action at
a distance (IAAD) is
impossible.
• EPR & Bell’s Inequality
• Quantum mechanics is incomplete OR
particles are instantaneously entangled.
• Clauser-Home-Shimoy-Holt (CHSH) &
Aspect experiments => entangled
• Newton’s and other inverse-square laws
plus Gauss’s Laws favor IAAD.
Retarded Action at a Distance
• Effects are not always immediate
• Liénard & Wiechert (1898, 1900)
• Preceded by Riemann (1861)
• Weber & Kirchoff obtained ‘c’ with IAAD
• Stirniman(2000) IAAD solution equals the
sum of retarded and advanced solutions.
– Is the Standard Solution of the Oscillating
#7 - All forces must be
‘contact forces’.
• Matter cannot act “where it is not”
• Definition of ‘contact’.
– A. Billiard ball interaction OR
– B. Field (energy) interaction
• With permanently attached fields, matter
can be “in contact” simultaneously with
all other matter.
#8 - Fields are fundamentally
quantum.
• Do fields really exist? Or are they just
mathematical abstractions?
• What really exists is interaction, which
can be described by fields or potentials.
• The quantum source: fields or particles?
– Poincare believed it was the particle
• Continuous fields <-> discontinuities?
Discontinuities
• Discontinuity of the vortex particle
– always a zero, never a pole
• Discontinuity of an interaction
– Sun - Earth magnetic field example
• Does every so-called ‘particle’ represent a
different kind of discontinuity?
– Photon, nutrino, muon, pion, etc.
Catastrophe Theory
• The mathematics of
bifurcation (Thom)
• The Zeeman
catastrophe machine
• Multiple solutions
depend on ‘history’
– Magnetic memory
#9 - Matter is sometimes a
wave and sometimes a
particle.
• Is nature confused? Or is science?
• Inseparability of matter and field
– demystifies wave-particle duality
• Davisson-Germer & George Thomson
– ALL particles in a beam interact via fields.
– Particles that DON’T pass through slits affect
the behavior of particles that DO.
#10 - The energy of a particle
resides only locally, where the
particle resides.
• Local matter & non-local field inseparable
• By Poynting, energy density is defined as
the interaction of fields: D*E + B*H.
• Since fields are ‘non-local’, so is energy
• If energy is spread through space, then
space contains a ‘sea of energy’.
#11 - Space is empty.
• A ‘sea of energy’ is anything but empty.
• This ‘sea’ is sometimes called ‘aether’.
• Definition of ‘aether’:
– A. Energy of matter spread thru space OR
– B. Reference frame (property) of space itself
#12 - Mass is a measure of
matter or ‘stuff’.
• Definition of ‘mass’:
– A. Amount of substance OR
– B. Resistance to motion (inertia)
• If mass is not ‘stuff’, what is?
– Matter must exert itself through fields.
– Its presence is indicated by divergence.
 
– What thing has the form   D   ? Charge!
#13 - Elementary particles
never change.
• Must the ‘mass’ of a particle stay fixed?
– No, toroidal particles may expand & collapse.
• Then why are mass constants constant?
– A particle’s instantaneous energy does not
remain constant, but the equilibriumvalue
about which it oscillates does.
• Toroids ‘radiate’ with continuous changes
in energy, but discreet changes in ‘state’.
Mass of elementary particles
• If mass changes, do other properties?
– Some properties, such as q and h, remain
constant, due to Gauss D & Faraday’s Laws.
• Account for mysterious mass differences?
– Proton (P) + Electron (E) = Neutron (N) + ?
– 12 P + 12 E = C12 + ?
• Limited number of discontinuity types
– Correspondence with elementary particles?
#14 - Quantum events can’t
be described continuously.
• The Strobe Effect
– Wagon wheel in an old western
– Roulette wheel in Las Vegas
– Interaction between ‘inertial’ frequency and
‘actual’ frequency
• Toroid particles have inertial frequencies.
– Interaction with environment: discontinuities
#15 - Matter and light must
be corpuscular or continuous,
but not both.
• Particles have energy due to geometry
alone (‘self’, ‘inertial’ energy or ZPE)
– AND energy due to environment (actual)
• If energy in space is immediately and
inseparably connected with matter…
– phenomena of matter <-> phen. of energy
• Discontinuities ALWAYS have zero energy
#16 - Gravity is fundamental.
• Discontinuities of gravity (black holes)
– poles, having infinite energy density
• Are gravity and EM BOTH fundamental?
– Is G a fundamental constant?
– Unit system analysis says no.
• Andre Assis suggested gravity as a
fourth-order non-cancelling attraction.
Another Gendanken
Experiment
• Imagine a river or water through a pipe.
• What happens when the flow narrows?
– It flows faster.
• What happens when velocity decreases?
– The flow widens.
• Matter through cross sections don’t vary.
Ampere’s Law: the Source of
Attraction
• Charge thru a cross section is invariant.
• Motion and attraction are inseparable.
• Examples:
– Bernoulli Effect
– Poynting-Robertson Effect
– Ionic & covalent bonding
– Strong nuclear force
#17 - Gravity is the dominant
force in the cosmos.
• Coulomb force (~kCe2) ~ 1040 *
Gravitational force (~Gmpme)
• Gravity only governs with no net charge.
– Even with no net charge, dipole and higher
order charge moments trump gravity.
– EM provides repulsion AND attraction.
– Not “Is GRT correct?” but “Does GRT apply?”
– Surface charge effects (T. T. Brown) are vital
Electricity in the Cosmos
• Anthony Peratt EM computer simulations
– Filamentary structures including ‘ball
lightning’
– Laws of EM produce all know galaxy types.
– Including Halton Arp’s Peculiar Galaxies
• Hannes Alfven claimed plasmas govern
99% of the Universe.
– Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD)
#18 - Energy from the sun
arises from hot nuclear
reactions in the core.
• Can EM explain the sun?
– Ball lightning model reproducible since Tesla.
– Hot fusion interior model NEVER reproduced.
• The sun’s rays have filamentary structure
– => electrical interactions.
• Huge temperature and voltage gradients
near the sun’s surface inexplicable?
#19 - Redshift is caused by
Doppler expansion of space.
• Halton Arp’s intrinsic redshift
– high-redshift quasar near low-redshift parent
• William Tifft’s redshift quantization
– Conventional physics ASSUMES quantization.
– EM fields DERIVES it from interactions.
– Bode’s Law: another example of quantization
What IS Redshift?

