DOCSLIB.ORG

New Mass-Energy Equivalence

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New Mass-Energy Equivalence European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.26 No.2 (2009), pp.161-175 © EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2009 http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.htm New Concept of Mass-Energy Equivalence Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen Department of Chemistry, College of Science University of Baghdad, Jadriyah, Baghdad, Iraq Contact e-mail [email protected] Abstract The correct meaning of E=mvv and E=mcc have been discussed. The discussion has shown that the second v and c are conversion factors and not v2 and c2 in these two equations respectively. These velocities (v and c) are used to convert the momentum units to energy units. The first v and c in both equations should be multiplied with the mass to form the momentum term. The essential issue is the momentum and not the mass where it is an absolute quantity and it will not give any indication while the momentum gives a clear vision about the moving mass. The speculative Lorentz factor has also discussed to be incorrect when used in special relativity to increase the mass of the materials through changing their velocities. The concept of conversion between mass and energy is discussed in chemical and nuclear reactions to show it is incorrect and the annihilation reactions of electron-positron are pseudo processes. A new non-relativistic mass-energy equivalence is used E=mbc as an alternative, where b is a derived universal constant and equal to 0.603797 x 108 m/s which gives E/m= 1.8101351214 x 1016 J/kg or 1u= 187.607 MeV/bc. The ratio of mbc/mc2 is equal to (187.607) / (931.49) = 0.2014 which gave 41.7 MeV/bc for the Total Kinetic Energy (TKE) of fission fragments of experimental value 29.4- 2 2 37.8 MeV/bc rather than 200 MeV/c given by E=mc . The magnetic constant of charged field μb was calculated from Maxwell formula and found to be equal to 3.265 x 10-6 N/A2 and it was larger than magnetic constant of electromagnetic field μo by 24.65. Keywords: E=mc2, E=mbc, Mass-Energy Equivalence, new mass-energy equivalence, photon-frequenton, states of matter, speed of light-charged particle velocity constant, b, magnetic constant μb, relativistic mass, relativity, types of energy. 1. Introduction Our present understanding of energy comes from different time periods, different experimental results of science and different theories and models. The substantial concepts of mass and energy and their relationship in the universe were continually changed throughout history by Greek, Roman, Arab, Indian and Chinese Philosophers. The inertia of motion was described in the 3rd century BC by the Chinese philosopher Mo Tzu, and in the 11th AC century by the Muslim scientist, Ibn al-Haytham Alhazen who stated Newton's first and second law of motion in 965-1039, Risala fi’l-makan (Treatise on Place) (i.e. 650 years before Newton laws), (Salam, 1984) and Avicenna also stated Newton's first and second law of motion in 980-1037 in his book: Ibn Sīnā's, Kitab al mayl (Theory of Inclination) (Espinoza, 2005). New Concept of Mass-Energy Equivalence 162 But the most acceptable mathematical definition for mass and energy was written by Gottfried Leibniz over the period 1676-1689 to express his theory vis viva of conservation of energy ∑ (from Latin for living force) (Mackie’s, 1845) and the theory of the conservation of momentum ∑ by Isaac Newton (British) in 1687 and René Decartes (French) in 1645 (Gullberg, 1997). These two theories were considered as controversial at that time but later they were understood as complementary. The mass concept is usually related to the energy. The mass is a fundamental concept in chemistry and it is a central concept of classical mechanics and related subjects. The concept of energy and its transformations is extremely useful in explaining and predicting most natural phenomena. Energy transformations in the universe over time are characterized by various kinds of potential energy which has been available since the Big Bang, later being released (i.e. transformed to more active types of energy such as kinetic or radiant energy) when a triggering mechanism is available. In the duration from the 19th century to the 20th century the mass-energy concept became more realistic for both issues when many scientists shared in crystallization of the concepts to understand deeply the secret of the universe. In 1804 John Dalton stated his five main points of his Atomic Theory. The discovery of the electron by J. J. Thomson (1897), the discovery of the proton by Ernest Rutherford (1919) and the discovery of neutron by James Chadwick (1932) in the first two decades of the twentieth century has set the real foundations of the atomic and nuclear structure. The subsequent theoretical and experimental researches on the energy, atom, nuclei, isotopes, waves and particles led to the branch of fundamental sciences that deals with atomic and subatomic systems which we today call quantum mechanics. It is the basic mathematical framework of many fields of physics and chemistry, including condensed matter physics, solid-state physics, atomic physics, molecular physics, computational chemistry, quantum chemistry, particle physics, nuclear physics, quantum chromodynamics and quantum gravity. The foundations of quantum mechanics were established during the first half of the 20th century by Max Planck, Curie, Albert Einstein, Ernest Rutherford, Niels Bohr, Louis de Broglie, Max Born, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, John von Neumann, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli and others (Planck M. 1901-1908, Einstein, 1905, Rutherford, 1904-1933, Bohr, 1913, De Broglie, 1924, Bernstein, 2005, Heisenberg, 1925-1927, Schrödinger, 1926, Macrae, 1999, Dirac, 1928, Pauli, Wolfgang and Jung, 1955). The theories and discoveries of thousands of nuclear physicists and chemists since the 1910s have resulted in a notable understanding into the fundamental structure of matter. These findings explained to us several facts about how the matter is composed of elementary and composite particles and how the forces control these particles. The Standard Model has integrated all these efforts and concepts to crystalize them for use in the data explanations of most of the experimental results (Bromley, 2000; Kane, 1987). The experts of CERN said “Even though the Standard Model is currently the best description there is of the subatomic world, it does not explain the complete picture. The theory incorporates only three out of the four fundamental forces, omitting gravity”. Other speculative theories tried to remedy these deficiencies such as Preon Theory which is coined by Jogesh Pati and Abdus Salam in 1974- (Pati and Salam, 1974; Dugne et al, 2002). This theory believes that there are one or more orders of particles more fundamental than those found in the Standard Model called preons, which are derived from "pre-quarks" and look like “particle zoo model” that came before it. The interest in preons has vanished also since the simplest models were experimentally ruled out in the 1980s. More theories have been suggested such as Supersymmetry theory, string theory and grand unification theory. Supersymmetry theory states that for every type of boson there exists a corresponding type of fermion such as sleptons, squarks, neutralinos and charginos (Martin, 1999; Lykken, 1996; Drees, 1996; Bilal, 2001; Arygres, 2001). The Grand Unification Theory is a theory that searches for precise explanations to all physical phenomena in the universe starting with the combining of the three fundamental forces: the electromagnetic force, the strong force and the weak force at high energies. It failed to combine the forth force due the lack of understanding of gravity (Ross, 1984, Parker, 1993; Hawking, 1988). 163 Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen A more recent model is the string theory which suggests that all "particles" that make up matter and energy are comprised of strings, measuring at the Planck length (Arygres, 2001; Cooper et al, 1995; Junker, 1996). These strings exist in an 11-dimensional universe to prevent tears in the "fabric" of space using the uncertainty principle, whereas our own existence is merely a 4-brane, inside which exist the 3 space dimensions and the 1 time dimension that we observe. It predicts the existence of a massless spin-2 particle behaving like the graviton (Schwartz, 1998; Troost, 2005; Witten, 2005). In my previous article I proposed a novel nuclear model to depict the nuclear structure and to explain the nuclear reactions. The model proposes new elementary particles called conservons and sub- quarks called magnetons. The magnetons are basic building blocks of the fermions while the conservons control the conservation of mass number, linear momentum, total energy, charge and spins during the nuclear reactions law of conservations. The electron, protons and neutrons are composed of the integer multiple of sub-quarks elementary particles magnetons. The protons have certain stable mass and the neutron have several stables masses depending on the