The methodology of the modern physics which has arisen on "yeast" of a
relativity theory, threw into confusion of many scientist and led to
appearance of a great number of the scientific theories similar more on
fantasies of medieval scholasticists.
So, for example, professor Vejnik, notorious of subjects, that has
suffered for criticism of a relativity theory (he simply has derided it),
writes in "Thermodynamics" – textbook for the students [1]: "...The
important lack of quantum mechanics is an absence of managing ideas, which
would allow to judge structure of a particle. In result such banal
elementary particle, as photon, has got in bit exclusive (the
considering the light as a wave as well as Einstein's formula
E = mc2, apparently promoted to that).
Actually photon basically does not differ from electron and other
elementary particles (about it is possible to judge on photos...). It was
enough to clear up structure of electron or photon to make complete notion
about all microcosms and about the laws, controlling them. According to
the common theory (Vejnik – N.N.), the elementary particle is an assembly
of microcharges. To last concern: mass (substanceons), space (metrons),
time (chronons), electron, thermons, Plank constant etc. Number of various
elementary particles is infinitely great".
Thus, we see as a space-time, wave-particle, principle of uncertainty,
equivalent of mass – energy and others of "essence" continue to create of
all new monsters as termons, chronons, metrons and substanceons. As to a
photo, if Vejnik were shown a snapshot of a night highway, he would define
"banality" of a motor vehicle leaving a track of headlights on a
photosnapshot too. "The Dream of intellect creates of monsters"
(Goija).
"A Reason of all natural phenomena is comprehended through reasons of
mechanical character, otherwise it is necessary to refuse any hope to
understand something in physics". (Huygens "The Treatise about light"
[2]). Famous researchers and thinkers of different times: Aristotle,
Galileo, Newton, Gook, Descartes, d'Alambert, Fresnel, Faraday, Helmholtz
and many others stated the same thought in different variants. So, Maxwell
in "The Treatise about an electricity and magnetism" [3] has written: "Now
we can not understand propagation (of interaction – N.N.) in time
differently, something, as flight of the material substance through space,
or as a status of movement or stress of medium already existing in space
Actually, as though energy was not transferred from one body to another in
time, there should be a medium or substance, in which there is energy,
after it has left one body, but yet has not reached another...
Therefore, all these theories (wave, interaction and electromagnetism –
N.N.) carry on to concept of the medium, in which the propagation takes
place. If we shall accept this medium as a hypothesis, I think, it should
occupy an outstanding place in our researches, and it is necessary to try
to construct mental notion of its operation in full details; it also
was my constant purpose in the present treatise".
But let us to imagine (on Wejnik) occurrence of photon. "Exited"
electron flied on an orbit. And suddenly any "banal essence" separated
from electron which, not having on that of any reasons and basis,
irrespective of velocity and cyclic frequency of electron, gains the
frequency of oscillations (after count of quantity of energy, which it
should take away?), and mass – what it will turn out! The consequence here
is not caused by reasons, and the physical reasons are not supported with
logic and laws of a mechanics. What here is "mental notions" of the
Maxwell?!
So, the Maxwell asserts, that energy on distance can be transferred
only by two ways: either together with mass, or through the intermediate
substance by waves. The existence of peculiar sort of matter as
electromagnetic field is result of penetration of non-scientific mentality
in physics. That is even not the heat liquid with helping of which they
highly successfully described the oscillation energy of atoms and
molecules of matter as well as thermal (electromagnetic) radiation. It is
simple attempt to hide the ignorance and powerlessness before a riddle of
a nature.
Outstanding minds of mankind solve these mysteries beginning from
ancient Greek, Arabian, Chinese thinkers, from Newton, Gook, Huygens and
finishing the modern researchers. Though they have achieved great success
in usage of light (lasers etc.), however their knowledge of an essence of
light has remained still very far from true.
Sights of Newton [4] on a nature of light were rather contradictory and
inconsistent. Though he also was an ancestor of true scientific thinking,
the fear of promotion of scientific hypotheses without a sufficient store
of the experimental and observant facts has resulted him in other extreme:
to indecision of thinking and to absence of a sequence in outputs. So, his
sights concerning interaction of bodies on distance have led him to
thought about existence of the intermediate medium. But by consideration
of a nature of light he rejects this medium because "there is no
sufficient store of experiences, by which the laws of operation of this
ether would be precisely defined and are shown".
Certainly, in his time the statement of a question about properties and
structure of an ether was premature, as there were no even such sciences,
as optics, electromagnetism, nuclear and molecular physics and many
others. And even presently such sciences as about an atomic nucleus and
about elementary particles still "float in a fog". What can we say about
ether – that is the following step of a structure of substance?