h E
z



h
E
• Interaction energy per total energy
– The definition of entropy
• Compton-like interaction with matter
• Doppler Effect assumes properties of
space itself
– Holds when matter density is uniform.
#20 - Cosmic Background
Radiation (CBR) results from
space expansion.
• Scientists back to 1900 associated CBR
with blackbody radiation (Assis)
2
4

k
4
4
B
P  k RT 
3 3
15  c
T
• Penzias & Wilson (1965) confirmed what
had been predicted by these scientists.
– Mainstream science, assuming empty space,
claimed the discovery as proof of expansion.
#21 - The age of the
Universe is the inverse of
Hubble’s constant (H).
• Conclusion based on other assumptions.
• Hubble’s original redshift data based on
R0 = c/H, z = R/R0
• Hubble himself disliked the Doppler idea
• Dirac: ke2/Gm2 ~ 1040 ~ mcR0/h
#22 - The Big Bang.
• aka “The Big Dud”
• Mass-based theories demand singularities
• Expansion itself is relative to matter
• Violates energy conservation
• Violates thermodynamics: T constant
during adiabatic expansion - Bligh
#23 - Point particles exist.
• All modern theories based on P.P.s
• Singularities - like the Big Bang Universe
• Useful approximation: Maxwell,Boltzman
• Ignores the question of structure
• Experimental data: Compton, Hofstadter
#24 - Quantum “spin” exists
without current.
• Rotation demands “groups”
• “Spin” without finite size is nonsense
• Magnetic moments known only to result
from closed circuits (currents) of charge
• Thus particles must be closed circuits or
physics differs at the quantum level.
#25 - Quantum mechanics
cannot be explained
“classically”.
• “Classical” = “not derivable from QM”?
– “Classical” = “via the laws of EM”?
• Does QM explain structure?
– Structure -> divisibility -> continuum
• QM assumes quanta, EM continua
– div B = 0 demands closed loops -> quanta
#26 - Elementary particles
are “things” in themselves.
• What are protons, muons, pions, bosons?
– Discreet measurable effects, nothing more
• Correspond with flow singularities?
– Poincaré’s topology -> Thom’s catastrophe
– 7 catastrophes -> 7 elementary particles
•Paul D. Tinari, "Use of Catastrophe Theory to Obtain a Fundamental Understanding of Elementary
Particle Stability", International Journal of Theoretical Physics, V25, N7, pp. 711-715 (1986).
E. P. Battey-Pratt & T. J. Racey, "Geometric Model for Fundamental Particles," International Journal
of Theoretical Physics, V19, N6, pp. 437-475 (1980).
#27 - Muons, pions, and even
neutrons are “elementary”.
• Particle zoo > Mendeleev’s elements
– Billiard balls or energy distributions?
• “Elementary” =? “can’t be broken down”
• “Fundamental” =? “stable flow pattern”
• “Decay” -> “instability” of interactions
#28 - There are two types of
charge.
• Rather two different “charged particles”
• 3D flow circuits -> helicity
– Repulsion between adjacent ‘fibers’ balanced
radially by parallel motion
– Balance between cross sections -> motion
around cross sections -> helicity
– Two types of helicity in 3d: RH & LH
#29 - Matter can be produced
and annihilated in pairs.
• Is matter really created and destroyed?
– whirlpools, Borchardt dust,virtual annihilation
• Dirac’s anti-matter = mirror matter
• Energy distributions “copy” real particles?
• Real production/annihilation -> energy
singularities
#30 - The wave function has
nothing to do with electromagnetic fields.
• Quantum wave function ψ normalized
– Could adopt ψ ~ E + icB, ψ* ~ D + H/ic
• Complex wave function admit shear
• Vector field equivalent to 2 scalar fields*
• Can vector potential A be replaced?
•Edmund T. Whittaker, "On an Expression of the Electromagnetic Field Due to Electrons by Means of Two Scalar
Potential Functions", Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, Series 2, 1, (1904), pp. 367-372.
#31 - Low Energy Nuclear
Reactions (LENR) impossible.
• Photoelectric Effect & laser action
– based on frequency, not intensity
• Hot fusion - intensity (sledge hammer)
– Cold fusion - frequency (resonance)
• Physical particles -> resonant frequency
– ν = c/λ, λ = circumference = wavelength
#32 - Simultaneity is
impossible.
• Are time and space independent?
– Does the instant (snapshot in time) exist?
• Does simultaneity -> infinite speed?
– Not unless something “travels”
• Herzian / Phippsian total time derivatives

