Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

Hossein Javadi Independent researcher and founder of CPH theory, Tehran, Iran

[email protected] July 6 2018

Abstract: In this article, four issues have reviewed and analyzed: What is the physical of energy? Does energy have ? What was the mass-energy equivalence before relativity? According to the work-energy theorem, what is the physical nature of , when force is displacing, energy is produced? Finally, the theoretical and empirical approach to the photon mass is compared. Keywords: energy, electromagnetic wave, massless, photon, limit speed, heat, relativity

Highlights of Energy History The word "energy" was first used by Aristotle. [1] Energy is one of the most basic physical concepts, but its simple yet precise definition is difficult, usually, it defines energy as the ability to do work. In the seventeenth century, Leibniz, "had developed concepts that correspond to our current understanding of kinetic and potential mechanical energy". [1] "Antoine Lavoisier described the law of conservation of mass (or the principle of mass/matter conservation) as a fundamental principle of in 1789". [2] Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

Caloric theory of heat, "according to this theory, heat was a fluid substance called caloric. This caloric was assumed to be invisible and weightless fluid that could neither be created nor destroyed". [3] "Count Rumford rejected the caloric theory by doing an experiment in 1798 and he proved that heat could be produced by friction or by doing mechanical work. Thus, caloric was being released, though the subdivision of matter was not occurring. Therefore, Rumford rejected the idea that an object contains a definite amount of caloric in it". [3] "In 1800, Thomas Young first introduced the word “energy” to the field of physics in 1800, but the word did not gain popularity. He later established the wave nature of light through interference experiments". [1] “Sadi Carnot was a French military engineer and , often described as the "father of thermodynamics". He published only one book, the Reflections on the Motive Power of Fire (Paris, 1824), in which he expressed, at the age of 27 years, the first successful theory of the maximum efficiency of heat engines. In this work he laid the foundations of an entirely new discipline, thermodynamics. Carnot's work attracted little attention during his lifetime, but it was later used by Rudolf Clausius and Lord Kelvin to formalize the second law of thermodynamics and define the concept of entropy”. [4] "The related term “work” was defined in 1828/29 by Gustave Gaspard de Coriolis and Jean-Victor Poncelet". [1] "The principle of work and kinetic energy (also known as the work-energy principle) states that the work done by all acting on a particle (the work of the resultant force) equals the change in the kinetic energy of the particle". [5] "Between 1842 and 1847, Julius Robert von Mayer, , and Hermann Ludwig Ferdinand von Helmholtz discovered and formulated the basics of what we refer to today as the law of conservation of energy: Energy cannot be created or destroyed; it can only be transformed from one form to another. Instead of the word “energy”, however, they used the terms “living force”, “tensional force” or “fall-force”. In 1851 − 1852, William Thomson (Lord Kelvin) and William J. M. Rankine began to use the word “energy” to denote any kind of “force” across all branches of . Finally, in 1905, established the general equivalence of energy and mass with his . From there, the concept of “energy” was generalized into the form used today." [1] That, is the famous equation in physics. Although it did not prove, the two separate conservation laws the energy conservation law and the mass conservation law was unified into a mass-energy conservation law.

Kinds of energy Although there are different kinds of energy, including kinetic energy, potential energy, electromagnetic energy, thermal energy, chemical energy, acoustic energy, etc., they can be converted to each other. We can use the convertible property of energies to each other, to consider and analyze the most important common energies property. To know more about energy, the best kind of energy is electromagnetic energy and the mass-energy equation .

Does energy have mass? As previously stated, in 1798, Benjamin Thompson rejected the theory of calories, but in the case of energy mass, there was no new word for energy. If we consider this claim to be the relation . not only is it not easy at the time of Thompson, even today, to prove that energy has mass or not. But technological advances have allowed empirical observations in the last century to be investigated and analyzed in different ways. In this regard, Einstein has presented two very important propositions, one in classical mechanics and the other one in relativity.