isotope Z and N. The neutron will have unstable masses in the radioactive nuclides. I also have discussed the idea of conversion of mass to energy and vice versa and I showed it is incorrect as it is neither in the chemical nor in nuclear reactions. The annihilation reactions of electron- positron are disintegration processes rather than annihilation processes, because the annihilation will break the laws of conservations (Muhyedeen, 2008). In addition to that I proposed the fifth and sixth states of matter. The fifth state represents the Nuclear Transparency in which the nuclear components are loosely bound and free to endure a nuclear reaction due to the weakness of the electromagnetic belt surrounding the nucleus. Beyond this region toward the sun core the fermions will be crashed and disintegrated into to their elementary particles, magnetons, which accumulated in hazy form which I called nuclear magma.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From Relativistic Time Dilation to Psychological Time Perception
    From relativistic time dilation to psychological time perception: an approach and model, driven by the theory of relativity, to combine the physical time with the time perceived while experiencing different situations. Andrea Conte1,∗ Abstract An approach, supported by a physical model driven by the theory of relativity, is presented. This approach and model tend to conciliate the relativistic view on time dilation with the current models and conclusions on time perception. The model uses energy ratios instead of geometrical transformations to express time dilation. Brain mechanisms like the arousal mechanism and the attention mechanism are interpreted and combined using the model. Matrices of order two are generated to contain the time dilation between two observers, from the point of view of a third observer. The matrices are used to transform an observer time to another observer time. Correlations with the official time dilation equations are given in the appendix. Keywords: Time dilation, Time perception, Definition of time, Lorentz factor, Relativity, Physical time, Psychological time, Psychology of time, Internal clock, Arousal, Attention, Subjective time, Internal flux, External flux, Energy system ∗Corresponding author Email address: [email protected] (Andrea Conte) 1Declarations of interest: none Preprint submitted to PsyArXiv - version 2, revision 1 June 6, 2021 Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 The unit of time . 4 1.2 The Lorentz factor . 6 2 Physical model 7 2.1 Energy system . 7 2.2 Internal flux . 7 2.3 Internal flux ratio . 9 2.4 Non-isolated system interaction . 10 2.5 External flux . 11 2.6 External flux ratio . 12 2.7 Total flux .
    [Show full text]
  • Simulating Gamma-Ray Binaries with a Relativistic Extension of RAMSES? A
    A&A 560, A79 (2013) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322266 & c ESO 2013 Astrophysics Simulating gamma-ray binaries with a relativistic extension of RAMSES? A. Lamberts1;2, S. Fromang3, G. Dubus1, and R. Teyssier3;4 1 UJF-Grenoble 1 / CNRS-INSU, Institut de Planétologie et d’Astrophysique de Grenoble (IPAG) UMR 5274, 38041 Grenoble, France e-mail: [email protected] 2 Physics Department, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee WI 53211, USA 3 Laboratoire AIM, CEA/DSM - CNRS - Université Paris 7, Irfu/Service d’Astrophysique, CEA-Saclay, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France 4 Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Zürich, Winterthurestrasse 190, 8057 Zürich, Switzerland Received 11 July 2013 / Accepted 29 September 2013 ABSTRACT Context. Gamma-ray binaries are composed of a massive star and a rotation-powered pulsar with a highly relativistic wind. The collision between the winds from both objects creates a shock structure where particles are accelerated, which results in the observed high-energy emission. Aims. We want to understand the impact of the relativistic nature of the pulsar wind on the structure and stability of the colliding wind region and highlight the differences with colliding winds from massive stars. We focus on how the structure evolves with increasing values of the Lorentz factor of the pulsar wind, keeping in mind that current simulations are unable to reach the expected values of pulsar wind Lorentz factors by orders of magnitude. Methods. We use high-resolution numerical simulations with a relativistic extension to the hydrodynamics code RAMSES we have developed. We perform two-dimensional simulations, and focus on the region close to the binary, where orbital motion can be ne- glected.