However number of observations, facts, experiments and knowledge of
properties of ether was accumulated, and all great and a little
significant theories have arisen only thanking "to mental construction of
its operation". Einstein and Infield have named the ether as "scaffolding"
for construction of the theories, which can be removed in a favor of
existence of a general principle of relativity. But now it is difficult to
imagine the rise of optics and electromagnetic theory, if the general
principle of relativity has appeared before them.
"The Wave theory has won the Newtonian theory of the expiration by
irreproachably qualitative and quantitative accuracy of the predictions"
(S. Vavilov [5]) and not only it is. First, it is impossible to explain
independence of velocity of light from velocity of a source by the theory
of the expiration. Newton just considered, that the velocity of photons
adds with velocity of a source. Secondly, the theory of the expiration
predicted increase of velocity of light in the denser medium, and wave
theory of Huygens – decrease of this velocity. The direct experiments on
measuring of the light velocity in the dense medium, made by Fizeau and
Foucault, have confirmed a wave nature of light.
The wave theory of light was confirmed both with theoretical and
experimental works by Faraday, Maxwell, Hertz, Lebedev and other
researchers. The Maxwell, for example, in "the Treatise..." has written:
"...the light conducting medium at passing light through it is capacity of
energy. In the wave theory advanced by Huygens, Fresnel, Jung, Green etc.,
this energy is considered partially potential and partially kinetic.
Potential energy is considered as stipulated by deformation of elementary
volumes of the medium. It means that we should consider the medium as
elastic. The kinetic energy is considered as, stipulated by oscillatory
movement of medium, therefore we should consider, that the medium has
finite density. In the theory of an electricity and magnetism accepted in
the present treatise, the existence of two sorts of energy – electrostatic
and electrokinetic is recognized, and it is supposed, that they are
localized not only in bodies, but also in each part of enclosing space.
Therefore, our theory will be coordinated to the wave theory that both
they assume existence of the medium capable to become the capacity of two
sorts of energy". Thus Maxwell and Faraday as the people of wide
scientific sights have specified that the ether is necessary not only for
the wave theory of light (electrodynamism), but also for transference of
interactions. This rather important argument is ignored till now by modern
researchers as result of necessity to see "a new dress of the king" –
curvature of space – time.
Here it is how taller Andersen has written about: "they have presented
themselves as the skilful weavers and have told, that can weave such
wonderful fabric, which differs by surprising property – becomes invisible
to any man, which sits not on his place or is impassable silly... "I am
not silly. It means that I am no mine place. Good grief! However I have
not to show it" – the dignitary thought.
S. Vavilov has written: "the Wave theory triumphed, appear, final
victory... But the celebration has appeared very premature... The wave
theory has appeared helpless before the quantum laws of operation of
light". [5]
We now shall be set by a question: really could this single fact
against set others so sharply change opinion of the scientists?! Yes,
there is a discretization of radiation; yes, photon flies as a monolithic
particle. But really is there no similar behavior of a sound in air? Or on
the contrary: is there no behavior of electromagnetic waves like
sound?
Hertz [6] and his followers perfectly have seen property of
electromagnetic radiation to transfer in enclosing space the spherical
waves, which have been not localized, in space. (By the way, they also
are not quantized, as modern luminaries confirm so far, as they are result
not skipping of electrons from one orbit on another, but accelerated
movement of free electrons in a conductor). Due to such property of long
electromagnetic waves we look the TV set and we listen to the receiver
from any point of sphere around the source of radiation. However, as soon
as the frequency of electromagnetic waves passes some boundary in the side
of increase, there is a direction of radiation.
The same occurs and to a sound. Such properties of a sound were
discovered absolutely recently, in connection with obtaining ultrasound.
It seemed that the ultrasonic waves have acute direction and can be
considered as particles localized in space. Is it "feebleness of the
wave theory"? It appears that each time, when the researchers are helpless
something to explain they accuse of it a classical mechanics.
Feynman has shown [7], that the laws of oscillations depend on
frequency, as the character of processes proceeding in the medium depends
on it. However he was satisfied only by inference of the equation of
oscillations, when pressure and temperature in an elastic wave vary
adiabaticaly. Any researchers, including Feynman, have not considered the
high frequencies of oscillations concerning length of free run of
particles, when the processes occurring at it, result in absorption of
heat. In this case is abundantly clear, that the oscillation can not be
propagated by a spherical wave. It is because of allocation of directions
of movement of separate particles. It can be only acutely directed, as the
frequency of oscillations is less than "frequency" of free run of
particles.
From analogy to properties of ultrasound the inference follows that the
localization at all does not contradict the wave theory. Moreover, whether
will appear, what air behaves as metal, and ultrasound has transversal
waves?
Except for localization, photons, unlike radiowaves, have one more
important property connected to their origin: strictly dosed in energy.
