The same people, who were thinking and saying "it is the "junk" science," now are trying to explain the physics of it? Another circus with the Big Bang etc. things in cosmology is a fun to watch for outsiders. But it is not a fun, this "belief" blocks our vision into a future.
Our Readers need to know and understand that all these nonsenses are connected, and they are the consequences of the >100+ years and present days academic electrodynamics. Surprised?
We would stand for the issues of volumetrically existing particles, "extended" (by R.Santilli), until they are disappeared or transformed into our physical world, or leaped into some other universe. We don't know answers for most of the sub-atomic world questions.
The other great issue of the academic orthodox particle physics is the Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz electrodynamics.
For example, the Coulomb "barrier" as Dr. Huizenga and later Hagelstein and other workers proclaimed as an obstacle while talking on the "dark" features of the Cold Fusion. What kind of barrier? What kind of the rule is it - What does the Coulomb "law" mean?
What is this? Does anybody know the history and real meaning of the Coulomb force before saying something so customary on that? Really knows? And what about the sub-atomic scale? Well - Are there only the two particles in atoms? And around - How many? Two of them also?
Because in COHP it cannot be done an averaging of Heterogeneous phenomena, and particles array, behavior as well. In conventional physics physicists could not average the Coulomb law for the two particles - while this law was found and formulated for only 2 particles. For this "law" being applied correctly for an array of particles it should be averaged somehow for cloud(s) of particles. And somehow is not a good word.
That should not mean - Just summing up each particle's rule or equation as it is customary in atomic and particle physics - the effects of particles just being summed up? As if they are at a kilometer distance one from another.
Surprised?
Going further we can address this in a more precise way by turning to QM. Because it is known that in Quantum Mechanics the major postulate states that -
3) The average value of measurements of an observable
,
for an electron (for example) with the wave function
is
while this is the great point-mass particles simplification at first, and the second, that this is simply wrong, not true for many instances and for structured particles.
That we know now for sure the major particles have the structures - electron, photon, proton, neutron, nuclei, while these are the "dark" matter up to now regarding their structure's details. And this is the consequence of QM used for ~90 years. Because there was proclaimed no interest in the structure of each of the bottom sub-atomic scale(s) major sub-atomic particles row. For what reason? When "everything" is supplied by QM use of point-mass particles. Particle physicists even spell the "reveletion" like - it is for point-massless particles (but quiet!).
Meanwhile, the "color" feature for some sub-atomic particles was precisely introduced because of this peculiarity of QM's nature. While itself a "color" presents just the one more reason for fun over the situation in particle physics now. Imagine a "Color" of a fundamental particle? We cannot. What is this? They can paint the "color" all over the point-mass particles, but it is still the art of painting, the graphical art, not physics.
In reality, COHP physicists cannot paint the colored "particles" such as conjectured quarks, gluons, etc., because it is impossible to paint a POINT - the point has no dimensions, but painting of something already means that that "something" has to assume the color, but this is impossible for the point - the object without spatial character, volumeless, as orthodox QM and QFT require. It's a joke, of course.
They soon will be integrating over the color as over the "special" variable, because they started to admit and picture the particles as consisting of some envelope with then the kernel, what is this? The STRUCTURE - but it's impossible! In COHP only, of course.
Now they continue to introduce a "color" for an electron? In doing this the electron in scientific articles, presentations, figures, pictures suddenly becomes a "Volume"! Instead of honest recognition long time ago that electron has a structure, means and a VOLUME. That electron has the two magnetic poles - that differentiate its movement and interactions. Not so fast - orthodox would say, to this electron might be given a thought after I get to the "eternity". It's not a science, it's a political game of having the power, money for this "research," etc. The slowest possible movement ahead just to keep the positions, chairs. With the intention that this will continue up to their retirement. The same game lingers now in the energy physics, both are of the same base.
Actually, this is continuing in science since the second part of XIX century, when H.Helmholtz and M.Planck noticed this particular progress slowing down phenomenon. Planck's - "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
Besides, the main might be reason was(is) - that the structured particle conventional
physics can not present as a "point-mass" particle at all. Because the
question arises - And what to do in this case with QM? Throw it away as an obsolete tool?
Then, what will be with our teachings and positions?
Also pretty important was at the time of QM creation,
that the Heterogeneous, Polyphase media theory(ies) did not exist
in physics at that time - beginning of the XX century.
Students are not told on this.
Everything was smashed into the Homogeneous (mix) matter - usually by averaging. And averaging has
been going incorrectly. Physicists knew and took into account that - W.Heisenberg himself did
his dissertation in Fluid Mechanics, turbulence problem (unsolved up to now) and then
switched to the easier fields of new atomic physics.
The development and progress in Polyphase Heterogeneous science in Continuum Mechanics
is at action even now, many decades since the 40s - 50s of XX century.
See our remarks and analysis in "Fundamentals of Hierarchical Scaled Physics (HSP-VAT)
Description of Transport and Phenomena in Heterogeneous and Scaled Media," and in
"Fluid Mechanics," "Thermal Physics," "Continuum Mechanics of
Heterogeneous (Ht) Media; Elasticity, Plasticity," other sections of this website.
How long it will take for Particle Physics and Electrodynamics to change their
paradigms we actually observing throughout the last ~40 years (even more, if take as the
starting point the struggle of Vlasov with the Soviet physics tops in 30s-40s of the XXth, over the collective in
plasma) that there is not much of a progress.
It might be guessed, but
the examples from this and other sciences hint - the Planck's rule is almost correct,
that will take time and nations will be divided
just over this educational advantages of a few over others on this planet.