    [Show full text]
  • Doppler Boosting and Cosmological Redshift on Relativistic Jets
    Doppler Boosting and cosmological redshift on relativistic jets Author: Jordi Fernández Vilana Advisor: Valentí Bosch i Ramon Facultat de Física, Universitat de Barcelona, Diagonal 645, 08028 Barcelona, Spain. Abstract: In this study our goal was to identify the possible effects that influence with the Spectral Energy Distribution of a blazar, which we deducted that are Doppler Boosting effect and cosmological redshift. Then we investigated how the spectral energy distribution varies by changing intrinsic parameters of the jet like its Lorentz factor, the angle of the line of sight respect to the jet orientation or the blazar redshift. The obtained results showed a strong enhancing of the Spectral Energy Distribution for nearly 0º angles and high Lorentz factors, while the increase in redshift produced the inverse effect, reducing the normalization of the distribution and moving the peak to lower energies. These two effects compete in the observations of all known blazars and our simple model confirmed the experimental results, that only those blazars with optimal characteristics, if at very high redshift, are suitable to be measured by the actual instruments, making the study of blazars with a high redshift an issue that needs very deep observations at different wavelengths to collect enough data to properly characterize the source population. jet those particles are moving at relativistic speeds, producing I. INTRODUCTION high energy interactions in the process. This scenario produces a wide spectrum of radiation that mainly comes, as we can see in more detail in [2], from Inverse Compton We know that active galactic nuclei or AGN are galaxies scattering. Low energy photons inside the jet are scattered by with an accreting supermassive blackhole in the centre.
    [Show full text]
  • (Special) Relativity
    (Special) Relativity With very strong emphasis on electrodynamics and accelerators Better: How can we deal with moving charged particles ? Werner Herr, CERN Reading Material [1 ]R.P. Feynman, Feynman lectures on Physics, Vol. 1 + 2, (Basic Books, 2011). [2 ]A. Einstein, Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter K¨orper, Ann. Phys. 17, (1905). [3 ]L. Landau, E. Lifschitz, The Classical Theory of Fields, Vol2. (Butterworth-Heinemann, 1975) [4 ]J. Freund, Special Relativity, (World Scientific, 2008). [5 ]J.D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics (Wiley, 1998 ..) [6 ]J. Hafele and R. Keating, Science 177, (1972) 166. Why Special Relativity ? We have to deal with moving charges in accelerators Electromagnetism and fundamental laws of classical mechanics show inconsistencies Ad hoc introduction of Lorentz force Applied to moving bodies Maxwell’s equations lead to asymmetries [2] not shown in observations of electromagnetic phenomena Classical EM-theory not consistent with Quantum theory Important for beam dynamics and machine design: Longitudinal dynamics (e.g. transition, ...) Collective effects (e.g. space charge, beam-beam, ...) Dynamics and luminosity in colliders Particle lifetime and decay (e.g. µ, π, Z0, Higgs, ...) Synchrotron radiation and light sources ... We need a formalism to get all that ! OUTLINE Principle of Relativity (Newton, Galilei) - Motivation, Ideas and Terminology - Formalism, Examples Principle of Special Relativity (Einstein) - Postulates, Formalism and Consequences - Four-vectors and applications (Electromagnetism and accelerators) § ¤ some slides are for your private study and pleasure and I shall go fast there ¦ ¥ Enjoy yourself .. Setting the scene (terminology) .. To describe an observation and physics laws we use: - Space coordinates: ~x = (x, y, z) (not necessarily Cartesian) - Time: t What is a ”Frame”: - Where we observe physical phenomena and properties as function of their position ~x and time t.