2

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

1 - Heat in classical mechanics: “Latent heat is temporarily hidden, like money put away in a safe, but available for use if one knows the lock combination. But heat is certainly not a substance in the same sense as mass. Mass can be detected by means of scales, but what of heat? Does a piece of iron weigh more when red- hot than when ice-cold? Experiment shows that it does not. If heat is a substance at all, it is a weightless one. The "heat-substance" was usually called caloric and is our first acquaintance among a whole family of weightless substances. Later we shall have occasion to follow the history of the family, its rise and fall. It is sufficient now to note the birth of this particular member. The purpose of any physical theory is to explain as wide a range of phenomena as possible. It is justified in so far as it does make events understandable. We have seen that the substance theory explains many of the heat phenomena. It will soon become apparent, however, that this again is a false clue, that heat cannot be regarded as a substance, even weightless. This is clear if we think about some simple experiments which marked the beginning of civilization”. (page 43, [6]) 2 - Heat in relativity: “Energy, at any rate kinetic energy, resists motion in the same way as ponderable . Is this also true of all kinds of energy? The theory of relativity deduces, from its fundamental assumption, a clear and convincing answer to this question, an answer again of a quantitative character: all energy resists change of motion; all energy behaves like matter; a piece of iron weighs more when red-hot than when cool; radiation traveling through space and emitted from the contains energy and therefore has mass; the sun and all radiating stars lose mass by emitting radiation. This conclusion, quite general in character, is an important achievement of the theory of relativity and fits all facts upon which it has been tested". (page 208, [6]) When Einstein was two years old, "in 1881 J. J. Thomson, later a discoverer of the electron, made the first attempt to demonstrate how this might come about by explicitly calculating the generated by a moving charged sphere and showing that the field in turn induced a mass into the sphere itself". [7] “Thomson’s slightly complicated result depended on the object’s charge, radius and magnetic permeability, but in 1889 English physicist Oliver Heaviside simplified his work to show that the effective 4 2 mass should be m = ( ⁄3) E / c , where E is the energy of the sphere’s . German , famous for his investigations into blackbody radiation, and Max Abraham got the same result, which became known as the “” of the classical electron (which was nothing more than a tiny, charged sphere). Although electromagnetic mass required that the object be charged and moving, and so clearly does not apply to all matter, it was nonetheless the first serious attempt to connect mass with energy”. [7] One of the more plausible precursors to is attributed to Fritz Hasenöhrl, a physics professor at the University of Vienna. In a 1904 paper Hasenöhrl clearly wrote down the equation 3/8 . [8] Probably the title of Einstein's article, which in 1905, titled "DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY‐CONTENT?" [9], speaking about the equivalence of mass and energy, is the best document to accept that Einstein believed that energy has a mass under all circumstances. But why he assumed the rest mass of the photon is zero?

Mysteries zero rest mass and speed of the photon By limiting the speed limit to the speed of light c and accepting relativistic mass at the beginning of the twentieth century, only one way seemed to be, assuming that the photon rest mass is zero. Given this assumption let’s focus on energy and momentum of photon. After 1906 Einstein have derived the second postulate of special relativity the constancy of the speed of light by assuming that the light quanta that he proposed in 1905 were massless particles. Relativistic energy and momentum is given by;

3

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

(1)

It is just possible that we could allow 0 provided the particle always travels at the speed of light c. [11] In this case above equations will not serve to define and so that for massless particle given by;

|| (2)

As it follows from the Einstein relativistic mass formula:

(3)

What does determine the momentum and energy of a massless particle? Not the mass (that is zero by assumption) not the speed (that is always ). Relativity offers no answer to this question, but curiously enough, quantum mechanics does, in the form of Plank's formula:

⇒ (4)

