New ideas in physics

A. THE NATURE OF PHOTONS. ( According to the Charge Conservation photons of spin h/2π move at c as spinning dipoles able to give local time-varying Ey/Bz = c).

1.In 1963 th American physicists French and Tessman showed experimentally that Maxwell's hypothesis of displacement current (Id) involves misconceptions (Am. J. Phys. 31,201, 1963).
2.Under the quantum theory of Planck and Einstein (photons) and the fact that the troublesome hypothesis of self-propagating fields is based on wrong postulations we developed the model of dipolic particles ( L.Kaliambos, 1994) in which photons of spin h/2π behave like spinning dipoles having the spin axis z always perpendicular to the velocity of light c. Here the Charge Conservation implies a dipole, since γ rays give the charges of electron and positron.( Pair Production, 1932).
3.This model is based on the experiment of Faraday, who observed in1846 that the magnetic field B changes the plane of polarization of light, since B exerts a torque on a moving dipole.
4.According to the laws of Coulomb and Biot-Savart, the charges +q and -q at the center of a dipole give Ey 2sinφ(1/4πεο)(q/r2) where φ is the angle between the velocity c and the dipole axis α 2r. Furthermore at the same point Bz 2sinφ(1/4πεοc2)(qc/r2). That is, Ey/Bz c. Note that one gets the same relation Ey/Bz = c at every point in space around the dipole with more sophisticated equations. The dipole oscillates at c because the repulsive magnetic force Fm between +q and -q becomes equal to the attractive electric force Fe when φ π/2 and υ c. At high frequency its average r becomes very small because it has a constant angular momentum like a spinning dancer.
5.The time-varying Ey/Bz c of a photon are always in phase with each other, while Maxwell's theory predicts out-of-phase components near the Ac source propagated through an elastic ether. Moreover under the basic laws of electromagnetism equating the electric energy density E2εο/2 of a capacitor with the magnetic energy density B2/2μο of an inductor one gets in the system E/B c, since Weber showed that 1/εoμo c2. Whereas Maxwell derived E/B c by comparing a false electric field E of the induction law in a loop with a wrong displacement current Id in a capacitor able to give the desired result. Note that in the induction law (ε -dΦ/dt) Maxwell thought that in a loop of radius r the emf is due to an electric field E given by ε E2πr -dΦ/dt .But it is well-known that the motional emf is due to a magnetic force. So it is given by ε (Fm/q) 2πr = - dΦ/dt. Moreover the magnetic energy Um of an inductor implies that a changing magnetic field cannot produce electric field E but only a magnetic force Fm. Also in the capacitor the changing electric field cannot produce magnetic field B but only an electric force Fe of the electric energy Ue. Of course this fact confirms the experiment of French and Tessman who showed the incorrectness of Id .
6.When the dipole (photon) moves in dielectrics the Ey due to two charges is reduced because of the polarization of the dielectric material. Hence, this reduction of Ey leads to c' < c. Here we explain also Einstein’s postulation that in vacuem c is the same in all inertial frames since the Biot-Savart low after the researches of Weber involves the proportionality factor 1/4πεοc2 .
7.In this case we have E'y/Bz c' and an index of refraction n c/c' since on a boundary the one charge moves at c' while at the same moment the second one moves at c. Moreover the crowding of photons in pinholes leads to complete waves which cannot be explained by Maxwell's theory.
8.When photons interact with electrons we get: Ey edy dW hν and Bzedy Fmdt p mc. Since Ey/Bz c one finds m hν/c2. In relativity hν/m c2 is derived also by using the simple Doppler relation δν/ν υ/c. So applications of classical laws on photons lead to relativistic dynamics and to quantum mechanics, since the Shroedinger equation is based on p hν/c = h/λ.