    [Show full text]
  • Uniform Relativistic Acceleration
    Uniform Relativistic Acceleration Benjamin Knorr June 19, 2010 Contents 1 Transformation of acceleration between two reference frames 1 2 Rindler Coordinates 4 2.1 Hyperbolic motion . .4 2.2 The uniformly accelerated reference frame - Rindler coordinates .5 3 Some applications of accelerated motion 8 3.1 Bell's spaceship . .8 3.2 Relation to the Schwarzschild metric . 11 3.3 Black hole thermodynamics . 12 1 Abstract This paper is based on a talk I gave by choice at 06/18/10 within the course Theoretical Physics II: Electrodynamics provided by PD Dr. A. Schiller at Uni- versity of Leipzig in the summer term of 2010. A basic knowledge in special relativity is necessary to be able to understand all argumentations and formulae. First I shortly will revise the transformation of velocities and accelerations. It follows some argumentation about the hyperbolic path a uniformly accelerated particle will take. After this I will introduce the Rindler coordinates. Lastly there will be some examples and (probably the most interesting part of this paper) an outlook of acceleration in GRT. The main sources I used for information are Rindler, W. Relativity, Oxford University Press, 2006, and arXiv:0906.1919v3. Chapter 1 Transformation of acceleration between two reference frames The Lorentz transformation is the basic tool when considering more than one reference frames in special relativity (SR) since it leaves the speed of light c invariant. Between two different reference frames1 it is given by x = γ(X − vT ) (1.1) v t = γ(T − X ) (1.2) c2 By the equivalence
    [Show full text]
  • SYNTROPY and SUSTAINABILITY Ulisse Di Corpo Lungotevere Degli Artigiani 32, 00153 ROMA
    SYNTROPY AND SUSTAINABILITY Ulisse Di Corpo Lungotevere degli Artigiani 32, 00153 ROMA – ITALY [email protected] https://upsol.academia.edu/UlisseDiCorpo Antonella Vannini Lungotevere degli Artigiani 32, 00153 ROMA – ITALY [email protected] https://upsol.academia.edu/AntonellaVannini ABSTRACT In the 1920s the backward-in-time solutions of the fundamental equations of the universe were rejected as non-physical, since retrocausality was considered to be impossible. Then, in 1941, the mathematician Luigi Fantappiè noticed that the properties of these solutions are: energy concentration, the increase in differentiation and complexity, the reduction of entropy, the increase in cohesion and unity, the formation of structures and the increase in order. Listing these properties he remarked that they coincide with the properties of life, which the classical (time forward) approach is unable to explain. In 1942 Fantappiè published a small book titled: “The Unitary Theory of the Physical and Biological World” in which he suggests that the physical/mechanical world is governed by the forward-in-time solution and by the law of entropy, whereas life is governed by the backward-in-time solution and by a law symmetric to entropy which Fantappiè named syntropy (from the Greek words syn = converging and tropos = tendency). The entropy/syntropy theory deals with energy and states that two transformations can effect energy: a forward-in-time transformation governed by the law of entropy and a backward-in-time transformation governed
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology Midterm
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology Physics Department Physics 8.20 IAP 2005 Special Relativity January 18, 2005 7:30–9:30 pm Midterm Instructions • This exam contains SIX problems – pace yourself accordingly! • You have two hours for this test. Papers will be picked up at 9:30 pm sharp. • The exam is scored on a basis of 100 points. • Please do ALL your work in the white booklets that have been passed out. There are extra booklets available if you need a second. • Please remember to put your name on the front of your exam booklet. • If you have any questions please feel free to ask the proctor(s). 1 2 Information Lorentz transformation (along the x­axis) and its inverse x� = γ(x − βct) x = γ(x� + βct�) y� = y y = y� z� = z z = z� ct� = γ(ct − βx) ct = γ(ct� + βx�) � where β = v/c, and γ = 1/ 1 − β2. Velocity addition (relative motion along the x­axis): � ux − v ux = 2 1 − uxv/c � uy uy = 2 γ(1 − uxv/c ) � uz uz = 2 γ(1 − uxv/c ) Doppler shift Longitudinal � 1 + β ν = ν 1 − β 0 Quadratic equation: ax2 + bx + c = 0 1 � � � x = −b ± b2 − 4ac 2a Binomial expansion: b(b − 1) (1 + a)b = 1 + ba + a 2 + . 2 3 Problem 1 [30 points] Short Answer (a) [4 points] State the postulates upon which Einstein based Special Relativity. (b) [5 points] Outline a derviation of the Lorentz transformation, describing each step in no more than one sentence and omitting all algebra. (c) [2 points] Define proper length and proper time.