Only moving photon has mass as follows from the Einstein formula . Physicists have not stopped on assumption of massless. There are more attempts were made to clarify the photon massless in theoretical and experimental physics. There are good theoretical reasons to believe that the photon mass should be exactly zero, there is no experimental proof of this belief. [12] These efforts show there is an upper bound on the photon mass, although the amount is very small, but not zero. The tight experimental upper bound of the photon mass restricts the kinematically allowed final states of photon decay to the lightest neutrino and/or particles beyond the Standard Model. [13] Theories and experiments have not limited to photons and graviton will also be included. For gravity, there have been vigorous debates about even the concept of graviton rest mass. [14] So far, we have considered two approaches, one theoretical approach, from a theoretical point of view, in 1798, when Benjamin Thompson proposed the thermal theory and physicists accepted, they believed that energy is weightless (energy has not mass), without any empirical evidence. At that time there was no significant familiarity with thermodynamics and . They did not even know the source of electrical charge (charged particles) and electromagnetic radiation. In 1864, electromagnetic equations were formulated by Maxwell. In the late nineteenth century, along with advances in theoretical field, some physical experiments challenged theoretical approaches. Including the production and detection of electromagnetic waves by Hertz in 1888, the discovery of radioactive elements in 1896 by Becquerel and the discovery of radium by Marie and Pierre Curie in 1898, which strongly influenced theorists. At that time, one of the most important and unanswered issues was the origin of the radiation of stars, including the sun, and the equivalence of mass-energy was precisely a scientifically acceptable response to the need of the day. But the logical contradiction was that if the rest mass of the photon is zero, or energy is weightless, how can radiative rays and mass conversion into energy be describled in the sun and other stars? Which was not even convincing for Einstein. It is considerable that there are still many puzzling aspects of the nature of light. Einstein wrote in 1951: “All these fifty years of pondering have not brought me any closer to answering the question, what are light quanta?” [15]

4

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

What is the quantum of energy really? To find the answer to this question, we need to know what is the quantum energy background and how it was proposed? Since the Newton and Huygens time, there have been two light-wave and particle theories. "Light travels in a straight line, and therefore it was only natural for Newton to think of it as extremely small particles that are emitted by a light source and reflected by objects. The corpuscular theory, however, cannot explain wave-like light phenomena such as diffraction and interference". [16] "In 1803, Thomas Young studied the interference of light waves by shining light through a screen with two slits equally separated, the light emerging from the two slits, spread out according to Huygen's principle. Eventually the two wave fronts will overlap with each other, if a screen was placed at the point of the overlapping waves, you would see the production of light and dark areas. Later in 1815, Augustin Fresnel supported Young's experiments with mathematical calculations". [17] For this reason, during the nineteenth century, all the scientific works related to light were dominated by the wave theory of light. “In 1864, he predicted the existence of electromagnetic waves, the existence of which had not been confirmed before that time, and out of his prediction came the concept of light being a wave, or more specifically, a type of electromagnetic wave. Until that time, the magnetic field produced by and electric currents and the electric field generated between two parallel metal plates connected to a charged capacitor were considered to be unrelated to one another.

Electromagnetic wave propagation

5

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

Maxwell changed this thinking when, in 1861, he presented Maxwell's equations: four equations for electromagnetic theory that shows magnetic fields and electric fields are inextricably linked. This led to the introduction of the concept of electromagnetic waves other than visible light into light research, which had previously focused only on visible light”. [16] Maxwell formulated dynamical theory of the in 1864 as follow;

, 2 (5)

, 2 , (6)

Light is an electromagnetic wave. The speed c of an electromagnetic wave is determined by the constants of and that is given as follow:

2.998 10 (7)

It is considerable that there are still many puzzling aspects of the nature of light. The efforts made by Joseph J. Thompson, Oliver Haweside, Wilhelm Wayne, Max Abraham and Fritz Hausnorel were to prove that the electromagnetic wave has mass. At that time, there was not at all discuss a photon. In the late nineteenth century, the issue of radiation was confronted with problems that the old electromagnetic theory and wave propagation properties could not solve. In 1900, proposed a particle radiation theory in which radiation is generated from energy packets derived from the relation in which E is the energy value, h, Planck's constant, and is the . [18] What was remained was to justify the packet of energy or quantum energy with Maxwell's equations. In 1907 Einstein explained the photoelectric effect using Planck's hypothesis. [19] Planck radiation formula was only a new scientific interpretation of classical electromagnetic theory. Because classical electromagnetic theory could not explain some of the new experiences such as photoelectric effect, Planck's radiation relation was accepted. However, “A photon-like wave-packet based on novel solutions of Maxwell’s equations is proposed. It is believed to be the first ‘classical’ model that contains so many of the accepted quantum features”. [20] This new interpretation of light wave theory, even is not claiming that light is a particle, was just a new interpretation, which ultimately accepted the physicists of the duality nature of light. Physicists define light as a set of one or more photons emitted through space as electromagnetic waves. Gradually the Maxwell's equations were used as the basis for model of atoms. [21] In 2016, scientists at the Centre for Quantum Technologies at the National University of Singapore showed that the shape of a photon also affects how it is absorbed by an atom and that photons have two different shapes, four meters long, with an absorption probability of about four percent. [22] While in the standard model of particles, the photon, like all other fundamental particles, is unstructured and point-like. In 2018, Observation of three-photon bound states in a quantum nonlinear medium, “Photons do not naturally interact with each other and must be coaxed into doing so. Liang et al. show that a gas of Rydberg atoms-a cloud of rubidium atoms excited by a sequence of laser pulses-can induce strong interactions between propagating photons”. [23] While in quantum mechanics, the photon is electrically neutral and photons do not interact with each other.

