Category Archives: Physics Book

The Physics Book.

The Universe of Atoms (Part IV)

ReferenceA Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics

Stanislao Cannizzaro (1826 – 1910) adopted a molecular, i.e., polyatomic, view of the elements, and showed that the atomic weights of elements, prepared in volatile compounds, could be deduced by the application of Avogadro’s hypothesis together with accurate combining weight data and vapor densities.

Cannizzaro’s greatest contribution was that “the different quantities of the same element contained in different molecules are all whole multiples of one and the same quantity, which always being entire, has the right to be called an atom.”

Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev (1834 – 1907) discovered that the elements, arranged according to magnitude of atomic weight, show a periodic change of properties. He arranged elements in vertical columns according to increasing atomic weight, so that the horizontal lines contain analogous elements, again according to increasing atomic weight. This resulted in a table from which several general conclusions could be drawn, such as, chemically analogous elements have atomic weights either in close agreement or increasing by equal amounts. The table showed new analogies, suggested corrections to some atomic weights, and predicted many new elements that were later discovered.

It showed that the elements most widely distributed in nature have small atomic weights, and all such elements are distinguished by their characteristic behavior. They are thus typical, and the lightest element, hydrogen, is therefore rightly chosen as the typical unit of mass. The magnitude of the atomic weight determines the properties of the element, whence, in the study of compounds, regard is to be paid not only to the number and properties of the elements and their mutual action, but to the atomic weights of the elements.

Mendeleev founded his system upon the quantity of the atomic weight because “the atomic weight is a quantity which does not refer to the momentary state of an element but belongs to a material part of it, a part which it has in common with the free element and with all its compounds.”

Thus, elements combine as multiples of a certain quantity called their atomic weight. This is similar to the later idea of “quantum”.  This “atomic weight” as quantum applies to chemical reactions. It refers to atomic configurations that are stable in themselves and in molecular combinations. The implication is that chemical combinations of elements in random quantities are not possible. It is this quantity or multiple of this quantity that exists freely in equilibrium with the background of primary substance also. The whirlpool model of the atom is consistent with this observation.

.

The Universe of Atoms (Part III)

ReferenceA Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics

Newton in his Opticks had suggested that gravitation might arise from the variation in density of an elastic medium filling all space. John Herapath (1790 – 1868) theorized that density differential in ethereal medium on the two sides of a body created a force on the body. So, he considered the relationship between temperature, pressure and density of the supposed ethereal medium. He adopted a kinetic view and provided a proof relating the pressure and volume to the velocities and masses of the rapidly moving medium.

This is like applying the kinetic theory to a continuum of varying density. We may thus see the spectrum of light as this continuum where different frequencies provide different densities and the density gradient appears as force. This is consistent with the whirlpool model of the atom where the density of the primary substance gradually increases toward the center, until it becomes completely solid. However, this was not acceptable to the scientists of 19th century because it required perfectly elastic collisions and deformation (infinite divisibility) of the medium.

Robert Brown (1773 – 1858) observed, “The very unexpected fact of seeming vitality retained by these minute particles so long after the death of the plant would not perhaps have materially lessened my confidence in the supposed peculiarity … I found also that on bruising first the floral leaves of Mosses, and then all other parts of those plants, that I readily obtained similar particles, not in equal quantity indeed, but equally in motion.” Brownian motion is an effect arising from the imbalance of molecular impacts on a free microscopic particle. In this sense, molecules have a primitive form of life as they have self-propelled motion. An inherent motion of molecules underlies the Kinetic theory of gases.

John James Waterston (1811 – 1883) showed among other things that under equal pressure and volume, the root mean square velocity of gas molecules is inversely proportional to their mass density. This relationship may be extended to the continuum represented by light. The square of the velocity of light is inversely proportional to its density as represented by some function of its frequency.