This property of photons connected with a structure of atoms should not be
distributed to all spectrums of electromagnetic waves. And here,
especially Planck's constant, as the characteristic of energy of photons
should not be considered in a more comprehensive sense, as it is made
continually in physic sat last time. The Planck's constant has no any
relation to a discretization of time, space and mass.
In connection with strict dosage of energy of photons a new science –
quantum mechanics arose, in which from the very beginning and till now
there were some unsolved questions. First: why electrons of atom, moving
on circle or elliptic orbit, do not radiate photons, though they undergo
centripetal acceleration? Second: what is the mechanism of radiation and
absorption of photons?
The first question is connected to error, which is repeated in all
tutorials and transactions on quantum mechanics. So, for example,
Semenchenko in "The Selected chapters of theoretical physics" [8] has
written: "Electrons can not move around of a nucleus long time, so far as
under the laws of a classical electrodynamics any accelerated electron
radiates electromagnetic energy. Therefore kinetic energy of electron
decreases, and eventually it should fall on a nucleus". In "To Physics for
all" [9] Kitajgorodsky even has calculated time of falling electron on a
nucleus. It appeared equal to 100-th of second!
I ask the reader to look at the equation of a classical electrodynamics
of Weber, consisting from three items. First item is law of Coulomb,
second is change of force of interaction as a result of delay of a
potential, third is that concerns to our subject of study. Here we see
that formula of Weber includes the scalar value of distance between
interacting particles. It means, that at constant distance between a
nucleus and electron both first and second derivative are equal to zero.
Therefore, in this case delay of a potential and radiation should
be absent. So, not everyone accelerated moving electron radiates energy.
Moved on a circle orbit electron should not radiate! Amazingly, how
long a so essential error was unnoticed!
Huygens has prompted the solution of the second question. He has
assumed: "Light arises due to pushes, which the moved particles of bodies
put to particles of ether". Before appearance of a relation of de Broglie
for lengths of waves this phrase of Huygens as though "hung in air". The
relation of de Broglie should become the base to research of reasons of
appearance of relation itself and appearance of photons as consequences of
waves of de Broglie. However inference about indetermination of quantum
mechanics made by Born, Heisenberg and Bohr, and also the refusal from
ether made by Einstein, has withdrawn the physicists in the side from this
problem.
Probably, it is necessary to assume that waves of de Broglie reflect
the real "pulsing" process of movement of particles. Reason of which is
the non-uniformity of delay of a potential. And photon is a segment of
local (sharp directed) waves of an ether having in the beginning and in
the end little bit different frequency of oscillation (width of a spectral
line), that is connected to deceleration of velocity of electron at its
transition from one steady orbit on another.
The pulsing movement of particles as the consequence of non-uniformity
of delay of a potential can be by solution of one more of questions of a
quantum mechanics: it is existence of steady discrete orbits of electron.
Probably, the steady orbits are result of resonance cyclic and pulsing
oscillations.
Thus, despite of multiple spells of orthodox relativists about the
returning to classical physics, to an ether, to mechanical sights, to a
causality and to notion of light as wave is not present and can not be, we
should it make. Otherwise "it is necessary to refuse any hope ever and
something to understand in physics"
The literature:
A.I. Vejnik. A thermodynamics. A higher school, Minsk,
1968, page 434. In Russian.
H. Huygens. The treatise about light. Lejden, 1703.
J.C. Maxwell. The treatise about an electricity and
magnetism, v. 1, 2, Oxford, 1873.
I. Newton. Optician or treatise about reflections,
refractions, bendings and colours of light. The London, 1706.
S.I. Vavilov. An eye and sun. Science, M., 1976. In
Russian.
H. Hertz. About rather fast electrical oscillations. Ann.
der Ph., b. 31, s. 421...448.
H. Hertz. About electrodynamics waves in air and their
reflection. Ann. der Ph., b. 34, s. 609...623.
R. Feynman, R.B.Leigton, M. Sands The Feynman lectures on
physics. V. 3...4, World, M.., 1976, page 391...398. In Russian.
V.K. Semenchenko. The selected chapters of theoretical
physics. Enlightenment, M., 1966, page 131. In Russian.
A.I. Kitajgorodsky. Physics for everything, v. 3
(Electrons), Science, M., 1979. In Russian.
Is published earlier:
"Science of Kazakhstan", 5 (65), March 1...15,
1996.
Знаете ли Вы, что в 1965 году два американца Пензиас (эмигрант из Германии) и Вильсон заявили, что они открыли излучение космоса. Через несколько лет им дали Нобелевскую премию, как-будто никто не знал работ Э. Регенера, измерившего температуру космического пространства с помощью запуска болометра в стратосферу в 1933 г.? Подробнее читайте в FAQ по эфирной физике.