6

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

In 2013, Art Hobson, a professor of physics at the University of Arkansas, published a long article and showed that all our assumptions about the particles were wrong, in principle, there was no particle in the universe, and everything was made out of the field. [24] Robert J. Sciamanda,, a professor at the University of Edinburgh in Pennsylvania, wrote in response to Hobson that there are neither fields, nor particles, but operators. [25] From the last two cases, it can be concluded that the physical nature of fundamental particles, such as photons, is not the definitions of the particles, but the only interpretations of the mathematical equations that are expressed in terms of particles. Let's go back to 2005 before Einstein began to discuss the limitaion of speed, even the speed of the transfer of forces were discussed. Before the publication of Einstein's relativistic articles, Poincare suggested in an article in July 1905 that all forces should be transmitted based on the Lorentz transformations. [26] In the Lorentz transformations, the speed limit is the speed of light, so the force cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light. Of course, the Lorentz transformations were formulated for the absolute ether reference frame, and Einstein considered the conversions valid for all inertial reference frame by rejecting the absolute ether reference frame. In the case of acceleration, the same limitations apply. Because in Newtonian mechanics time was absolute, it was a simple relation as follow:

(8)

But in relativity (here special relativity is desired), in addition to the fact that the mass is not constant, time must also be considered as the relativistic time. It means, classical mechanics absolute time was replaced by the absolute the light speed c in special relativity. As a result, the acceleration (velocity derivative) is the four-dimensional in special relativity, three dimensions, x, y, z, for spatial coordinates, and one dimension for time  (proper time). That's why it's much more complicated than Newtonian mechanics. [27] This phenomenon can be explained in this way, assuming that a particle is accelerated under the influence of constant F, its mass is increased by increasing its speed (Equation 1). By increasing the mass, the effect of the force decreases and the time with expansion is encountered until the force is ineffective and never its speed reaches the speed of light c. The common feature of acceleration in Newtonian mechanics and relativity is that the acceleration in both theories is formulated with regardless to the structure of the particles. Of course, one cannot question Newton and Einstein because their knowledge of substance and structure was limited to their era. It is worth recalling that the main argument in the paper is energy (in particular photon) and its mass. The blue photon has more momentum (and energy) than the red photon. Hausenorel by analyzing the physical experiments and the effect of Doppler effect in light [28] and using the work-energy theorem concluded that the difference between the various photons is depended in the work produced by the forces. In other words, the force used to produce a blue photon is greater than that used to produce red photons. Because of the mass of the photon is given by 4/3 /. [7] In this formula, there is a direct relationship between mass and energy, the more energy it is, the more work has been done, and according to the work-energy theorem, it can be concluded that force has become energy. This result can be obtained from the gravitational blueshift (and redshift) [29] and the Pound-Rebecca test [30]. In these phenomena, gravitational force is converted into gravitational energy, the gravitational energy converted to electromagnetic energy, and the electromagnetic energy converts to matter-antimatter. The reverse process of these processes is also possible and consistent with experience. It's not true that, as