James Preston Joule (1818 – 1889) firmly established the idea that mechanical energy could be transformed into internal energy and thus produce the same effect as “heating” a body and that a fixed ratio existed between mechanical work and thermal units. Heat is properly defined as energy in transit due solely to a temperature difference.  Joule saw that chemical energy in battery is converted to electrical energy in the circuit and that this in turn is converted into heat. This ultimately established the Law of Conservation of Energy.

Underlying all properties of substance is the conservation of energy and mass. Energy is basically motion, and it seems to condense as mass. The motion can never be zero in an absolute sense. Therefore, mass and energy seem to transform into each other by degrees. Both energy and mass may be classified as the primary substance.

James Clerk Maxwell (1831 – 1879) brilliantly deduced the distribution of molecular speeds in a gas at equilibrium at any temperature. This great step forward in the understanding of the behavior of the elementary particles of gases represents one of the major advances in the progress of the atomic theory of matter. Besides, Maxwell provided a formula for the coefficient of viscosity of a gas which showed this quantity to be independent of pressure, a most unexpected and surprising result.

These mathematical results are just as valid for the whirlpool model as for the spherical model of the atom.

.

The Universe of Atoms (Part II)

ReferenceA Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics

Part I of this series introduced many new concepts including new models for light and atom. We now look into the effects of these concepts on existing ideas in physics.  

The theory of atoms was most successfully supported by the investigations in chemistry. Dalton (1766 – 1844) envisioned chemical combination to be an atom to atom union. This was most immediately useful in settling the question of combination in definite proportions. The formula of the compound could now be assumed. From that it was possible to infer the relative weights of the constituent atoms. It established that there is no creation or destruction of atoms, and the pressure of a volume of gas depends on the number of free atoms in that volume. These free atoms are all alike for a given gas. Among fluids particles of one kind can pass through particles of another kind easily. Such diffusion takes place because the particles are always disposed to move to that situation where the pressure is least.

Gay Lussac (1778 – 1850) showed that when gases enter into chemical reactions, they do so in numerically simple volume ratios, and the volume of the products, when gaseous, may be expressed by simple integral numerical ratios to the volume of the original reactants. This is true for gases, when the force of cohesion between free atoms is minimum, and where most of the volume is due to the “atmosphere of heat” surrounding the hard “atom”. The volume ratio is, most likely, also the ratio of free atoms that combine.

Avogadro (1776 – 1856) advanced the principle that equal volumes of different gases at the same temperature and pressure contain the same number of free particles. By this principle Avogadro correctly deduced the chemical formula for water, ammonia, nitrous oxide, nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide. However, for the principle to be valid it was necessary to introduce a new hypothesis, namely, that the free particles of many of the elementary gases such as hydrogen and nitrogen were molecules i.e., combinations of two, or sometimes more, atoms.

This principle means that the same volume is contributed by the individual particles of all gases. In other words, the mass bearing portion of the particle is infinitesimal in volume compared to the total volume of the particle. Therefore, in the whirlpool model of the atom most of the mass is concentrated at the center.

When the temperature of a certain volume of gas is increased, its pressure increases proportionally. Since pressure is due to the repulsive force among the particles, such force increases with temperature. This increases the agitation of the particles, hence increasing their impact on the walls of the container. Since pressure is the same at the same temperature for the same number of particles, the repulsive force among those particles must be the same regardless of their mass. In other words, the average impact of a particle on the walls of the container must be the same. If the molecule is heavier, then its velocity must be less. If the molecule is lighter, its velocity must be greater. This implies an inverse relationship between mass and velocity of the gas molecules under certain conditions.

The notion that all matter is composed of the same primary substance and that when organized in different ways produces the various elements, occurs far back in antiquity. In Dalton’s theory, atoms are distinguished by their different masses. Prout (1785 – 1850) hypothesized that the atoms of all elements are simply combinations of hydrogen. This was based on the specific gravity of elements being integer multiple of the specific gravity of hydrogen. Thus, the mass of hydrogen atom became the fundamental unit of atomic mass. This may have some bearing on how the central core in the whirlpool model of atom is stably formed.

