Sample Copy. Not For Distribution. - Educreation · The Michelson-Morley Experiment 42 Chapter 2:...
Transcript of Sample Copy. Not For Distribution. - Educreation · The Michelson-Morley Experiment 42 Chapter 2:...
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
i
Neo-Classical Physics or
Quantum Mechanics?
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
ii
Publishing-in-support-of,
EDUCREATION PUBLISHING
RZ 94, Sector - 6, Dwarka, New Delhi - 110075 Shubham Vihar, Mangla, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh - 495001
Website: www.educreation.in __________________________________________________
© Copyright, Author
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, magnetic, optical, chemical, manual, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of its writer.
ISBN: 978-1-61813-463-9
Price: ` 432.00
The opinions/ contents expressed in this book are solely of the author and do not represent the opinions/ standings/ thoughts of Educreation.
Printed in India
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
iii
Neo-Classical Physics or
Quantum Mechanics? A New Theory of Physics
By
Dilip D James
EDUCREATION PUBLISHING (Since 2011)
www.educreation.in
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
iv
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
v
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
For the past decade, Dilip D. James has immersed
himself in the subject of quantum mechanics, with
particular emphasis on its advantages and its limitations.
His insights into quantum mechanics; with regard to
both, its successes and its failings, are unmatched. He
looks at what we know now about the sub-atomic world,
and contrasts that to what we thought we knew in 1927,
when quantum mechanics as we know it today was
established. He examines the philosophical basis of
physics and science and what it means in practical terms.
In this book he introduces the Neo-classical Theory of
Physics, a concept he has worked on for several years.
D.D. James displays an uncanny knack for getting
people past the idea that science is inherently dry and
difficult. He has degrees in physics and mathematics is
a confirmed lover of music and is an alumni of the
Trinity College of Music, London. D. D. James is
married and has two sons. He lives in the Nilgiri Hills of
South India.
W
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
vi
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
vii
This book is dedicated to my mother Susheela who
instilled in me a love of science and gave me the drive
and determination to complete this book, to my father
Ramakuri Sanjeeva Rao James who is ever my
inspiration, to my wife Daphne and my sons Vivian and
Vikram for their unstinting support and encouragement.
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
viii
FOREWORD
There is an uncanny resemblance between Christianity in
the Middle Ages and Physics in the Twenty-first
Century. In the former, the common man could not read
the scriptures, because they were written in Latin; the
clergy had to interpret the scriptures for the laity, with
predictable results. Physics in the Twenty First Century
is similar. Only mathematicians with Doctoral degrees
can understand the Universe and how it works, to the
rest of mankind the Universe is an area of darkness. This
is not by any means a desirable development.
As human beings we are all sentient individuals and
as such at a minimum are expected to enquire about our
environment, the world around us, and the Universe we
live in. It is wrong, on a fundamental philosophical
basis, that such knowledge is whether by circumstance
or by design, limited to a privileged few.
This book explains the Universe for the first time in
a way that is comprehensible to everyone. Neo-classical
physics undertakes the study of the behaviour of the
universe as an entity and the physics of sub-atomic
particles in easy to understand everyday terms. Neo-
classical Physics is the language that sets you free. Free
to see, free to comprehend, free to wonder anew.
W
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to Ramesh, Anil
and Rathan, without their assistance this book would not
have been written. My sincere thanks to my editors at
Educreation Publishing, thanks are also due to Sunna,
Zarina, Zara, Anita, Padmini, Ranjini, Simon, Nirmala,
Mohan, Raj, Prem, Inder, Chandra, Clive, Lucy, Rachel,
Sheila, Shanti, Manohar, Suresh, Saumya, Swapna and
Dr. Dayakar Rao. My special thanks to my wife Daphne
and my wonderful sons Vikram and Vivian.
W
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
x
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page no.