7

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

physicists two hundred years ago said that energy does not have mass, we would not be able to avoid the adoption of mass for energy by modern knowledge and experience. Even Einstein explicitly stated that, according to the assumption, the rest mass of the photon is zero. Now, if we want to solve this problem with the knowledge of the day, we must admit that it is not only energy but also force has mass. But what is the force? In modern physics, fundamental forces (gravity, electromagnetic, weak and strong nuclei forces) are carried by particles called bosons, and the boson is carrying a discrete amount of energy. [31] When the force is worked on a particle, the momentum and its energy increase, in fact, some momentum and energy enter from the force to the structure of particle and increasing its energy and momentum. This idea that force has mass, was propounded in CPH Theory, 30 years ago in persian . [32] But in the case of the rest mass of photon, according to relativity, the photon always moves at the speed of light, and it cannot be observed that the photon at rest condition. We now analyze the Singapore's experiment: "Time-resolved scattering of a single photon by a single atom", which takes13.6 nanoseconds for an atom to absorb the photon. [22] It means the photon is about 4 meters long. How can we detect it at rest and determine its mass reaches zero? The fact is that when the photon is absorbed by the atom, the mass of the photon is added to the mass of the atom, as Einstein said, "The mass of a hot red and hot iron piece is more than cold." (page 208, [6]) By rejecting the zero rest mass of photons, physics will be more realistic, more intuitive, and much more easy to explain physical phenomena. [33] In recent decades, numerous papers have been published in theoretical and empirical fields which, according to them, can be shown that the hypothesis of the zero rest mass of the photon is not defensible. Reflection of the photon: about the pressure and distortion of the photon, it is notable that "The deviation of the photons of polarized laser light on reflection is due to the force created by the mass of the photon at the contact point of reflection. Force can only be created if photon has mass. A photon of zero mass cannot create any force at the contact point of reflection and will not deviate. The mass of spinning photon creates the force to turn at the contact point of reflection resulting in the deviation of photon and change the direction of photon". [34] Neutrinos: "The approximate equality in the arrival times of the neutrino and light signals from SN 1987A allows an accurate check of the hypothesis of special relativity that the limiting velocity for all forms of radiation is the same". [35] In addition, “neutrinos appear very strongly to travel at the speed of light and according to the afore- stated, they must be massless. Experiments appear to strongly suggest that indeed, neutrinos most certainly are massive particles. While this solves the problem of neutrino oscillation, it directly leads to another problem, namely that of “How can a massive particle travel at the speed of light”? [36] Nobel prize for neutrino mass:“The Nobel Prize in Physics 2015 recognises for their key contributions to the experiments which demonstrated that neutrinos change identities. This metamorphosis requires that neutrinos have mass. Its Standard Model of the innermost workings of matter had been incredibly successful, having resisted all experimental challenges for more than twenty years. However, as it requires neutrinos to be massless, the new observations had clearly showed that the Standard Model cannot be the complete theory of the fundamental constituents of the universe”. [37] The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory: the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory keeps a list of various methods for measuring the mass and charge of subatomic particles, including photons. There are no signs of zero photon mass in this list. [38] Orginal papers about photon mass: Dr. Mohamed Hassani Said the massless photon is just a suggestion. [39] “The claim "the photon has no mass" or equivalently " the photon has zero(rest)mass" is

8

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

just a suggestion without any empirical evidence, and the claimers are, generally, not familiar with the literature dedicated to the subject. Historically, the introduction of a non-zero photon mass was extensively discussed by the authors[1- 11]”. [40] His list includes works by physicists such as A. Einstein and L. de Broglie. [40] I would suggest reading his articles and comments. [41] Since this paper discusses the photon and its mass, I tried to review this issue from the point of view of modern physics and experimental evidence. I preferred not to raise the point of view of CPH Theory that its approach is a long discussion itself. Enthusiasts can refer to the author's articles and books. Charge of the photon: “a physicist in the US has analysed waves from distant galaxies to obtain a new upper bound on the electrical charge of the photon. Brett Altschul of Indiana University has found that the charge is no more than 10-46 times the charge of the electron - assuming the existence of photons with positive and negative charges. This is 13 orders of magnitude better than the previous direct bound on the charge of a particle that we normally assume to be neutral”. [42] Since this paper discusses the photon and its mass, I tried to review this issue from the point of view of modern physics and experimental evidence. I preferred not to raise the point of view of CPH Theory that its approach is a long discussion itself. Enthusiasts can refer to the author's articles and books. [33] CPH Theory is based on the combination of three theories, classical mechanics, quantum mechanics and relativity. In the CPH Theory by analyzing the energy properties, it is shown that the physical properties of energy are transmitted to the matter-antimatter and vice versa. In addition, the mechanism of field production by particles, including the production of electric fields by charged particles, is described.

