Physics of the 21st century
Приветствую Вас Гость | RSS

Физика 21 века Новая физика - физика 21 века

Choose language of the site:

Афоризм Эйнштейна

Меню сайта:

Главная страница

Полевая теория элементарных частиц


Полевая теория элементарных частиц

Поляризация электромагнитного поля

Элементарные частицы

Элементарные частицы

Строение элементарных частиц

Нейтрон - элементарная частица

Протон - элементарная частица

Электрон - элементарная частица

Электронное нейтрино - элементарная частица

Мюонное нейтрино - элементарная частица

Фундаментальные взаимодействия

Ядерные силы

Элементарные частицы: мифы физики 20 века

Гравитационное поле элементарных частиц

Физические поля элементарных частиц

Теория гравитации элементарных частиц


Теория гравитации элементарных частиц 1

Теория гравитации элементарных частиц 2

Гравитон гравитино - мнение физики

Заблуждения в физике

Заблуждения в физике 20 века

Заблуждения: Кварки

Заблуждения: Виртуальные частицы

Заблуждения: Фундаментальные взаимодействия

Заблуждения: Сильное взаимодействие

Заблуждения: Слабое взаимодействие

Заблуждения: Стандартная модель элементарных частиц

Заблуждения: Бозон Хиггса

Заблуждения: Большой взрыв

Заблуждения: Нейтринные осцилляции

Заблуждения: Черная дыра

Заблуждения: Теория струн

Заблуждения: Кварк-глюонная плазма

Мифы Стандартной модели элементарных частиц

Стандартная модель элементарных частиц

Виртуальная частица - мнение физики


Прелестный кварк (B-кварк)

Очарованный кварк (C-кварк)

Нижний кварк (D-кварк)

Странный кварк (S-кварк)

Истинный кварк (T-кварк)

Верхний кварк (U-кварк)



Калибровочный бозон



Изотопический спин


Мифы астрофизики

Темная материя

Темная энергия

Черные дыры

Большой взрыв

Расширение Вселенной

"Реликтовое излучение"

Красное смещение - мнение физики

Мифы Бозона Хиггса

Бозон Хиггса - мнение физики

Механизм Хиггса

Открытие бозона Хиггса - правда и вымысел

Нейтрино во Вселенной

Роль нейтрино в красном смещении и ...

Загадка нейтрино с точки зрения полевой теории элементарных частиц. Часть 1

Загадка нейтрино ... 5


Умные мысли и не только ...

и Д Р У Г О Е

Гостевая книга



Страница сайта Errors in the physics Страница сайта

In the physics of the second half of XX century the set of "opening" taken on trust without the proof or without checkout has been made. To understand with similar cases and to show that in a series from them other interpretation of the fact is possible also or the saved up data this series of articles is conceived.

It is a wire transfer of articles of "Заблуждения" executed by means of online translator PROMT (!/Natural/)

Errors in the physics: QUARKS


Let's ask a seditious question. Whether there are quarks in the nature. After all them nobody saw and in any experience they were not observed.


The idea of quarks has arisen in connection with growth of number of open elementary particles and as a result attempts of their ordering. It is clear that the more exist of elementary particles; that is the more difficultly trusted in their simplicity and the first that comes to mind that they consist of smaller number more elementary particles. But this is one of possible solutions and completely not unique.


It is considered that quarks correspond to unitary symmetry (SU (2), SU (3), SU (4)). Correspond, but only whether this symmetry is true, after all leptons do not want to submit to it, and with other particles not all is smooth. The statement that is at the heart of microcosm symmetries – not precisely lie. Symmetries in a microcosm are, but only what are caused by properties of space, and with unitary symmetry they blanket have no anything. Unitary symmetry it no more than a mathematical invention for the purpose of ordering of elementary particles - simply telling, a mathematical prop for a hypothesis of quarks.


And in general it is impossible to put an equal-sign between real-life elementary particles and a mirage. If quarks model is true, then leptons should consist of quarks also. At a тау - lepton, what masses do not suffice? But it is not inscribed in model and consequently it have rejected. Well and if leptons are equal to quarks why of them consists nothing and why quarks have a fractional electrical charge, and leptons are not present.


Ordering of a part of elementary particles was the basic argument in advantage quarks models. But the field theory has coped with a problem of ordering of all elementary particles, and the place for quarks and gluons was not in it. And no gravitons relate elementary particles in a single whole. All of them simply are not necessary to the nature. The field is continuous and will be conversed under the laws.


So, existence of quarks is real is not proved. That they approach for the present dominating "theory" is not the proof of their existence. The theory in the field any more can work or works with errors. So the question on existence of quarks remains unclosed. As the nature is can perfectly bypassed and without them.


The definitive answer to this point in question is clear for me. And how many it is necessary to prolong to chase a mirage – is to solve to everyone self-maintained.


And in summary: if to part number of quarks in a elementary particle on two we will gain main quantum number L being the fundamental performance of elementary particles and spotting their properties. But it already has begun absolutely other history – the science, namely a quantum mechanics and a classical electrodynamics – two titans of a microcosm here starts to work.


Vladimir Gorunovich





Errors in the physics: VIRTUAL PARTICLES


Let's understand with one of myths of physics of XX centuries under the name "Virtual particles" directly related to a quantum theory.


At the heart of a quantum theory the statement lies that all interactions have discrete character and are transmitted by means of quanta. But any quanta (except photons) in the free view in the nature it is not observed. Well and as the quantum theory without quanta to exist cannot in any way as fields without quanta is not quantum fields the guess has been made that as carriers of interactions elementary particles can act, being in the virtual state. Differently the quantum theory asserts that elementary particles, of which all substance consists, can be both in a real state, and in the virtual. In the first state they really exist in the Universe, their performances can be found out, measured. In the second state they are carriers of interactions between particles being in a real state and move with light speed (as quantum’s). It is considered that the virtual quantum are carriers of electromagnetic interactions, and the virtual mesons – kernel. Well and as it is impossible to find out the virtual state – that its existence is accepted on trust, without the proof. I want to remind that the classical theory negates possibility of existence of virtual particles as it will contradict known laws of the nature except quantum theory "laws", certainly.


Let's begin one after another.


That is affirms, that at the heart of existence of virtual particles is the indeterminacy relation of Heisenberg, entering restriction on simultaneous measuring of co-ordinates and an impulse of particles lies. We will view it. We take the specified relation


∆p × ∆x ≥ h


Also we will substitute in it a quantum impulse


∆mc × ∆x ≥ h


Then we multiply and it is divisible on «c» the left part


mc2 × ∆x/c ≥ h


Whence we will gain


∆E × ∆t ≥ h (since E=mc2, and x/c=t)


It is considered that the law of conservation of energy can be broken for a while ∆t on quantity ∆E=h/∆t.


It is interesting gained. Have begun with impossibility of simultaneous precise measurement of co-ordinates and an impulse of elementary particles as in a microcosm any measuring imports contortions to a measured, and have terminated infringement of the law of the nature. We will go further.


Let's view now the virtual quantum.


Let at some instant time t the elementary particle core (for example, π + meson) has let out the virtual quantum with energy ∆E, and it has departed aside from a particle with light speed. After a while smaller, than ∆t he has come across other particle (for example, π – meson), has been immersed by it, and thus there was an interaction of both particles. The effect of interaction can be or display of attractive forces between particles or forces of pushing away (if both particles have a charge of one sign).


There is a first question: as particles learn that it is necessary to be drawn, or to be repelled, if quantum of a charge has no.


The second question: if while the virtual quantum flied, the second particle has moved aside or further and the quantum has missed or has not reached. Then particles will not interact at all – but it completely contradicts experimental data. If the quantum measures such that cannot miss then as it is immersed by a core of other particle which in the sizes on some orders is less?


The third question: if the second particle in general is not present nearby then that the virtual quantum will not be let out? But then there is a question - as the first particle learns that it is necessary to let out the virtual quantum and whence it gains the information on quantity of energy and a direction in which it should fly.


Well and if the virtual quantum are let out, and in the absence of other particle then there is other question - why there is an emission with the given energy ∆E instead of from what or another after all the spectrum ∆E is perpetual. As the virtual quantum learns that has come it is time to be liquidated itself and in general that occurs to it after time ∆t.


The fourth question: if sideways from the second particle there will be the third on hardly большем distance from the first. It is that will not interact at all with the first. After, the virtual quantum is already immersed by the second particle. Whence the first particle learns that it is necessary to radiate one more virtual quantum for the third and as between them energy ∆E, on which a limit (∆E=h / ∆ t is erected will be divided).


 Now we will a little change requirements, having placed the third particle for second that the first it did not see. It is that will not interact at all with the first. After, the virtual quantum will immerse second and if they go through second, through whereas the second will interact.


Let's surround the first particle with set of other both signs of an electrical charge, but on identical distance from the first. Where and as the first particle will radiate the virtual quantum, and that force of interaction inversely proportional to number of participating particles – but it completely does not correspond to experimental data.


The fifth question: if radiation of the virtual quantum is conducted extensively uniformly and continuously then the number of the virtual quantum immersed by another particle will be in inverse proportion to a quadrate of distance to the first particle. In this case potential energy of interactions will change under the law 1/r3, instead of as not 1/r.


The sixth question: at radiation of the virtual quantum the radiant should gain a recoil momentum and depart to the opposite side. As a result a particle should shake at each certificate of radiation. And liquidation of the virtual quantum will go in general with infringement of a law of conservation of momentum.


The seventh question: at a spin of photon is equal to unity. Radiation and liquidation of the virtual quantum go also with infringement of a conservation law of a spin?


The eighth question: as the virtual quantum of one particle interacts with the virtual quantum of other particle. If they do not interact, and fly by through then they with the same success can fly by and through a elementary particle, without having noted it, and no interaction will exist. And if they dissipate the one on the other, whereas they reach a core of other elementary particle – there collisions is not to avoid.


Well and electrodynamics laws in general are skipped. And after all the quantum is quantum of an electromagnetic field and process of its radiation or uptake is electromagnetic process.


I do not try to view interaction of the charged elementary particles possessing magnetic fields. The quantum theory in life will not solve such problem.


In my opinion all is clear – the virtual quantum in the nature do not exist, and nature laws are carried out, what mathematical manipulations with them would not spend. Nature laws not us are created, and not to us them to change. Thus, the quantum theory statement about discrete character of interactions contradicts laws of the nature and does not correspond to experimental data.


Whether instead, of it was better instead of inventing the virtual quantum and to demand for them infringement of laws of the nature simply to admit presence of cross of electric fields and to be converted to a classical electrodynamics without breaking nature laws. So according to a classical electrodynamics energy (U), concluded in electric field intensity (E) is spotted by the formula:


U =1/8 π ∫E2dv (the integral undertakes on all field)


Well and as intensity of electric fields from different radiant can put, we will gain the following. If intensity of fields (E1 and E2) in space have one sign (not very well «+» or «-») then will be (E1 + E2)2> (E12 + E22) – forces of pushing away take place. Well and if intensity of both fields in space have opposite signs then will be (E1 + E2)2 <(E12 + E22) – take place attractive forces. And so is for any pair of particles. All corresponds to laws of the nature and it is necessary to invent nothing.




Objections in questions second, the third, the fourth, the sixth and the eighth concern also the virtual mesons and nuclear interactions. To these objections it is necessary to add still the following:


First, in the nature is exist π+, π and π0 mesons. We will admit, the proton has let out virtual π+ meson and itself was transmuted into a neutron. Then the π+ meson should overcome at first an electric field of other proton, and on it additional energy is required. After uptake a π+ meson other proton its electrical charge becomes equal +2e. Well and if the π+ meson does not reach or will miss, its liquidation will occur also to charge conservation law infringement and as then the former proton will return the electrical charge back.


Well and if the neutron lets out virtual π+ meson it that becomes an antiproton. Similar objections are and to emission a π meson.


Thus, π+ and π mesons cannot be carriers of nuclear interactions. So why then π0meson it are. The answer one: π0 meson also are not a carrier of nuclear interactions.


Secondly, nuclear interactions at first are powerful attractive forces, and then on smaller distances are transmuted into even more powerful forces of pushing away. How here to be – to invent new carriers of interactions, for example K – mesons, but them too much more than it is necessary. And why then with one attic it is attractive forces, and with others – forces of pushing away. Where is the mechanism which is responsible for a direction of forces?


As we see the virtual mesons, critics also do not maintain. And as to an explanation of the nature of nuclear interactions the answer to this question is found in frameworks of the field theory – all according to nature laws.




So, if what or from "theories" demands presence of virtual particles and the infringement of laws of the nature related to them its future is uniquely determinate. Sooner or later it all the same will fail.


Vladimir Gorunovich







Has historically developed, that partitioning of interactions of elementary particles is into classes has been yielded on intensity of their course. These are the gravitational interactions strong, electromagnetic and weak and added to them. We will ask a question behind what of the numbered interactions there are real-life physical fields. We will view them upside-down.


Gravitational interactions have a gravitational field is the fact.

At weak interaction no field is present.

Electromagnetic interactions have an electromagnetic field is too the fact.

At field strong interaction in a macrocosm is not present. But there is a question – that is understood as strong interaction. If as strong interaction are understood kernel then it is necessary to consider that fact that the field theory of elementary particles has erected their nature – namely: nuclear interactions are in the core interactions of constant magnetic fields of nucleons in a short-range band. Hence, strong interaction are the shape of electromagnetic interactions.

As we see, existence only the gravitational and electromagnetic interactions are really proved. All the others should be derivative of the first if they in general exist in the nature. It, first of all, concerns weak interaction. And as to "open" carriers of weak interaction that, first virtual particles in the nature are not present, and secondly always it is possible to choose particles from perpetually great number of elementary particles with the given spin and with demanded quantity of a rest mass (especially when the theory does not give exact value), but such particles it can appear more than it is required to "theory".


So, we have returned to two fundamental interactions, as well as hundred years ago: electromagnetic and gravitational. Physicists tried to think up something else, but the nature has solved that to it enough two. It means, at the heart of a microcosm the electromagnetism lays.




Vladimir Gorunovich







The standard model is understood as a theoretical construction in elementary particle physics, featuring electromagnetic, weak and a strong interactions of all elementary particles. Thus the standard model does not include gravitation.


The standard model consists of following standings:


All substance consists of 12 elementary particles-fermion: 6 leptons (an electron, a muon, a tau-lepton, electronic neutrino, muonic neutrino and tau-neutrino) and 6 quarks (u, d, s, c, b, t) which can be united in three generations of fermions.


Quarks participate in strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions; the charged leptons (an electron, a muon, a tau-lepton) — in weak and electromagnetic; neutrino — only in weak interaction.


All three types of interactions arise as consequence of a postulate that our world is symmetrical concerning three types of the gauge transformations. Particles-carriers of interactions are:


8 gluons for a strong interaction (symmetry group SU (3));


3 heavy gauge bosons (W +, W −, Z0) for a weak interaction (symmetry group SU (2));


Is 1 quantum for an electromagnetic interaction (symmetry group U (1)).


Unlike electromagnetic and strong, the weak interaction can immix fermions from different generations that lead to instability of all particles, except for the easiest, and to such effects, as infringement of CP-invariance and neutrino oscillations.




Now about that is actually.


Weak interaction in the nature are not present, they are necessary only to quantum "theory".

Strong interaction, or simply telling kernel forces, are in the core interactions of constant magnetic fields of nucleons in a short-range band. Hence, strong interaction are the shape of electromagnetic interactions.

The number of leptons in the nature is not restricted to six. Thanks to collider operation will be unclosed also new, including with spin there is more than 1/2 (it is 3/2 5/2, 7/2, …).

Quarks in the nature are not present.

The postulate on symmetry of the world concerning three types of the gauge transformations is no more than a hypothesis and not proved.

Gluons in the nature are not present.

Heavy bosons are – but these are usual elementary particles and those much more three.

And here photon really exists in the nature.

The parent of instability of elementary particles is presence of channels of decay, and it is not related to weak interaction in any way.

And in summary, it is possible to add that with ordering and a structure of elementary particles the field theory has perfectly consulted without the aid of quarks with gluons and without manipulation with nature laws.




Vladimir Gorunovich




Errors in the physics: WEAK INTERACTIONS


Existence of weak interactions in the nature is not proved. That the hypothesis of weak interactions is one of quantum theory props – yet is not the proof of their existence. Behind weak interactions there are no real-life fields in the nature (as for example an electromagnetic field or gravitational). As to "open" carriers of weak interactions always it is possible to choose a suitable particle from infinitely great number of elementary particles (except fractional electric charge) for this or that "theory" - but such particles it can appear more than it is required.


The statement about that that weak interactions operate disintegrations of elementary particles too is not proved. According to the field theory of elementary particles, disintegration of particles is defined by presence of channels of disintegration, conditions in which given particle is, and also the laws of the nature operating at any moment. And no mathematical manipulations with nature laws are supposed.


The PRESENT THEORY should operate within the limits of nature laws, instead of operate them on sole discretion – in it and the science consists.


Vladimir Gorunovich




Errors in the physics: STRONG INTERACTIONS


Question in that we understand as strong interactions. If strong interactions are understood as nuclear forces – that, according to the field theory of elementary particles, nuclear interactions are interactions of magnetic fields of nucleons in a near zone. Hence, strong interactions are a version of electromagnetic interactions.


Well and if we understand interactions in which quarks and gluons participate as strong interactions – that quarks and gluons in the nature are not present. According to the field theory of elementary particles, fractional electric charge in the nature does not exist at all, and elementary particles and antiparticles with a spin equal to unit (except a photon) in the nature exists 20. What of them we name gluons and why these. Hence, such strong interactions in the nature are not present.


So the hypothesis of strong interactions is also an unproved hypothesis.


Vladimir Gorunovich




Errors in the physics: HIGGS BOSON


Came to tell in more details time about likely most fashionable today to a "mathematical" fairy tale in the physicist.


It was required to Standard model and its ally of the Quantum theory to explain, the weight at elementary particles whence undertakes. Clear business what to agree with a weight explanation as equivalent of energy of electromagnetic fields of elementary particles for this couple is equivalent to suicide. Therefore it was necessary to invent characteristic mechanism of investment in weight of elementary particles. And they made it as follows:

  1. Tore off from electromagnetic interactions a part, falling into to interactions of electric fields and named its electromagnetic interaction. Thus forgot about magnetic interactions of elementary particles.
  2. Declared that for an electromagnetic interaction the photon (at him the rest-mass is equal to zero, and the spin is equal 1) answers.
  3. Chose a small group of vector mesons (W and Z bosons) with a spin equal 1 and appointed their responsible for the weak interaction which has been earlier thought up for an explanation of disintegrations of elementary particles. Thus about other vector mesons forgot.
  4. As at the selected vector mesons of spin too it appeared equal 1 them united together with a photon and called all it is calibration bosons. About other bosons forgot.
  5. As at vector mesons the rest-mass is distinct from zero the small group of elementary particles in which at one particle a zero rest-mass turned out and at all the others - nonzero.
  6. United the torn off electromagnetic interaction with a nonexistent weak interaction in the nature and named it an electroweak interaction.
  7. Attributed to the invented electroweak interaction symmetry (it between a photon and vector mesons between which cannot be symmetry) and called its electroweak symmetry.
  8. Decided that constantly there is a process of spontaneous infringement of the invented electroweak symmetry Higgs mechanism and a Higgs field corresponding to it therefore elementary particles possessing a weak interaction has a weight.
  9. As almost all elementary particles, according to the Quantum theory, should possess earlier thought up weak interaction decided that for presence of weight of elementary particles the invented Higgs field answers. In the nature the Higgs field is not observed.
  10. Well and to the thought up Higgs field, as well as it is necessary in the Quantum theory, attributed quantum – a Higgs boson, without asking the nature consent. Clear business that the invented quantum appeared short-lived differently at once there is a question: why it till now did not see.


Thus, the mechanism explaining presence of a rest-mass at elementary particles has been invented.

Further a Higgs boson can name one of again open bosons with whom number infinity, but can and invent the mechanism like « Confinement » for "a theoretical" substantiation of impossibility of supervision of a Higgs boson in the free kind. After all thought up the same fairy is tale for quarks with gluons and many pecked. Why in the second time not to try.


Now about that, whence in the nature there is a weight at elementary particles.

Each elementary particle, except a photon, has constants electric and magnetic weeding, and also a variable electromagnetic field (wave properties of elementary particles are a consequence of presence of a variable electromagnetic field). Further we summarize energy of all fields and it is divisible on a light speed square (according to Einstein's formula). Also it is not necessary to invent any Higgs mechanism together with a Higgs field – all very simply: the usual classical electrodynamics and Einstein's formula work.


Vladimir Gorunovich




Форма входа


Друзья сайта

Данный сайт научно-образовательный, не преследует коммерческих целей и располагается на интернет-ресурсе, предоставленным коммерческим веб-сервисом uCoz.

Information for sponsors


Flag Counter
Copyright БГУ физфак Горунович В.А. © 2018
Создать бесплатный сайт с uCoz