xi
d


  
 
 xˆ i
  v 
dt t i 1 t
x i t
3



3

x i
v
i 1 t
3


   xˆ i
x i
i 1
Maxwell’s Equations
 
 D  

 ~ dD
H 
dt
 B  0
 ~
~
 
dB
E  
dt
d
  
  v 
dt t
Advective Formulas






    
       
v  A   v  A  v    A  A    v  A  v
    
  
  
 
v  A    v  A  A  v  v   A  A   v



 


 ~ D   
    
  
H 
   v  D   D  v  v   D  D   v
tt

 




E  
   v  B   B  v  v   B  B   v

B
 ~ ~    ~ ~  
 
~ 



 
  


D
~
  H  v D 
 v  D  v  D   v
t
~




B
~
~ 
~ 
  E  v  B   
 B  v  B   v
t

~
 ~
 
D 
B
H 
J
E  
t
t







#33 - The net voltage around
a circuit is zero.
• Kirchhoff’s voltage law: ΣV = 0
– True in rotating frames? Is voltage “static”?
• Faraday’s Law: V = -dΦ/dt dynamic
 
• Advective v   term generates
ωx term
• Newton’s bucket: Is rotation wrt space?
– If wrt to matter, advective terms transient
#34 - The alteration of clocks
is equivalent to time dilation.
• Time keeping <> time itself
– Does time slow down if your watch does?
– If you are in deep freeze or hibernation?
• Do we measure ‘time’ or compare cycles?
• GPS / Hafele-Keating prove time dilation?
– No, only that caesium atoms oscillate more
slowly under the stress of gravity
The Twin Paradox
• Which really ‘moves’ in a Machian sense?
• Motion (velocity) -> acceleration
– Why is energy ~ velocity2?
• If the spaceship as a whole ‘moves’, does
the interior (travelling twin) also ‘move’?
• “At rest” =? “no net force or torque”
#35 - Zero Point Energy
(ZPE) comes from the ether.
• Is “ether” independent of matter?
– If so, how do we describe it mathematically?
• “Ether” =? interaction accounting system
• Total energy = Self + interaction energy
• If “temperature” ~ interaction energy
– ZPE ~ self energy (energy within particles)
#36 - Kinetic and potential
energy are fundamentally
different.
• Do object energies depend on observer?
– It’s always possible to move with the object
– Energy seen as potential (trans. or rotation)
• Fundamental: how to determine motion?
– If wrt matter (Mach), kinetic & potential,
translation & rotation, 4 ways to view same
• Toroidal particles, rotation & environment
#37 - Observation affects
reality.
• The moon disappears when nobody looks
• QM: ψ “collapses” upon observation?
• Are such non-falsifiable ideas “science”?
• Observation affects measurement
• Fundamental axiom: reality exists
#38 - Mind has nothing to do
with physics.
• Has science “proven” that paranormal
phenomena don’t occur?
• Do reductionist physics explain thought?
• Mechanism to convert thought to reality?
• Walter Russell, Wilhelm Reich, Hal
Puthoff, John Bockris, James DeMeo
#39 - Experiments “prove”
theories.
• Experiments only falsify, never “prove”
• “Distance” between data & interpretation
• Failure to distinguish ideas (theories) &
physical reality (experiment) - MAJOR!
• Straw man fallacy rampant in physics
Conclusion
• Assumptions necessary, but often hidden
• Confusion between idea and reality
• Mach’s Principle & toroidal particles give
alternative views of many assumptions
• Can you extend the list?
• Reconsider any long-held assumptions?