Refarences

1 - The History of the Word "Energy", Energy Fundamentals http://home.uni-leipzig.de/energy/ef/01.htm 2 - The Law of Conservation of Mass, Lumen Introduction to Chemistry, https://courses.lumenlearning.com/introchem/chapter/the-law-of-conservation-of-mass/ 3 - Theories of heat, FULLLIBRARY Nothing is so practical as a good theory http://fulllibrary.com/Natural%20Sciences/Physics/Concepts/theories-of-heat.html 4 - Nicolas Léonard Sadi Carnot, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_L%C3%A9onard_Sadi_Carnot 5 - Work (physics), From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_(physics)#Work%E2%80%93energy_principle 6 - A. EINSTEIN AND L. INFELD, THE EVOLUTION OF PHYSICS https://archive.org/stream/evolutionofphysi033254mbp/evolutionofphysi033254mbp_djvu.txt 7 - Tony Rothman, Was Einstein the First to Invent E = mc2?, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, 2015 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/was-einstein-the-first-to-invent-e-mc2/ 8 - Did Einstein discover E = mc2?, PHYSICS WORLD, 2011 https://physicsworld.com/a/did-einstein-discover-e-mc2/

9

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

9 - DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY‐CONTENT? By A. EINSTEIN September 27, 1905 https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2. 10 - Field, J. Einstein and Planck on mass-energy equivalence in 1905-06: a modern perspective. 2014 arXiv preprint arXiv:1407.8507 11 - Griffiths, D. Introduction to elementary particles: John Wiley & Sons, 2008, page 89 12 - Hojman, S. A., & Koch, B. (2013). Closing a window for massive photons. Advances in High Energy Physics, 2013 13 - Heeck, J. How stable is the photon? Physical review letters, 111(2), 021801, (2013). 14 - Goldhaber, A. S., & Nieto, M. M. Photon and graviton mass limits. Reviews of Modern Physics, 82(1), 939. (2010) 15 - L.B. Okun, Photon: history, mass, charge, 2008, https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0602036.pdf 16 - What is light? Canon Global http://www.canon.com/technology/s_labo/light/001/11.html 17 - What is light, Theory of light http://www.nightlase.com.au/education/optics/light.htm 18 - Max. Planck, On the Law of the Energy Distribution in the Normal Spectrum, Ann. Phys., 4, 553, 1901 http://ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuevo_maletin/Planck%20(1901),%20Energy%20distribution.pdf In other form reported in the German Physical Society (Deutsche Physikalische Gesellschaft) in the meetings of October 19 and December 14, 1900, published in Verh. Dtsch. Phys. Ges. Berlin, 1900, 2, 202 and 237 19 – A. Einstein, Planck's Theory of Radiation and the Theory of Specific Heat, Annalen der Physik (ser. 4), 1907 , https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol2-trans/228 20 - John. E. Carroll, A photon-like wavepacket with quantised properties based on classical Maxwell’s equations, arXiv, 2006 https://arxiv.org/ftp/quant-ph/papers/0609/0609156.pdf 21 - Milan Perkovac, Maxwell’s Equations as the Basis for Model of Atoms, Scientific Research, 2014, http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=45334 22 - Victor Leong, et, at., Time-resolved scattering of a single photon by a single atom, Nature Communications, 2016, https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms13716 23 - Qi-Yu Liang1, et, at. , Observation of three-photon bound states in a quantum nonlinear medium, Science, 2018 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6377/783 24 - Art Hobson, There are no particles, there are only fields, American Journal of Physics 81, 211 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4789885 25 - Robert J. Sciamanda, THERE ARE NO PARTICLES, AND THERE ARE NO FIELDS, American Journal of Physics 81, 645 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4812316 26 - Thibault Damour, Poincar´e, the Dynamics of the Electron, and Relativity, arXiv, 2017 https://arxiv.org/pdf/1710.00706.pdf 27 - G. F. SMOOT, Relativity Notes, Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, 2003