9.Here the electric force Fe Eye and the magnetic force Fm Bze(dy/dt) are the interactions between the charges of photon and the charge e of electron since the basic Coulomb law of force and the experiment of Ampere were based on the action at a distance. Of course, for the cimplicity of problems according to the basic definitions of fields, Ey and Bz are the forces that would act on unit charges and unit velocities. However, under the influence of Maxwell’s theory charges or currents are thought of as producing electric and magnetic fields everywhere in space which are a property of space and move without the charges according to Maxwell’s false idea of self-propagating fields.
10.In the absorptions of photons hν/m c2 must be equal to Einstein’s famous formula E/dm c2.Of course the photon mass justifies its spin, the gravitational red shift and the gravitational bending of light. When it is sufficient it gives the total mass hν/c2 2me of an electron and a positron where the two opposite charges lead to the conclusion that photons behave like spinning dipoles. On theother hand for hν/c2< 2me the two opposite charges of a photon ( dipole) cannot be separated. Conclusions: Under the errors of Maxwell's postulations we see that Faraday’s experiment (1846)leads to the conclusion that photons move at c as spinning dipoles of an energy E hν and solve the photon-wave dilemma of two very different theories, since nature works in only one way.
MASS-ENERGY EQUIVALENCE OF MATTER AND OF PHOTONS
Here we clear that our complete formula E/Δm hν/m c2 for the simplest atomic and nuclear structure (hydrogen atom and deuteron) tells us that the concept of mass-energy equivalence connects the concepts of conservation of mass and conservation of energy, which continue to hold separately. This principle also means that mass conservation becomes a requirement of the energy conservation. (Einstein in his book The evolution of physics emphasizes that, if energy changes type and leaves a system it simply takes its mass with it, since nature is inherently symmetric).
Of course the Michelson-Morley experiment led to the m mo/(1-υ2/c2)0.5 and also to the famous formula E/Δm c2, since Einstein was the first scientist who introduced the mass-energy equivalence as a fundamental principle that follows from the relativistic symmetries of space and time. So Einstein suggested that Δm of the very high binding energies of nuclei provides a test of his theory. However for the study of the nuclear structure under the abandonment of electromagnetic laws the source of the nuclear binding energy remained unknown, though the Bohr model and the Shroedinger equation succeeded in finding carefully the binding energy of the hydrogen atom by using the fundamental electromagnetic laws. Under this condition many physicists keep on believing that the source of the nuclear binding energy is the mass defect Δm by using the false idea that the mass is converted to energy under Einstein’s formula E /Δm c2 in spite of the photon mass m hν/c2. But mass-energy equivalence does not imply that mass be converted to energy, and indeed implies the opposite, since photons are never at rest. In physics of elementary particles, certain types of particles (including photons), can be created and destroyed, but the precursors and products of such reactions retain both the original mass and energy, both of which remain unchanged (conserved) throughout the process. In the case of the binding energy of deuteron a careful analysis of the magnetic moments of nucleons leads to considerable charge distributions as: (-5e/3,+8e/3) for the proton and ( +8e/3.-8e/3) for the neutron. Successfully they are able to give the binding energy E (2.2246 MeV) (1.6/1013) J/MeV. Hence, Δm E/c2 hν/c2 0.3955/1029 Kg, which is measureable.
B. STRONG NUCLEAR FORCES. (The magnetic moments of nucleons imply considerable charge distributions which give very strong proton-neutron bonds of short range).
1.After the discovery of the uncharged neutron (n) which led to the abandonment of fundamental electromagnetic laws, Heisenberg (1932) proposed the idea of an exchange force between the protons of antiparallel spin (bonding state of S=0), by applying Pauli's exclusion principle (1925).
2.Starting with the simplest molecule H2+ in which two protons (p-p system) of opposite spin are attracted by one electron, Heisenberg said that in the S=0 of protons the presence of one electron produces an exchange force due to a property of spins called exchange symmetry.
