21 May '11 07:31

- Why we don’t have Philosophy of Physics ?

===========.

The common opinion about Philosophy of Physics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_physics

#

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

etc . . .

===========.

My opinion:

- Why we don’t have Philosophy of Physics ?

==========

There are Classic Mechanic and Quantum Mechanic,

but there isn’t Philosophy of Physics. Why ?

=======.

1.

In thermodynamics particles are "mathematical points",

2.

In QT particles are "mathematical points",

3.

In SRT particles are points.

4.

In QED particles are points.

5.

The energy, impulse, linear and angular momentum in physics

is also a " mathematical point".

6.

Then one "mathematical point" ( particle) interacts with another

"mathematical point" (energy, impulse ..etc ) the physicists say:

" The Quantum theory and micro-world are paradoxical."

==========

Therefore I wrote :

Physics - Particle and its shadow Math Point.

Our Earth moves straight and rotates around itself.

Let us take an infinite small point and suggested

it also has these two kinds of movement.

What will be happen ?

1

An infinite small point moves straight and its trajectory

shows us a straight line ( SRT)

2

An infinite small point changes its straight direction

( for example near Sun) and its trajectory curves ( GRT)

3

An infinite small point can rotate around itself.(?!)

Here is hidden a puzzle.(!)

Stupid question:

Does anybody ever draw point in his life?

!!!

Take pen and make point.

What do you see ?

Point,- you say.

And I see point, which has geometrical form of circle ( c/d=pi=3,14).

And even the smallest point will have geometrical form of circle

And even an Infinite Smallest Point will have geometrical form of circle

4

The SRT talks about an infinite small point which moves

in the Emptiness.(!) Which geometrical form can have this point ?

The Third law of Thermodynamics says in the Emptiness (!)

( in the Cold Emptiness ) an infinite small point cannot have volume.

It means an infinite small point must have geometrical form of circle

5

According to SRT this circle – particle cannot be firm,

it must be elastic.(!)

6.

The Electron’s puzzles.

The electron is not a point.

It is forbidden to electron to be hard as a steel, it must be elastic.

The electron doesn't have really orbit . . .

It is a reason of a standing wave of fantastically high frequency.

It can be a corpuscular and a wave at the same time.

On the one hand, in interaction with aether all its parameters

becomes infinite, but on the other hand, it is the reason

of electromagnetic waves and a density in the aether.

The electron has a negative twin brother - positron.

#

1900, 1905

Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f.

1916

Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c,

it means: e = +ah*c and e = -ah*c.

1928

Dirac found two more formulas of electron’s energy:

+E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2.

Questions.

Why does electron have five ( 5 ) formulas ?

Why does electron obey four ( 4) Laws ?

a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass

b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law

c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law

d) The Fermi-Dirac statistics

#

What is an electron ?

Now nobody knows .

In the internet we can read hundreds theories of electron.

For example.

More than ten different models of the electron are presented here. (!!!)

More than twenty models are discussed briefly. (!!!)

Thus, the book gives a complete picture of contemporary theoretical

thinking (traditional and new) about the physics of the electron.

/ The book "What is the Electron?"

Volodimir Simulik. Montreal, Canada. 2005. /

http://redshift.vif.com/BookBlurbs/Electron.htm

All of them are problematical.

So, why we call an electron a simple elementary

particle if it looks not very simple ?

We can read hundreds books and magazines about philosophy of physics.

But how can we trust them if we don’t have the real model of Electron ?

7.

In 1915 Einstein connected Mass with Geometry.

Maybe now, in 2010, somebody will try to understand the interaction

between an Infinite Small Particle and Geometry.

=====================.

P.S.

Let’s look at it another way –

In an Italian railway station.

It was more then two hours until the departure of the train.

I went to the café and ordered a cup of coffee. Soon two men

and a very beautiful, slim woman took a place opposite me.

They ordered something to drink and one of the man opened

a case of violin and took out a bow. He began to explain

something about the bow, carefully and gently touching it.

Then another man took this bow and also enthusiastically

continued this conversation. For half an hour the bow was passed

from one hands to another followed with enthusiastic discussion.

And the beautiful woman looked at bow, at both these men without

saying a word. For half an hour I watched this group with admiration

and excitement. What a class! What a cultural level!

What a beauty!

And now let's imagine the bow pressed into a "mathematical point"

and the musicians speak seriously about a "mathematical point"

which must produce a sound from a violin.

Everybody will say I describe an idiotic situation.

Well, I agree.

But why doesn't anybody say it to physicists when they observe

an elementary particle as a "mathematical point" , without paying

attention to its geometrical form.

#

If physicists think about a particle as a " mathematical point"

the result can be only paradoxical. And I am sure if somebody

takes into consideration the geometrical form of particle the

paradoxes in Physics will disappear.

We will have Philosophy of Physics.

#

When Feynman said "I think I can safely say that nobody

understands quantum mechanics." it was only because nobody took

into consideration the geometrical form of a particle.

=============================.

Best wishes.

Israel Sadovnik Socratus

=========================.

===========.

The common opinion about Philosophy of Physics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_physics

#

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

etc . . .

===========.

My opinion:

- Why we don’t have Philosophy of Physics ?

==========

There are Classic Mechanic and Quantum Mechanic,

but there isn’t Philosophy of Physics. Why ?

=======.

1.

In thermodynamics particles are "mathematical points",

2.

In QT particles are "mathematical points",

3.

In SRT particles are points.

4.

In QED particles are points.

5.

The energy, impulse, linear and angular momentum in physics

is also a " mathematical point".

6.

Then one "mathematical point" ( particle) interacts with another

"mathematical point" (energy, impulse ..etc ) the physicists say:

" The Quantum theory and micro-world are paradoxical."

==========

Therefore I wrote :

Physics - Particle and its shadow Math Point.

Our Earth moves straight and rotates around itself.

Let us take an infinite small point and suggested

it also has these two kinds of movement.

What will be happen ?

1

An infinite small point moves straight and its trajectory

shows us a straight line ( SRT)

2

An infinite small point changes its straight direction

( for example near Sun) and its trajectory curves ( GRT)

3

An infinite small point can rotate around itself.(?!)

Here is hidden a puzzle.(!)

Stupid question:

Does anybody ever draw point in his life?

!!!

Take pen and make point.

What do you see ?

Point,- you say.

And I see point, which has geometrical form of circle ( c/d=pi=3,14).

And even the smallest point will have geometrical form of circle

And even an Infinite Smallest Point will have geometrical form of circle

4

The SRT talks about an infinite small point which moves

in the Emptiness.(!) Which geometrical form can have this point ?

The Third law of Thermodynamics says in the Emptiness (!)

( in the Cold Emptiness ) an infinite small point cannot have volume.

It means an infinite small point must have geometrical form of circle

5

According to SRT this circle – particle cannot be firm,

it must be elastic.(!)

6.

The Electron’s puzzles.

The electron is not a point.

It is forbidden to electron to be hard as a steel, it must be elastic.

The electron doesn't have really orbit . . .

It is a reason of a standing wave of fantastically high frequency.

It can be a corpuscular and a wave at the same time.

On the one hand, in interaction with aether all its parameters

becomes infinite, but on the other hand, it is the reason

of electromagnetic waves and a density in the aether.

The electron has a negative twin brother - positron.

#

1900, 1905

Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f.

1916

Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c,

it means: e = +ah*c and e = -ah*c.

1928

Dirac found two more formulas of electron’s energy:

+E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2.

Questions.

Why does electron have five ( 5 ) formulas ?

Why does electron obey four ( 4) Laws ?

a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass

b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law

c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law

d) The Fermi-Dirac statistics

#

What is an electron ?

Now nobody knows .

In the internet we can read hundreds theories of electron.

For example.

More than ten different models of the electron are presented here. (!!!)

More than twenty models are discussed briefly. (!!!)

Thus, the book gives a complete picture of contemporary theoretical

thinking (traditional and new) about the physics of the electron.

/ The book "What is the Electron?"

Volodimir Simulik. Montreal, Canada. 2005. /

http://redshift.vif.com/BookBlurbs/Electron.htm

All of them are problematical.

So, why we call an electron a simple elementary

particle if it looks not very simple ?

We can read hundreds books and magazines about philosophy of physics.

But how can we trust them if we don’t have the real model of Electron ?

7.

In 1915 Einstein connected Mass with Geometry.

Maybe now, in 2010, somebody will try to understand the interaction

between an Infinite Small Particle and Geometry.

=====================.

P.S.

Let’s look at it another way –

In an Italian railway station.

It was more then two hours until the departure of the train.

I went to the café and ordered a cup of coffee. Soon two men

and a very beautiful, slim woman took a place opposite me.

They ordered something to drink and one of the man opened

a case of violin and took out a bow. He began to explain

something about the bow, carefully and gently touching it.

Then another man took this bow and also enthusiastically

continued this conversation. For half an hour the bow was passed

from one hands to another followed with enthusiastic discussion.

And the beautiful woman looked at bow, at both these men without

saying a word. For half an hour I watched this group with admiration

and excitement. What a class! What a cultural level!

What a beauty!

And now let's imagine the bow pressed into a "mathematical point"

and the musicians speak seriously about a "mathematical point"

which must produce a sound from a violin.

Everybody will say I describe an idiotic situation.

Well, I agree.

But why doesn't anybody say it to physicists when they observe

an elementary particle as a "mathematical point" , without paying

attention to its geometrical form.

#

If physicists think about a particle as a " mathematical point"

the result can be only paradoxical. And I am sure if somebody

takes into consideration the geometrical form of particle the

paradoxes in Physics will disappear.

We will have Philosophy of Physics.

#

When Feynman said "I think I can safely say that nobody

understands quantum mechanics." it was only because nobody took

into consideration the geometrical form of a particle.

=============================.

Best wishes.

Israel Sadovnik Socratus

=========================.