|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Are CERN physicists too stupid in physics? 16.17 Uniformity Principle#1497 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
This mathematics of physics has been around several months now and the
peer reviewed sci.physics.research where this post was sent recently are far too stupid in mathematics and physics to even give a reply, for if they had given a reply they would not be stupid in physics. And John Baez boasted in the early 1990s that he was a originator of sci.physics.research and his ability to do mathematical physics, but if that is the case, why could John Baez in 1990s not even able to do a simple math proof of Euclid's infinitude of primes? So here is an open invitation for John Baez to make something of himself in physics rather than (be, in my opinion) a nobody in physics-- verify the below that it is a generalized Dirac Equation. Recently I mentioned Peter Higgs and Leon Lederman, so can they give a reply to this post as to whether the Maxwell Equations derives the more general Dirac Equation, or is the mathematics above the heads of both Peter and Leon and that I need to wait for some more skilled physicists of the future to be able to verify. I put the below as a test to all CERN physicists, whether the Dirac Equation is derivable out of the Maxwell Equations. Those guys and gals should be able to verify or disprove whether the Dirac Equations comes out of the Maxwell Equations, otherwise, you should not be at CERN at all. Now on page 1113 of Halliday & Resnick's, Physics, part 2, extended version, 1986, we see H&R discussing the Balmer Rydberg formula of this: 1/y = R(1/m^2 -(1/n^2)) So let us see how all of Spectral Physics is beginning to be all derived out of the Maxwell Equations. This should be the case since both the Schrodinger and Dirac Equations are derived out of the Maxwell Equations. When the Maxwell Equations are the axioms over all of physics, then everything in physics is directly tied to the Maxwell 
Equations. Alright, these are the 4 symmetrical Maxwell Equations with magnetic monopoles: div*E = r_E div*B = r_B - curlxE = dB + J_B curlxB = dE + J_E Now to derive the Dirac Equation from the Maxwell Equations we add the lot together: div*E = r_E div*B = r_B - curlxE = dB + J_B curlxB = dE + J_E ________________ div*E + div*B + (-1)curlxE + curlxB = r_E + r_B + dB + dE + J_E + J_B Now Wikipedia has a good description of how Dirac derived his famous equation which gives this: (Ad_x + Bd_y + Cd_z + (i/c)Dd_t - mc/h) p = 0 So how is the above summation of Maxwell Equations that of a generalized Dirac Equation? 
Well, the four terms of div and curl are the A,B,C,D terms. And the right side of the equation can all be conglomerated into one term and
the negative sign in the Faraday law can turn that right side into the negative sign. Now in the Dirac Equation we
need all four of the Maxwell Equations because it is a 4x4 matrix equation and so the full 4 Maxwell Equations are needed to cover the 
Dirac Equation, although
the Dirac Equation ends up being a minor subset of the 4 Maxwell Equations, because the Dirac Equation does not allow the photon to be a double transverse wave while the Summation of
the Maxwell Equations demands the photon be a double transverse wave. And the Dirac Equation never has the magnetic monopoles of north and south always attracting which the Maxwell equations never has any repulsion of magnetic monopoles. But the Shrodinger Equation derived from the Maxwell Equations needs only two of the Maxwell Equations, the two Gauss laws. The Schrodinger Equation is: ihd(f(w)) = Hf(w) where f(w) is the wave function The Schrodinger Equation is easily derived from the mere 2 Gauss's laws combined: These are the 2 Gauss's law when no monopoles are expected : div*E = r_E div*B = 0 Now the two Gauss's law of Maxwell Equations standing alone are nonrelativistic and so is the Schrodinger Equation. div*E = r_E div*B = 0 ____________ div*E + div*B = r_E + 0 this is reduced to k(d(f(x))) = H(f(x)) Now Schrodinger derived his equation out of thin air, using the Fick's law of diffusion. So Schrodinger never really used the Maxwell Equations. The Maxwell Equations were foreign to Schrodinger and to all the physicists of the 20th century when it came time to find the wave function. But how easy it would have been for 
Schrodinger if he instead, reasoned that the Maxwell Equations
derives all of Physics, and that he should only focus on the Maxwell Equations. Because if he had reasoned that the Maxwell Equations
were
the axiom set of all of physics and then derived the Schrodinger
Equation from the two Gauss laws, he would and could 
have further reasoned that if you Summation all 4 Maxwell Equations, that 
Schrodinger would then have derived the relativistic wave equation and thus have found the Dirac Equation long
before Dirac ever had the