3.However in the detailed calculations of spinning electrons and identical nucleons of S0 we showed that an electromagnetic force Fem appears as follows: Fem Fe - Fm. Moreover between the electrons the magnetic attraction Fm is stronger than the electric repulsion Fe at r < 0.5788/1012 m. Whereas in the p-p and n-n systems of S0, Fm never exceeds Fe and only the simple p-n system with parallel spin (S1 of deuteron) exists with net attractive Fe and Fm. Thus, the simplest nuclear structure with a net strong attractive force Fem = -Fe -Fm cannot obey the Pauli principle. (L. Kaliambos 2003).

4.In 1935, since physicists believed that proton has only the charge +e which cannot interact with the zero charge of the neutron, Yukawa using the same ideas of Heisenberg proposed another nuclear force based not on natural laws but on the exchange of some particles called mesons.
5.In 1957 there were determined the factors gp 2.793 of p and gn -1.913 of n giving the magnetic moments μp and μn respectively, which imply charge distributions as +e = (-q + Q) for proton and (+Q' -Q') = 0 for neutron, confirmed by bombarding them with very energetic electrons.
6.In 1964 Gell-Mann and Zueig in their quark model proposed that -q = -e/3 and +Q = +4e/3 or +e = -e/3 +4e/3 for p while for n, (+2e/3 -2e/3) 0. However at the shorter separation 2rp of the simple p-n system they cannot give the observed binding energy Eb -2.2246 MeV of deuteron.
7.In 1973 Gell-Mann and Fritzsch in their theory of Quantum Chromodynamics replaced the fundamental charge of electromagnetic laws by a color charge which may give a color force between quarks or nucleons produced by gluons which have never been observed. That is, we see again Heisenberg's and Yukawa's qualitative description of an exchange force and so far physicists in vain look for a new natural law for finding the quantitative forces between nucleons.
8.Under these difficulties we analysed the gp 2.793 and the gn -1.913 which give for the proton +e = (-5e/3, +8e/3) and for the neutron (+8e/3, -8e/3) = 0 distributed at the centers and along the peripheries respectively. Note that for a uniform +Q in proton one gets +Q = +16e/3.
9.Using +e = (-q +Q) the deep inelastic scattering showed that -q is at the center of proton. So in the relation μp/S = gpe/mp when +Q is along the periphery, we have μp Q(ω/2)rp2 Also the proton as an oblate spheroid has a spin S tmpωrp2 where 0.5 < t < 0.4. (For a spinning disk S 0.5mωr2 while for a spinning sphere S 0.4mωr2). So when t = 0.47742 and +Q = +8e/3 as a multiple of the quark u with +2e/3 we get the experimental gp = 2.793. Using the same method for the neutron we have found that +Q' = +8e/3 at the center and -Q' -8e/3 along the periphery. Surprisingly such charge distributions lead to S1 of deuteron. (L. Kaliambos, 2003).
10.Applications of such dipole-dipole interactions at the shortest separation 2rp 1.626 fermis givealong the radial direction a short-ranged net force leading to the p-n bond of Eb -2.2246 MeV. Of course the attractive forces give a binding energy grater than Eb. For example using the simpleCoulomb potential we can see that the point charges -5e/3 of proton and +8e/3 of neutron at theshortest distance 2rp 1.626×10-15 m give 9×109(-5/3)(8/3)×1.6×10-19/1.626×10-15 -3.936 MeV. Conclusions: Nuclear forces obey the same laws that govern atoms and molecules. Applications of such laws on photons lead not only to relativistic dynamics but also to quantum mechanics.
C. NUCLEAR STRUCTURE. ( It is due to the p-n bonds when they exceed the p-p and n-n repulsions since a close packing of nucleons brings the p-n bonds closer together).
1. So far in the absence of a real force the most important structure models like the Fermi Gas, the Nuclear Shell and the Collective model, (based on the Pauli principle), lead to complications.