.

The Universe of Atoms (Part I)

ReferenceA Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics

The entire universe seems to be formed out of some primary substance that exists as a continuum. The thinnest form of this primary substance appears as space (Descartes 1596 – 1650). In this space appear atomic eddies of primary substance that coagulate rapidly toward their center.

We may call this the “whirlpool” model of the atom. In this model, the primary substance gradually condenses as it gets closer to the center, until it becomes very dense at the center. Instead of being a rigid, impenetrable ball, the atom has a spinning, gradually condensing, whirlpool like flat structure. Fractals of this structure may be seen throughout the cosmos in the form of solar systems and galaxies.

According to Boscovich (1711 – 1787) atoms cannot be hard, rigid, massive spheres because they cannot change their velocity instantaneously upon collision. This objection is overcome when we look at atoms as a condensing whirlpool rather than a solid impenetrable ball.

Our planet, its atmosphere, and the deep space around it, are all made up of this primary substance. The deep space consists of the continuum of primary substance but rarely of coagulating eddies or atoms. The atmosphere around our planet, however, is full of atoms that combine as molecules and are separated by the background continuum of primary substance.

Christian Huygens (1629 – 1695) forwarded the wave theory of light that is present in the background. The wave property of light essentially declares it to be a continuum. The wave theory, however, sees light as a “disturbance” rather than as a substance. This seems to be a major inconsistency. If we look at light as a substance that is moving at great speed it explains both the wave and particle like properties. The wave-like property comes from its flimsiness and great speed, and its particle-like property comes from its finite density. The structure of light may also describe the background continuum of primary substance.

Michael Faraday (1791 – 1867) used lines of force to describe the nature of light and the primary substance. Later Maxwell (1831 – 1879) attributed electromagnetic characteristics to light but he did not acknowledge it as a substance.

The 16th century scientists were greatly interested in the study of the atmosphere made of molecules separated by the background continuum of primary substance. They found that the air compresses and stretches like spring. The springiness of air comes from a balance of attractive and repulsive forces among its molecules. These molecules have a whirlpool-structure similar to atoms. The molecules move freely maintaining a certain distance among each other. When this distance is decreased there is repulsion, but when it is increased there is attraction. In this way, air and other gases act like elastic fluids.

The density of the background primary substance is negligible compared to the density of the molecules. Therefore, the density of air is essentially described by the number of molecules in a certain volume. Compression of air means the decrease in the average distance among the air molecules. This results in a decrease in volume and increase in density. It also results in repulsion among molecules, which appears as increased pressure. Robert Boyle (1627 – 1691) discovered the law that the pressure of a given mass of an ideal gas is inversely proportional to its volume at a constant temperature.

Robert Hooke (1635 – 1703), on the other hand, stressed upon the intrinsic motion of the molecules and that this motion was different for molecules of different masses. From the perspective of the “whirlpool” model, most of the mass of an atom or molecule is concentrated at the center but it also fans out outward while decreasing in density and increasing in motion. The outer edges of molecules merge into the background of still lower density just like eddies merge into the surrounding flow. The centers of these molecules, therefore, move at much slower speeds than the surrounding primary substance.

It should be noted here that the conservation laws of momentum and energy do point to some relationship between mass and velocity. The difference is that this relationship takes on a new dimension for the whirlpool model postulated herein. In this case, the idea of “particle” at atomic level is replaced by the idea of “continuum of variable cohesive density”.

In the kinetic theory of gases, the molecules have intrinsic motion. Their velocity changes with temperature but not with pressure. Therefore, it would seem that mass must also change with temperature. This “change in mass” may appear as change in equilibrium forces among the molecules.