idea of finding a relativistic wave equation. So, now, how does the Maxwell Equations of just the two Gauss laws with magnetic monopoles derive the Balmer-Rydberg formula? Very easily is the answer because when you have magnetic monopoles in the two Gauss laws, you have in effect, two inverse square laws and thus you have the 1/m^2 term and the 1/n^2 term in a Summation of the two Gauss laws: div*E = r_E div*B = r_B Those two laws can be translated into two Coulomb laws: F1 = K1(1/m^2) K2(1/n^2) = F2 Now Summation of those two Coulomb forces gives this: F1 + K2(1/n^2) = F2 + K1(1/m^2) which yields this F1 - F2 = K1(1/m^2) - K2(1/n^2) Now the F's are consolidated into a 1/y and the K's constant terms merge into one consolidated constant of R, Rydberg constant. So in the above I have outlined how the Maxwell Equations is all of Spectral Physics, is all of Quantum Mechanics and even more than Quantum Mechanics. So that when physicists and astronomers see something like the Titius- Bode Rule, what they are in fact seeing is a law of Physics as the stars, galaxies, planets and moons are atomic physics writ large. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author- archiving of AP sci.math posts since May 2012 
as seen he http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986 Archimedes Plutonium http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
students ask these questions at MIT, Princeton, Harvard, Stanford,Caltech Chapt16.17 Uniformity Principle in history of science becomes axiomset #1499 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Now I am going to change the name of the title of this chapter to
this: Chapt16.17 Uniformity Principle in history of science becomes axiom set I am doing that because in the history of physics and the hard sciences, except mathematics, is that they never had an axiom system to give a foundation of their science. Geology in 1700s was so swamped with religion making incursions into geology as a science set up a principle called the Uniformity Principle which basically says that the processes of geology that we see around us are made by natural forces and not some religious supernatural. Geology certainly could not have a axiom system in the 1700s, so came up with a second best idea-- the Uniformity Principle which dismisses the supernatural and allows the natural. Trouble with physics, is that it never imposed a principle for it was not plagued by religion, at least not noticeably, but physics was plagued after the Maxwell Equations of 1860s, was plagued by compartments of physics dreaming up crank crackpot ideas, with nothing to mediate and judge if those ideas were consistent with the rest of physics. So you have one compartment saying Pauli Exclusion Principle where you cannot squeeze a proton into a second proton, and you had another compartment saying you have gravity collapse into a black hole and squeezing a proton into a second proton. Or you had a compartment saying that you have Special Relativity due to the Maxwell Equations and a different compartment saying that light can be Doppler redshifted and diametrically the opposite of Special Relativity. So in 1700s, geology could not adopt the Maxwell Equations as the axioms over geology, since the equations were not even borne as yet, but geologists could do the next best thing, adopt the Uniformity Principle. But after 1860s, there was no excuse for physicists to have a axiom set over all of physics. A set that keeps them honest and not one group contradicting the next group. A set that establishes how we discover new and true physics, where we look to the Maxwell Equations, not some old codger or hyped up new kid on the block. Instead, we keep our eyes focused on the Maxwell Equations. Now in the past year, I discovered the Maxwell Equations demands that light be a double transverse wave and not a single transverse wave. This is very important because it proves that Magnetic Monopoles must exist, and that Space itself is composed of these magnetic monopoles. The EM-gravity is the result of magnetic monopoles always attracting, in that north attracts north and north attracts south, unlike electric charge that has both attraction and repulsion. So now, I am aware that many physicists and schools around the world have placed Archimedes Plutonium and these posts in a global filter or blocking of my posts. But sincerely, does anyone in science think that blocking or filtering AP, the suppression of AP, does anyone think that such a strategy will work? Does anyone actually think that no student nor news reporter will ever ask how it is that Earth can orbit around the Sun when one is going 220km/sec and the other 29km/sec? Does anyone actually think that no person will ask a physics professor of MIT, Princeton, Harvard, Caltech, Stanford that how can Newtonian gravity or General Relativity allow for a gravity that has the Sun moving about 10 times faster than Earth in Space? Oh sure, few students in classes of physics professor is going to jeopardize their grade in asking the question, but there are many students who read these posts and not in a physics class who will ask those professors. Many will ask these other embarrassing questions: 1) Ask your physics professor, _______, ask him/her 
how it is that they believe Newtonian gravity and General Relativity 
while the speed of the Sun in Space is 220km/sec and Earth is a mere 
29km/sec. 