2.Using Fe and Fm for the Deuteron we see that the charges (-5e/3, 8e/3) of proton and (8e/3, -8e/3) of neutron give a net attractive Fem of short range leading exactly to Eb -2.2246 MeV with S1 (in radial direction), which contradicts the Pauli principle. In the first diagram you see the two deuterons D1 and D2 formed along the radial direction with parallel spins of p1-n1 and p2-n2 systems.
3. For the structure of Helium ( 4 He ) the two deuterons D1 and D2 of the first diagram are coupled along the spin axis z. Here the p1-n2 and p2-n1 bonds along the spin axis are very strong with oriented spins of S0. They exceed the weak repulsions of non-oriented spins of the p1-p2 and n1-n2 systems along the diagonals x of the formed rectangle. Therefore a very strong binding energy of -28.29 MeV appears with a total spin S0 of the p-n bonds. This opposite spin led to the Fermi Gas model, because it was believed that 4He has no p-n bonds but p-p and n-n bounds of S=0 according to the Pauli principle, even though the simple p-p and n-n systems cannot exist. Also, the large energy of 4He and of other very stable nuclei (magic nuclei) led to the model of the nuclear shell, which cannot be related to the stable electron shells due to the central potential in atoms.
4.For example the two stable rectangles of 4He cannot be bound to give the simplest parallelepiped of Beryllium, 8Be, since the p-p and n-n systems in the two squares have S 1 along the diagonals and exert a very strong repulsive Fem Fe + Fm which exceed the three p-n bonds per nucleon. Note that according to the Fermi Gas model, Beryllium of 4p 4n with S0 should be very stable.
5.Surprisingly, in the greater compound parallelepipeds the p-n bonds lead to stable nuclei. In the third diagram you see that 16O is very stable since in the inner squares there are four p-n bonds per nucleon. Only some nuclei with extra neutrons are unstable as in the radioactive Carbon, where the two extra neutrons form two weak single bonds (unstable bonds) outside a parallelepiped leading to the β decay. In this case one extra neutron becomes a proton which forms two bonds per nucleon (stable bonds) in Nitrogen .

6. Such extra neutrons are observed also in heavy nuclei but they give stable structure, when they are bound with two or three protons. For example in the Lead of the last diagram ( 208Pb) with 82 protons and 126 neutrons there is a very stable orthorhombic system with six bonds per nucleon surrounded by other small parallelepipeds which form 44 blank positions for receiving the 44 extra neutrons. However in heavier nuclei the long-ranged repulsive forces of the p-p systems exceed the short-ranged p-n bonds and lead to the decay.( L. Kaliambos, 2003). In neutron stars one sees the opposite where the long -ranged gravitational forces overcome the short-ranged n-n repulsions.
Conclusions: In the simplest nuclear structure (deuteron) the charge distributions of protons and neutrons lead to the simple nuclear structure along the radial direction, which cannot obey the Pauli principle. Moreover the very stable nuclear structure of 4He is due to the strong p-n bonds along the spin axis, which exceed the weak p-p and n-n repulsions of non oriented spins. However in 8Bethe p-p and n-n repulsions of parallel spin exceed the three p-n bonds per nucleon. In heavier nuclei the p-n systems along the radial and axial directions form symmetrical shapes with no more than six bonds per nucleon in very stable orthorhombic systems, where a type of shell structure forms blank positions for receiving the extra neutrons, which are bound with two or three protons.Consequently we reveal the nuclear structure by using the well- established electromagnetic laws, while the qualitative forces of Yukawa and of Quantum Chromodynamics based on the so called exchange forces due to virtual particles cannot lead to the nuclear structure.
Here you see the diagrams of 4He, 8Be, 16O and 208Pb with the centers of p (Ù ) and extra n (o) while the centers of ordinary neutrons are at the rest cross sections.

File:Kaliamboslef.jpg
D. ATRRACTIVE MAGNETIC FORCES BETWEEN TWO ELECTRONS OF OPPOSITE SPIN AT SHORT INTER-ELECTRON SEPARATIONS OVERCOME THE ELECTRIC REPULSIONS AND FORM PAIRS WITH VIBRATION ENERGIES IN ORBITALS OF MANY-ELECTRON ATOMS AND MOLECULES.