A body when pushed in any direction resists that push. This resistance is called inertia of the body as considered by Newton (1642 – 1727). It means that the body is already moving at its natural speed, and any deviation from that speed is resisted. But this must also mean that after a body is deviated from its natural speed by the application of force, it must then return to that speed when the external force is removed. This logical argument differs from Newton’s first law of motion. It, however, admits that the external force somehow reduces the mass of the body imperceptibly to increase its speed.

In the whirlpool model of the atom the density is increasing toward the center. This may appear as a “force of gravity” acting toward the center. This is more perceptible in the fractals of the whirlpool model as solar systems and galaxies. This view is consistent with Newton’s ideas.

.

The Space-Time

ReferenceA Logical Approach to Theoretical Physics

Here is my view on the reality of space-time.

  • The Euclidean space is an idealization of dimensions of matter.
  • Space is not necessarily discrete like dimensions of matter.
  • Space is not necessarily rigid like dimensions of matter.
  • In reality, space is neither discrete nor rigid.

Here the word “discrete” is used in the sense opposite to “continuous” meaning “apart or detached from others; separate; distinct”. We can talk about dimensions in discrete terms, but we cannot do so with space. Space is a continuous whole.

Here the word “rigid” is used in the sense opposite to “flexible” meaning “firmly fixed or set”. We can talk about units for the dimensions of matter to be fixed, but not so for space.

  • A Euclidean point is an idealization of a location in space.
  • A location in space is not necessarily dimensionless.
  • A location is continuous with the space around it.
  • A location is approximated by a discrete point only when there is matter.

It is matter that fixes locations in space by virtue of being rigid. When there is no matter, we cannot fix or pinpoint locations in space.

  • Calculus approaches continuity from the direction of discreteness.
  • Calculus talks about gradually shrinking infinitesimals in that process.
  • We need mathematics that approaches discreteness from the direction of continuity.
  • Such mathematics will approach discreteness as frequency.

Calculus uses a matter-centric viewpoint that approximates continuity in terms of shrinking infinitesimals. When there is no matter as in the case of electromagnetic fields we cannot use rigid infinitesimals for reference. We may need to use lessening frequency to approach continuity. Here discreteness seems to be provided by frequency.

  • Mathematics considers a discrete point to be a primitive notion.
  • In reality, it is the continuous space, which is a primitive notion.
  • The rigidity of space is a function of disturbance in it.
  • Infinite frequency of disturbance generates total rigidity in space.

We cannot use dimensionless Euclidean point as primitive notion because it is not seen as expanding into a continuous space. But we can use continuous space as primitive notion because we can see it as shrinking to generate a dense point that approaches discreteness. It is this “density” that can be associated with rigidity.

  • Discreteness starts to form as space is disturbed.
  • This discreteness increases with frequency.
  • At a certain threshold  frequency, rotational fields start to form within the electromagnetic fields.
  • The first stable form of such rotational field is the electron.

It is postulated that electromagnetic field is the disturbed space. As this disturbance increases as frequency, pockets of rotational electronic fields appear in the wider electromagnetic field.

  • As these rotational fields grow the high frequencies at their center starts to collapse to form a hard nucleus.
  • The next stable form of this rotational field appears to be the hydrogen atom.
  • Mass is naturally created in the nucleus as the frequency of disturbance increases the most at the center.
  • The mysterious factor here is the role of “frequency”.

Mass is naturally created in the nucleus as the frequency of disturbance increases. The task now is to understand the nature of this disturbance.

The theory of special relativity talks about contraction of space and dilation of time at speeds approaching the speed of light. Such conclusions are subjective because the “observer” in that theory is limited in its observation by the speed of light.

Objectivity exists to the degree observer uses the whole universe as its reference. This means using all physical and mental senses. The moment one uses part of the universe as its reference one’s viewpoint descends into subjectivity. Thus mathematics employed by Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity is subjective.

Objectivity is the consistency among inputs from all physical and mental senses. To the degree this consistency is missing, observation is incomplete and subjective.

Reference: From my response on Quora

.