Then ask them whether they can ever understand that the true answer to 
the problem is EM-gravity, that the Maxwell Equations provide a Solar gravity-cell. 2) Ask your physics professor, _______, ask him/her 
how it is that they accept the Doppler redshift when even Hubble, the 
discoverer rejected it as a measure of distance, and that it violated 
Special Relativity. When the Maxwell Equations are the axioms of 
physics then the redshift is a measure of the curvature of space, 
never distance. Call it the Curvature redshift. 3) Ask your physics professor, _______, ask him/her how it is they come to believe that a light-wave is a single transverse wave of a electric field E and magnetic field B, when it is that a double transverse wave of E- and E+ and M- and M+ preserve the speed of light regardless of wavelength or frequency. 4) Ask your physics professor, _______, ask him/her 
why they believe in a Cooper pairing of electrons in 
superconductivity, when the Maxwell Equations deny pairing of 
electrons, but do allow for the Malus law which when replaced for 
resistance in Ohm's law solves superconductivity. 5) Ask your physics professor, _______, ask him/her 
why they believe in dark matter and dark energy 
when the Rings of Saturn are partially solid-body-rotation. When these 
professors see solid-body-rotation in galaxies far away, they invoke 
dark-matter and dark-energy, yet when they look at Saturn and its 
Rings, they fail to see any solid body rotation and are deaf dumb and 
silent on the situation. The solution is that gravity is EM-gravity 
which demands solid body rotation as commonplace throughout the 
Cosmos. 6) Ask your physics professor, _______, ask him/her 
why they believe in pulsars or neutron stars when the Maxwell Equations explain these to be nothing more than the clashing of two gravity cells such as the Sun and Jupiter which makes Jupiter a mini-pulsar of 45 minute periods. 7) Ask your physics professor, _______, ask him/her 
whether it is far easier to derive the Schrodinger and Dirac Equations 
from the Maxwell Equations summed up, or whether they prefer to derive 
these equations the manner in which Feynman devoted his three volume 
text: "Feynman Lectures on Physics" 1963. You see, when a physicist 
has no axioms for his subject, he is lost in the weeds until he does 
have an axiom set for his subject. The Schrodinger and Maxwell 
Equations are easily derived by simply a summation of the magnetic 
monopole Maxwell Equations. 8) Feynman tells us the most important single idea in all of physics is the Atomic Fact-- all things are made up of atoms,.. So the question is, is not the Universe itself a thing? For surely the Universe is not a nothing. Hence, if physics is a science of the axioms of Maxwell Equations, then the Universe itself must be a big gigantic atom. What specific atom, this textbook says it is a Plutonium Atom Totality. So ask you physics or math professor, ______, 
ask him/her 
whether that logical syllogism must be true. Test them to see if they 
are really scientists, or just another member of the herd mentality 
spewing out what it is they believe their stooge puppet masters want 
them to spew. So the science community at large can suppress AP, globally filter and block his posts, but the truth of the matter is that, these questions above will keep coming up and coming up over and over again. So, if you are a physicist at MIT, Caltech, Princeton, Harvard, Stanford, you can easily ignore AP and block him, but what happens when your students start asking you how it is that Earth can move at 29km/sec whilst the Sun is moving at 220km/sec and still stay together in Newtonian gravity or General Relativity? Are you going to try to suppress and block and filter those students? Why not just come clean as a scientist should always be clean, and confront and answer the questions. The moment scientists are out to block, stifle, filter someone doing science, is the moment you ceased being a scientist. If you are scared of science questions, you are not a scientist. -- Approximately 90 percent of AP's posts are missing in the Google newsgroups author search starting May 2012. They call it indexing; I call it censor discrimination. Whatever the case, what is needed now is for science newsgroups like sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.bio, sci.geo.geology, sci.med, sci.paleontology, sci.astro, sci.physics.electromag to
be hosted by a University the same as what Drexel
University hosts sci.math as the Math Forum. Science needs to be in education
not in the hands of corporations chasing after the next dollar bill. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author- archiving of AP sci.math posts since May 2012 as seen here : http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986 Archimedes Plutonium http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
distribution of galaxies points to Atom Totality not Big Bang #176 ;3rd ed; Atom Totality (Atom Universe) theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | November 6th 09 09:29 AM |
#1 new book; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANGTHEORY IN PHYSICS | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 13 | May 1st 09 06:25 AM |