1. Because of the qualitative descriptions of the spinning electrons (exchange symmetry) neither was able to provide satisfactory equations for explaining the pairing of two electrons and the energies in the ground states of heliumlike atoms e.t.c. Under these difficulties detailed calculations of two electrons of opposite spin ( S0 ) at a separation r lead to Fem Fe -Fm Ke2/r2 - α2 Ke2/r4, where α 3h/4πmec 0.5788/1012 . In this case the attractive Fm is a spin-dependent force of short range which becomes equal to the long-ranged Fe when α rο = 0.5788/1012 m. (L. Kaliambos, 2003).
2.Moreover no third electron can approach this electron-electron system, since the antiparallel spin gives B 0. Therefore in the helium atom with two electrons of opposite spin orientation this fact accounts for the chemical inertness (noble gas). It is of interest to note that at r< ro (where the attractive Fm exceeds the repulsive Fe) an attractive electromagnetic force Fem Fe - Fm produces a vibration energy (Ev) in the electron -electron system under an emf. On the other hand under the rules of quantum mechanics the third electron in Li must occupy the 2s state able to be removed and attached to the single electron with S = 0 of a non-metal atom for making an ionic bond.
3.Such a positive energy of two electrons with opposite spin opened the way for understanding the total (negative) binding energies of many-electron atoms and molecules.

4.For example in all the ground-state energies (E) of heliumlike atoms e.t.c. after a careful analysis of the energies (E) of H-, He, Li+ e.t.c. we get the following equation: E = -27.2Z2 + (16.95Z - 4.1), where Z is the number of protons. (L.Kaliambos, 2008).
5.Here the first term expresses the negative binding energy ( in eV) as given by the Bohr model or the quantum mechanics, based on the potential of the nucleus and the two-electron system, while the second and third term express the positive vibration energy Ev ( in eV) of spinning electrons. For example for Z1 and Z2 we find the experimental values -14.35 eV for H- and -79 eV for He (noble gas). Note that the probability density for the two-electron system is large at the short distance r < ro . That is, the two oscillating electrons behave like one particle. On the other hand the parallel spin (S1) gives repulsions of both Fm and Fe under the relation Fem Fe +Fm.
6.However if one of the two electrons in Helium is raised to a higher energy level with S0 or S1 the vibration energy Ev (16.95Z- 4.1) eV disappears because r > ro. In both cases the two electrons move in different orbitals since Fm is very small. Note that according to the qualitative symmetric space the two electrons of S0 should occupy the same region, even though r > ro . Of course the S1 leads to the lower energies than those of S0 with Fem Fe -Fm since the magnetic repulsion Fm of the S1 giving strong repulsive Fem = Fe +Fm favours the negative potential of the nuclear charge.
7.In the molecule H2 the pair of two electrons feels the electrostatic potential of both protons when they have opposite spin (bonding state). Here we write again Fem Fe - Fm but in the p-p systems the attractive Fm never exceeds the repulsive Fe. So the p-p repulsion of S0 is weaker than the p-p repulsion of parallel spin (anti-bonding state of the p-p system) where we have a strong repulsive force Fem = Fe + Fm. In the bonding state H2 has a binding energy of -31.7 eV, which is stronger than the energy of H- because the two-electron system behaves like one particle and attracts the two protons when they have opposite spin. Hence, in the bonding state it is energetically favourable for the two atoms to form the covalent bond of H2. Of course this energy is weaker than the binding energy of He, (-79 eV), since H2 involves the weak repulsive force Fem = Fe -Fm of the p-p system.
8.In H2+ of course Ev disappears as in the case of the helium ion, where the one electron attracts the nucleus of +2e. But in H2+ the binding energy is weaker than that of the helium ion, because of the p-p repulsion Fem = Fe -Fm ( bonding state of opposite spin of the p-p system).