    [Show full text]
  • The Challenge of Interstellar Travel the Challenge of Interstellar Travel
    The challenge of interstellar travel The challenge of interstellar travel ! Interstellar travel - travel between star systems - presents one overarching challenge: ! The distances between stars are enormous compared with the distances which our current spacecraft have travelled ! Voyager I is the most distant spacecraft, and is just over 100 AU from the Earth ! The closest star system (Alpha Centauri) is 270,000 AU away! ! Also, the speed of light imposes a strict upper limit to how fast a spacecraft can travel (300,000 km/s) ! in reality, only light can travel this fast How long does it take to travel to Alpha Centauri? Propulsion Ion drive Chemical rockets Chemical Nuclear drive Solar sail F = ma ! Newton’s third law. ! Force = mass x acceleration. ! You bring the mass, your engine provides the force, acceleration is the result The constant acceleration case - plus its problems ! Let’s take the case of Alpha Centauri. ! You are provided with an ion thruster. ! You are told that it provides a constant 1g of acceleration. ! Therefore, you keep accelerating until you reach the half way point before reversing the engine and decelerating the rest of the way - coming to a stop at Alpha Cen. ! Sounds easy? Relativity and nature’s speed limit ! What does it take to maintain 1g of accelaration? ! At low velocities compared to light to accelerate a 1000kg spacecraft at 1g (10ms-2) requires 10,000 N of force. ! However, as the velocity of the spacecraft approaches the velocity of light relativity starts to kick in. ! The relativistic mass can be written as γ x mass, where γ is the relativistic Lorentz factor.
    [Show full text]
  • The Generalized Conversion Factor in Einstein's Mass-Energy Equation
    Volume 3 PROGRESS IN PHYSICS July, 2008 The Generalized Conversion Factor in Einstein’s Mass-Energy Equation Ajay Sharma Fundamental Physics Society, His Mercy Enclave Post Box 107 GPO Shimla 171001, India ajay.sharmaa@rediffmail.com Einstein’s September 1905 paper is origin of light energy-mass inter conversion equa- tion (L = mc2) and Einstein speculated E = mc2 from it by simply replacing L by E. From its critical analysis it follows that L = mc2 is only true under special or ideal conditions. Under general cases the result is L / mc2 (E / mc2). Conse- quently an alternate equation E = Ac2M has been suggested, which implies that energy emitted on annihilation of mass can be equal, less and more than predicted by E = mc2. The total kinetic energy of fission fragments of U235 or Pu239 is found experimentally 20–60 MeV less than Q-value predicted by mc2. The mass of parti- cle Ds (2317) discovered at SLAC, is more than current estimates. In many reactions including chemical reactions E = mc2 is not confirmed yet, but regarded as true. It implies the conversion factor than c2 is possible. These phenomena can be explained with help of generalized mass-energy equation E = Ac2M. 1 Introduction bomb explosions, volcanic reactions etc. Whatever may be the case E = Ac2M is capable of explaining the phe- Mass energy inter-conversion processes are the oldest in na- nomena. Thus conversion factor other than c2 is possible, in ture and constitute the basis of various phenomena. Before Einstein’s September 1905 derivation and confirmed experi- Einstein’s work, Newton [1] stated that “Gross bodies and mentally also.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1909.09084V3 [Physics.Hist-Ph] 16 Jul 2020 IX
    Defining of three-dimensional acceleration and inertial mass leading to the simple form F=M A of relativistic motion equation Grzegorz M. Koczan∗ Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS/SGGW), Poland (Dated: July 20, 2020) Newton's II Law of Dynamics is a law of motion but also a useful definition of force (F=M A) or inertial mass (M =F/A), assuming a definition of acceleration and parallelism of force and accel- eration. In the Special Relativity, out of these three only the description of force (F=dp/dt) does not raise doubts. The greatest problems are posed by mass, which may be invariant rest mass or relativistic mass or even directional mass, like longitudinal mass. This results from breaking the assumption of the parallelism of force and standard acceleration. It turns out that these issues disappear if the relativistic acceleration A is defined by a relativistic velocity subtraction formula. This basic fact is obscured by some subtlety related to the calculation of the relativistic differential of velocity. It is based on the direction of force rather than on a transformation to an instantaneous resting system. The reference to a non-resting system generates a little different velocity subtrac- tion formulae. This approach confirms Oziewicz binary and ternary relative velocities as well as the results of other researchers. Thus, the relativistic three-dimensional acceleration is neither rest acceleration, nor four-acceleration, nor standard acceleration. As a consequence, inertial mass in any direction of the force has the same value as relativistic mass. In other words, the concepts of transverse mass and longitudinal mass, which depend on velocity, have been unified.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lorentz Factor and the Probability Density by Boris S
    Global Journal of Science Frontier Research: A Physics and Space Science Volume 17 Issue 3 Version 1.0 Year 2017 Type : Double Blind Peer Reviewed International Research Journal Publisher: Global Journals Inc. (USA) Online ISSN: 2249-4626 & Print ISSN: 0975-5896 The Lorentz Factor and the Probability Density By Boris S. Dizhechko Abstract- New Cartesian physics based on the identity of space and matter and makes the principle of uncertainty Heisenberg by a principle of physical irrationality of points of space- matter from which naturally follows a probabilistic way of describing the developments in quantum mechanics. New Cartesian physics relates the probability of an event in quantum mechanics with the factor of Lorentz of the special theory of relativity, which turns idle geometric space in the physical, in which space moves. GJSFR-A Classification: FOR Code: 020399p TheLorentzFact orandtheProbabilityDensity Strictly as per the compliance and regulations of: © 2017. Boris S. Dizhechko. This is a research/review paper, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), permitting all non commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Lorentz Factor and the Probability Density Boris S. Dizhechko Abstract - New Cartesian physics based on the identity of New Cartesian physics, based on identity of space and matter and makes the principle of uncertainty space and matter, argues that space is moving and Heisenberg by a principle of physical irrationality of points of movement is the main vortex, i.e. the circumference.
    [Show full text]
  • A Solution of the Interpretation Problem of Lorentz Transformations
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 30 July 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202007.0705.v1 Article A Solution of the Interpretation Problem of Lorentz Transformations Grit Kalies* HTW University of Applied Sciences Dresden; 1 Friedrich-List-Platz, D-01069 Dresden, [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected], Tel.: +49-351-462-2552 Abstract: For more than one hundred years, scientists dispute the correct interpretation of Lorentz transformations within the framework of the special theory of relativity of Albert Einstein. On the one hand, the changes in length, time and mass with increasing velocity are interpreted as apparent due to the observer dependence within special relativity. On the other hand, real changes are described corresponding to the experimental evidence of mass increase in particle accelerators or of clock delay. This ambiguity is accompanied by an ongoing controversy about valid Lorentz-transformed thermodynamic quantities such as entropy, pressure and temperature. In this paper is shown that the interpretation problem of the Lorentz transformations is genuinely anchored within the postulates of special relativity and can be solved on the basis of the thermodynamic approach of matter-energy equivalence, i.e. an energetic distinction between matter and mass. It is suggested that the velocity-dependent changes in state quantities are real in each case, in full agreement with the experimental evidence. Keywords: interpretation problem; Lorentz transformation; special relativity; thermodynamics; potential energy; space; time; entropy; non-mechanistic ether theory © 2020 by the author(s). Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY license. Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 30 July 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202007.0705.v1 2 of 25 1.
    [Show full text]