10

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

http://aether.lbl.gov/www/classes/p139/homework/eight.pdf 28 - Andrew Zimmerman Jones, Doppler Effect in Light: Red & Blue Shift, ThoughtCo, 2017 https://www.thoughtco.com/doppler-effect-in-light-red-shift-and-blue-shift-2699033 29 - Elizabeth Howell, What Are Redshift and Blueshift?, SPACE.COM, 2018 https://www.space.com/25732-redshift-blueshift.html 30 - Pound, R. V.; Rebka Jr. G. A. "Apparent weight of photons". Physical Review Letters 4 (7), 1960 31 - CERN, The Standard Model, https://home.cern/about/physics/standard-model 32- ﯾﮕﺎﻧﮕﯽ ﻣﺎده – اﻧﺮژی، ﻧﺸﺮﯾﮫ دﺑﯿﺮﺧﺎﻧﮫ ھﯿﺌﺖ ﻋﻠﻤﯽ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه آزاد – واﺣﺪ ﺟﻨﻮب ﺗﮭﺮان، 1370 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319310113_ygangy_madh_-_anrzhy ﻧﻈﺮﯾﮫ ھﺎی ﻋﻠﻤﯽ – رد ﯾﺎ ﺗﻌﻤﯿﻢ؟ ﺗﮭﺮان، اﻧﺘﺸﺎرات اﺗﺎ، 1371 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319313385_nzryh_hay_lmy_-_rd_ya_tmym 33 - Hossein Javadi, et. at., Generalization of the Dirac’s Equation and Sea, in Persian, General Science, 2016 http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers/View/6553 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303988130_tmym_madlh_w_dryay_dyrak You can read all my work together in the following book: Beyond the Standard Model: Modern physics problems and solutions, in English https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/1939123623 Beyond the Standard Model: Modern physics problems and solutions, in Persian https://www.ketabrah.ir/pay/24977 34 - Narendra Swarup Agarwal, Experimental Proof of Mass in Photon, Journal of Modern Physics, 2015, 6, 627- 633, https://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP_2015042114060745.pdf 35 - Leo Stodolsky, The speed of light and the speed of neutrinos, Physics Letters B, 2002 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0370269388911549 36 - Golden Gadzirayi Nyambuya, Are Photons Massless or Massive?, Journal of Modern Physics, 2014, 5, 2111- 2124 http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP_2014122515125440.pdf 37 - The Royal Swedish Academy of has decided to award the Nobel Prize in Physics for 2015 to Takaaki Kajita and Arthur B. McDonald https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2015/press.html 38 - Citation: C. Patrignani et al. (Particle Data Group), Chin. Phys. C, 40, 100001 (2016) and 2017 update http://pdg.lbl.gov/2017/listings/rpp2017-list-photon.pdf 39 – Mohamed Hassani https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohamed_Hassani3 40 – References that Dr. Mohamed Hassani published: 1- A. Einstein, Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 7, 132 (1905) 2 - A. Einstein, Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 18, 121 (1917)

11

Energy: theoretical and experimental incompatibility

3 - A. Proca, J. Phys. (Paris) 8, 23 (1937) 4 - L. de Broglie, La mécanique ondulatoire du photon. 1. Une nouvelle théorie de la lumière (Hermann, 1940), 121-165 5 - L. Bass and E. Schrodinger, Proc. R. Soc. London, Series A 232, 1 (1955) 6 - L. de Broglie and J.P. Vigier, Phys. Rev. Lett. 28, 1001 (1972) 7 - P. Kaloyeron and J. P. Vigier, Phys. Lett. A 130, 260 (1988) 8 - H. Georgi, P. Ginsparg, and S. L. Glashow, Nature 306, 765 (1983) 9 - R. Lakes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 1826 (1998) 10 - J. Luo et al., Phys.Rev.Lett. 90, 081801 (2003) 11- A. S. Goldhaber and M. M. Nieto, arXiv: 0809.1003v5 [hep-ph] 5 October 2010 41 - Read more: Does energy have mass? https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_energy_have_mass 42 - Hamish Johnston, New limit placed on photon charge, PHYSICS WORLD, 2007 https://physicsworld.com/a/new-limit-placed-on-photon-charge/ Original source; Brett Altschul, Bound on the Photon Charge from the Phase Coherence of Extragalactic Radiation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 261801, 2007 https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.261801

12