Conclusions: The description of electromagnetic forces Fem between two electrons with S= 0 ads a
new idea in the quantum mechanics for understanding the additional vibration energy in the Bohr
model of many-electron atoms and molecules, since the attractive magnetic force Fm becomes
stronger than the electric repulsion Fe at r < ro. Moreover in molecules the pairing electrons of S=0,
(opposite spin) behave like one particle able to attract the p-p system when it has the bonding state
of opposite spin with a weak repulsive electromagnetic force Fem = Fe -Fm .
ABSTRACTS
Impact of Maxwell's equation of displacement current on electromagnetic laws and comparison of the Maxwellian waves with our model of dipolic particles. (1994)
Maxwell's reasons for introducing displacement current are considered and attention is drawn to a basic error in the formulation of Maxwell's equation of the displacement current between the plates of a capacitor as though it covers all the length of the circuit which contains the capacitor. It is emphasized that it is sufficient to apply the Biot-Savart law to all the real currents and to ignore the fallacious idea of displacement current. Thus the troublesome hypothesis of self propagating fields
in Maxwell's theory is compared with our theory of dipolic particles to interpret the dual view of
the nature of light.
Nuclear structure is governed by the fundamental laws of electromagnetism (2003)
Contradicting interpretations of the nuclear force as given by two contrasted approaches like the meson theory and the quantum chromodynamics, are overcome here by reviving the basic electromagnetic laws which are applicable on the existing charged subconstituents in nucleons. On this basis, considerable charge distributions in nucleons as multiples of 2e/3 and -e/3 are determined after a careful analysis of the magnetic moments and the results of the deep inelastic scattering.
Basic equations derived from the distributed charges of oriented spins of nucleons give strong and short ranged forces leading exactly to the binding energies of deuteron and other nuclei. According to these interactions p-p and n-n systems repel and only the p-n bonds form rectangles and closely packed parallelepipeds providing an excellent description of nuclear properties.
In this dynamic subject such contrary forces create structures of saturation and of finite number of nucleons. They also invalidate the charge independence hypothesis and differ fundamentally from the central potential and the effects of the Pauli principle of electronic configurations responsible for the development of two different models like the Fermi gas and nuclear shell.
There are two kinds of p-n bonds, which imply anisotropy, leading often to elongated shapes of vibrational and rotational models of excitation, while the surface tension contributes to the creation of non-elongated shapes with stable arrangements. Finally, for A>40 a type of shell structure provides new rules for understanding the structure of magic nuclei for N>Z and the increasing ratio N/Z with A.
Spin-spin interactions of electrons and also of nucleons create atomic molecular and nuclear structure . (2008)
Fundamental interactions of spinning electrons at an interelectron separation less than 578,8 fm yield attractive electromagnetic forces with S=0 creating vibrations under a motional emf. They explain the indistinguishability of electrons and give a vibration energy able for calculating the ground-state energies of many-electron atoms without using any perturbative approximation. Such forces create two-electron orbitals able to account for the exclusion principle and the mechanism of covalent bonds.
In the outer subshells of atoms the penetrating orbitals interact also as pair-pair systems and deform drastically the probability densities of the quantum mechanical electron clouds. Such a dynamics of deformation removes the degeneracy and leads to the deviation from the Bohr shell scheme. However in the interior of atoms the large nuclear charge leads to a spherically symmetric potential with non interacting pairs for creating shells of degenerate states giving an accurate explanation of the X-ray lines. On the other hand considerable charge distributions in nucleons as multiples of 2e/3 and -e/3 determined by the magnetic moments, interact for creating the nuclear structure with p-n bonds. Such spin-spin interactions show that the concept of the antisymmetric wave function for fermions is inapplicable not only in the simple p-n system but also in the LS coupling in which the electrons interact from different quantum states giving either S0 or S1.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu