Viewing posts from March, 2008
It may or may not be attributable to Galileo.
Please, read the blog Galileo Galilei Biggest Blunder . This blog is just next to Newton's Biggest Blunder...:)
Please, let me know your comments.
Cheers,
MP
Dear MP,
Thank you for your proposition to feel free to comment.
I. I begin from your words: "The physics is invisible to your eyes and instruments. It can only be seem with the eyes of the mind...", which pertain to the contemporary Physics. Such Physics is false science. It gives imaginary worlds instead the real one. I propose you to read my paper "Smulsky J.J. Conceptual Error in Contemporary Science // Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance. 13th Annual Conference 3-7 April 2006 at the University of Tulsa, OK, USA. Vol.3, No. 2. Published Space Time Analyses, Ltd. Arlington, MA,USA.- 2007. - Pp. 277-281." (http://hypergeo.s3.amazonaws.com/static/media/uploads/blog/CnErCS2.pdf)
II. Hypergeometrical Universe Theory, Grand Unification, inflation and other theories are based on the General Theory of Relativity (GTR). I send you my paper "Gravitation, field and rotation of Mercury perihelion", from which you will find that it is downfall of General Theory of Relativity. GTR can be forgotten and can be thrown out. Below I give some information about my paper:
Abstract: The basic components of a problem of rotation of Mercury perihelion are considered. It is shown, that offered by Paul Gerber the finite speed of gravity propagation has not substantiation. It is established, that with influence under the Newton law of gravity the perihelion in motionless reference system turns on 529.9" per one century, but on the data of observation it turns on 582.3" per one century. Early the rotation of the Sun on a movement of planets was not taken into account. The compound model of rotation of the Sun is offered which allows taking into account this influence. In view of rotation of the Sun the Newton law of gravity defines all size of perihelion rotation and defines all features of the planets movement.
Conclusions
1. The offered in 1898 by Paul Gerber the mechanism of finite speed of gravitation is
speculative and has no a substantiation.
Hypergeometrical Cooper Pairs and Superconductivity
I was invited to represent the student body at the celebration of the 50 Years of the Laboratory for the Research of the Structure of Matter at Penn. It was an honor and I was dazzled by the sights of the Fathers of Quantum Mechanics in academic regallia.
I sat on my chair waiting for the beginning of the talks. The gentleman on my side decided to make small talk with that young student- the little me...:) He mentioned his name:Schrieffer... I immediatelly said, " Well, I only know one Schrieffer- from Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) Superconducting Theory... "
I don't really remember what did I say afterwards, but I know that I displayed way too much reverence and poor Bob Schrieffer felt unconfortable and managed to scape...:)
I know for sure that I was hyperventilating...:)
What can I say. I was a naive, wide-eyed student, full of admiration and respect for my fellow scientists and mainly for the visionaries who brought us to our present understanding... I didn't know that I had to play it cool, not to disturb the scientific celebrities...:)
Today, I am going to explain the why there is a formation of a Cooper Pair, that is, why two mutually repulsive electrons would agree to walk togetther in a correlated manner...:)
Not unlike in the case of Alan Guth's Inflation Theory of the Universe, the formation of a Cooper pair requires the absolute turning off of all critical sense in your Brains...:) Equally charge particles are mortal enemies and repeal each other with a force singularly dependent upon their distance..:) That is, the force goes to infinite when they are close..>:) Infinite!!!!!
That bitter pill is gilded by words like "One build a Boson out of two Fermions"...:)
This sounds great but it doesn't mean anything..:)
This would mean something if there were a logical link between spin and charge...:) Current Science has no such logical connection.
My theory provides the logical link between spin and charge.
I hope you will pay the required attention to understand that the reason why you can place a bunch of Hypergeometrical Cooper Pairs close together is because their net interaction is ZERO and it is not because you called it a Boson nor because the pair has zero spin!!!...:)
You know, the Electron was always a Fermion until BCS came up with the concept of Cooper pair. This is a dress-up but it doesn't provide any substancial explanation why a Cooper pair doesn't interact. In this very short blog, I provided such explanation and eliminated the need to dress an Electron as a Boson...:) This doesn't mean anything and doesn't provide any physical insight that will allow for the creation of Room Temperature Superconductors or other more relevant discoveries.
Any dilator has spin otherwise it would had recombined with its antidilator and returned into Nothing...;) The Universe is composed only of dilators which can get together to make things that does not apparently spin. It is just appearances. Things always spins...It just happens that two four-dimensional spins can be seem in three dimensions as a 3D pseudo-rotation..:)
The physics is invisible to your eyes and instruments. It can only be seem with the eyes of the mind... and I have some teardrops to clarify this subject...:)
As I did in Newton First Law, I will provide the Why? You know that Why is the question that will destroy any Cybernetic Supercomputer Hell Bent on World Domination...:)
Why is normally left to Theology and in Science it is always dressed up as a Principle (Equivalence Principle in Quantum Mechanics or Gravitation/Inertia, or Hamilton Principle etc) or sometimes it becomes a Conjecture..:) which is the lowest level of scientific speculation...
What I am detailing here has already been mentioned in my papers and books but I guess it is always worthwhile to draw a picture...:)
Let's draw the two electrons with opposing spins:
You might notice something different between the two electrons. When they spin in different directions they reach different mid-points. In the spin 0.5 electron, the next state is an antiproton on its side, while it is a proton in the spin -0.5 electron (or vice-versa depeding upon definition). Of course, here we have two electron and two anti-electron phases repeling each other but we also have two proton-antiproton phases attracting each other... Thus the net repulsion is ZERO...:) That is much smaller than INFINITE ..:)
From Antenae Theory you should also notice that since the Proton and Antiprotons are sideways, their attraction will only be felt in close proximity...:) Near-Field is the correct terminology...
This means that there is a difference between having two electrons with the same spin and two of opposing spins.
As in the Little Prince blog, What is essential is invisible to the Eyes
The difference happens to be observable only in the four dimension and only when we don't have a material existence...:)
This difference is not some obscure and unexplained exchange energy..:) Instead one has an electrostatic interaction between Protons and Antiprotons in a four-dimensional spatial manifold. The subject of binding energy is to be studied by adding a relative kinetic energy (temperature) to the pair. A Cooper Pair with a non-zero temperature will have a net interaction that can be calculated by magnetism, and thus can be calculated in the spacetime side of the Hypergeometrical Universe Icon above. Please read the paper or books to understand how magnetism is modeled in hypergeometrical terms.
That, in a nutshell, is the reason WHY there are Cooper pairs...
It is also the physical reason for the exchange energy in Quantum Mechanics.
Cheers,
MP
PS- Next I will start with how to calculate the Mass (3D Volume overlap) of a Neutron... I will follow with the Hyperons and all isotopes..:)
This is how you will be able to design the stable new elements for your spaceships...:)