That was and is not the true final picture. The reality is more complicated. Most of other particles in a contemporary particle physics "Zoo" are just the spectacular conjectures, based on statistics and gauge (adjusting) theories. Yes, and Higgs boson is also the gauge theory based on.
Destined even not for an observation!
Non-orthodox physicists wrote thousands of pages on this (only in the last half-century R.Santilli is probably the foremost scientist raising the voice for >30 years) inadequate physics that became by itself since ~1926 or even since N.Bohr's Nobel prize. Then, in the 30s the Anglo-German withstanding continued having in mind that both sides had their own atomic, particle physics. Sequentially, the war had frozen the physical science under the pressure of nuclear arms secret technologies power, meaning and of the money that are allotted for the particle physics itself as a part of military technologies. Since then, that war time nuclear and particle physics (OSFA and homogeneous) see themselves as the "state of the art," the last and the best word in physics? Strangely enough. They are the Gatekeepers in fact. Let's remind on the ITER waste of money, for the one only example.
Note, that we are not talking here on the known astrophysics concerns related and explained, wrongly often, with this point-mass particle physics and QM, starting from the wrongly analyzed Michelson-Morley's 1887 experiment, etc.
Another great tool in particle physics is Quantum Electrodynamics that actually sprang out with the main starting effort by Feynman from the same idea we are talking to in here - taking the particles as just the particles, not wave functions. Unfortunately, this idea ended up in the same way as QM. It was a premature theory at that time in the 40th because there were no tools developed in mathematics for that. And there was no vision and understanding of the scale governed phenomena in physics. In spite that Feynman quite close came to the treatment of each particle well, as the point-mass particle. And the path integral formulation of Feynman did not help on that much.
We need to accept the note here that both QM and QED are well, just the simplified approximations, often misleading, and inapplicable. For starting years in the 20th-30th and QED 40th, they were the first approximations in view of available at that time methods for studying the many body and polyphase media tasks, but not for many decades since that. The war outcome changed the scientific attitude quite all. Physics needs the continental physics input with the force and bravery of the beginning of XX century.
Well, we understand here completely that the points are about the works by P.Dirac and Werner K. Heisenberg. We understand this and that it was more than 80 years back and that something can go wrong or unsuccessful during the time, no matter what a great or greatest people were involved before. We must remember in that order the mechanics of Aristoteles ("the river of streaming Gold" by Cicero, no one could be compared to him as a philosopher, scholar) which was up to the demand, acceptance and taught the world for more than 1900 years until the Newton time.
It is not that the idea of Volumetric, Structured Electron (other particles) was not coming to physicists (non-orthodox, or mixed dissident physicists) before. There were and are the attempts and theories of volumetric (extended) fundamental particles.
Still the main fundamental issue they could not involve. What is in it for a Polyphase surrounding? What is it? What if it might be a Volumetric particle, then what else is so important we can do about it? And How?
We keep answering in the sub-sections of this section to this question. Briefly we might say - Oh, well, but this is opening the whole world of physics sub-atomic scales interaction - not an "action-at-a-distance" in the absent vacuum (aether), having in mind only the real emptiness, which is the physical mythology, with gauge theories, etc., but real.
This also opens a way to justify, really justify after ~110 years of "one scale for all" (OSFA) the paths and models for scaleportation of physical phenomena between the scales. Which up to now is the ad-hoc business. People writing the same equations for any scale involved from the sub-atomic scales and up to the intergalactic ones as in Particle Physics, High Energy Physics, cosmology, SR and GR and see nothing wrong with that equations. We said, but not enough, on that in other sections of this site including and on issues of inadequacy of the homogeneous MD pseudo-science already.
We would discuss these points with more scrutiny in the following sub-sections of this section on Standard issues of Particle Physics. To some extent we are forced to re-iterate the arguments said many years back by distinguished physicists. But now all of this is being seen under the new angle, through the new window of Polyphase-Polyscale-Polyphysics (3P) Particle Physics while applying the HSP-VAT techniques.
The reasons are stemming from the two long time standing problems we said on above. While with advancements of these two fields that are connected to the structured "elementary" particles, and to the inadequate description of Electromagnetic phenomena with the Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz electrodynamics theory with the system of equations that used for explanations more than a hundred years, that both strangle our progress in science and generally in technologies.
We don't concern here in this section with the other, so far known, but having a limited volume of research and understanding, physical disciplines on the long range interaction fields those as N.A.Kozyrev's Causal Mechanics (transductions), "torsion" mechanics. We do this in other sections on Ht Atomic Physics, Astrophysics, and Gravidynamics 2.
It must be said here, using the great chance to state that the conformist,
conventional physics, which is the electrodynamics mostly,
did not use and
comprehend the methods of HSP-VAT widely and that is because of the great
culprit and conspiracy (sub-conscious may be) hidden behind the inability of
conventional one scale physics to provide the up-scaling, the correct
mathematical averaging in atomic and particle physics since the beginning of
XXth century. They use far and wide the point-particles scheme instead.
We should remember that the whole body of orthodox physics stands on
the statement that - the averaging can be and has been provided within
this one scale physics. And that is not true, yeah, unfortunately this is a lie.
Nevertheless, they teach students in the way of false one-scale atomic physics well, for more than 90 years since the Lorentz time. At the beginning and middle of the XXth century there were no appropriate scaling methods, tools in physics and math. But not after 1967, when they started to appear. Now it is a lie to say to students - we are teaching at the state of the art in this and that regarding the averaging and what's beyond of it.
See in the below sub-sections and in the "Atomic and Sub-atomic Scale Description....,"