About the Author V
Dedication vii
Forewords viii
Acknowledgements ix
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
The Solvay Conferences 1
The Philosophy of science 4
Theories of the air 12
Concepts of Classical Physics 15
Quantum Mechanics Concepts 19
Heisenberg‟s Uncertainty Principle 24
Schrodinger‟s equation 31
Fields and the aether 36
The Michelson-Morley Experiment 42
Chapter 2:
The Big Bang Theory and light 52
The Big Bang Theory 52
Cosmic Background Microwave
Radiation 55
Alternative Theories to the Big Bang 58
Measuring distances to the stars 63
The Universe can never be truly explored 66
The neo-classical explanation for the
formation and existence of an aether 69
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
xii
Historical perspectives of the Universe 70
From light to aether and back again 71
Ancient Theories on light 76
The neo-classical view of an aether 79
The Propagation of Light 80
Neo-classical theory on the propagation
of light 85
Chapter 3: Max Planck and Light
Quanta 97
Max Planck: 97
The spectral distribution of radiation 103
Introducing Boltzmann‟s statistical
method into the theory of radiation 105
Planck‟s formula 107
Ludwig Eduard Boltzmann 111
A more detailed explanation of Planck's
constant 116
What was the outcome of the introduction
of Planck's constant 120
Quantum Physical model of the atom 133
A new interpretation of planck's constant 136
Chapter 4. Wave Theory: Louis De
Broglie, Schrodinger and Einstein 143
Wave Theory 143
The Classical view of waves 143
Mathematical description of one-
dimensional waves 147
Different Wave Forms 148
Sinusoidal waves 149
Depiction of Standing waves 151
Waves utilize Transmission media 152
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
xiii
Absorption of waves 153
Reflection of waves 153
Interference of waves 154
Refraction of waves 154
Diffraction of waves 155
Polarization of waves 155
Dispersion 156
Waves on strings 156
Acoustic waves 157
Water waves 157
James Clerk Maxwell : Electromagnetic
waves 157
Quantum mechanics: The Schrödinger
equation 160
Waves and particles 160
Position wave function 169
Momentum wave function 174
Position and momentum probability
distributions 175
Thoughts on the De Broglie relation 178
Derivation of de-Broglie Relationship 181
The speed of light and the Principle of
Relativity 189
Chapter 5: Five great Scientists 194
A brief word on the History of Astronomy 194
Johannes Kepler 1571 – 1630 201
Galileo Galilei: 1564 - 1642 208
Sir Isaac Newton 1642 - 1726 213
James Clerk Maxwell 1831 - 1879 230
Albert Einstein 237
Chapter 6 : Ten things that are wrong
with Quantum Mechanics and modern
physics
249
An overview 249
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
xiv
1. Hoarding a cardinal sin 250
2. Wave-particle duality 256
3. Louis De Broglie and matter waves 258
4. “Complementarity” 259
5. Schrodinger‟s wave function 265
6. The Double Slit Experiment 270
7. Questionable Mathematics in
quantum mechanics 278
8. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle 284
9. The quantum mechanics concept of
spin 288
10. Fields matter and particles 297
11. Quantum Mechanics and radio waves 305
Chapter 7. Neo-classical physics 312
The departure from empiricism and
reason 312
Neo-classical physics a short account 318
Taking the fuzziness out of quantum
mechanics 319
Wave particle duality does exist: only not
in the way you thought it did! 323
The hydrogen spectrum 324
Neils Bohr‟s model of the atom 325
The neo-classical structure of the photon 328
The aether 333
On the propagation of light 338
The propagation of a current in a wire 344
Deep space radio transmissions 355
Neo-classical physics and Magnetism 358
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
xv
Neo- classical physics and Gravity 366
Einstein‟s Theory of General Relativity 375
The Neo-classical Theory of Gravity 377
Neo-classical physics and Super
conductors 379
Bibliography 384
W
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
xvi
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Neo-Classical Physics or Quantum Mechanics?
1
CHAPTER- 1
Introduction
“The important thing is to not stop questioning.
Curiosity has its own reason for existence.”
- Albert Einstein
The Solvay Conferences:
The beginning of the twentieth Century saw the
development of extraordinary events in the science of
physics. In December of 1900 Max Planck, a German
physicist, published a scientific paper which was to
throw the world of physics into a fever of confusion and
to change our perception of the world and of matter
forever. So important was the discovery made by Max
Planck that an entire chapter in this book is given to
explaining what that discovery was and how it impacted
the world of physics. The purpose of this book is to try
and convey to the reader the mood and prevailing beliefs
of the time during which quantum mechanics was
formulated and of how physicists of the time reacted to
the revolutionary new developments in physics with
which they were suddenly confronted. A summary of
everything in this book is presented in this introductory
chapter. This book has been written for anyone who is
interested in knowing something about the state of
modern day physics. The Universe is a truly wondrous
place and deserves that each of us take some time to
understand what it means and what our place in it might
be. Although a fair number of mathematical expressions
are present in the book, they are purely incidental, and
not important, it is not necessary either to know or to
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Dilip D James
2
understand mathematics in order to understand this
book.
One of the key factors in the formulation of
quantum mechanics, were the discussions that took place
at the Solvay conferences. The Solvay conference of
1911 was the first international conference in the history
of science; it brought together in Brussels the leading
physicists of the time for a week-long discussion on the
'quantum theory of radiation'. Subsequently the Solvay
conferences were held every three years but were
interrupted by the First World War.
A key organiser at these scientific conferences was
Hendrik Lorentz, a highly gifted mathematician and
renowned physicist, he would remain the scientific
organizer of the Solvay conferences until his death - the
1927 Solvay conference on quantum mechanics was the
last he chaired. The legendary Bohr/Einstein debate on
the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics started at
this 1927 Solvay conference. The 1927 Solvay was
remarkable in that of the twenty-nine scientists who
attended seventeen would go on to become Nobel
laureates.
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Neo-Classical Physics or Quantum Mechanics?
3
It is therefore apparent that the formulation of
quantum mechanics was a systematic process that was
formulated through active discussion between leading
scientists and physicists from all over the world and not
just a spontaneous science that was formulated by any
one person. It was the physicist's answer to the
seemingly impossible problems posed by Planck's
discovery of light quanta.
Some of the bewilderment and confusion prevalent
at the time can be seen from the statement of F.A.
Lindemann, a young English physicist, who had
attended the First Solvay Conference held in 2011:
"The discussions were most interesting but the
result is that we seem to be getting deeper into the mire
than ever. On every side there seem to be
contradictions.1
The atmosphere surrounding the conception of
Quantum mechanics was one of discussions and heated
clashes between contradictory arguments. The names of
many leading scientists are linked with its development,
including N. Bohr, A. Einstein, M. Planck, E.
Schrödinger, M. Born, W. Pauli, A. Sommerfeld, L. de
Broglie, P. Ehrenfest, E. Fermi, W. Heisenberg, P.
Dirac, R. Feynman, and others. It is also not surprising
that even today anyone who starts studying quantum
mechanics encounters a psychological barrier. Quantum
Mechanics is difficult to accept, this is not so much
because of the mathematical complexity of the subject
but rather is due to the strangeness of the concepts
involved. To reorganize one's pattern of thinking to
accept new and unobvious concepts which are not part of
everyday experience is a difficult undertaking to
achieve.
An important aspect of this book is to study both
the advantages and disadvantages of quantum mechanics
and to demonstrate how these findings might lead to the
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Dilip D James
4
formulation of a new neo-classical physics. In order to
gain a true understanding of the facts it is necessary to
first explore the essence of what classical physics and
quantum mechanics represent and in what manner they
differ.
The Philosophy of science:
From the most primitive times man has felt the
urge not merely to accept and react to his environment
but also to attempt to modify, to control and to explain
it. The earliest form of explanations took the form of the
personification of the great natural forces such as the
sun, the wind, the water and the earth. For instance the
ancient Greeks believed that there were five elements
that everything was made up of: Earth, Water, Air, Fire
and Aether. This theory was suggested around 450 BC,
and it was later supported and added to by Aristotle.
Indian and Chinese philosophies based on the same
principles of the four basic elements that are used to
describe interactions and relationships between things,
predated the Greek theory by many centuries. In the
Indian system these five elements were: agni (fire) vayu
(wind) prithvi (earth), jal, (water) and akshaya (aether)
and represented the elemental aspects of nature, while
the five elements in the Chinese system: wood, fire,
earth, metal, and water - were believed to be the
fundamental elements of everything in the universe
between which interactions occur.
Thus the idea of reducing the nature and the
complexity of all matter in terms of simpler substances
seems to have been a universal trend in philosophical
thought from the most ancient of times.
While philosophical thought pertaining to the
sciences dates back at least to the time of Aristotle, the
philosophy of science emerged as a distinct discipline
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Neo-Classical Physics or Quantum Mechanics?
5
only in the middle of the 20th century in the wake of
the logical positivism movement, which aimed to
formulate criteria for ensuring all philosophical
statements' meaningfulness and objectively assessing
them. Thomas Kuhn's landmark 1962 book The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions was also formative,
challenging the view of scientific progress as the steady,
cumulative acquisition of knowledge based on a fixed
method of systematic experimentation and instead
argued that any progress is relative to a "paradigm": the
set of questions, concepts, and practices that define a
scientific discipline in a particular historical period.2
Epistemology is concerned with the nature, sources
and limits of knowledge, it is primarily concerned with
propositional knowledge, or the knowledge that such-
and-such is true, rather than other forms of knowledge,
for example the, knowledge of how to such-and-such.
Epistemology questions what knowledge is and how it
can be acquired, and the extent to which knowledge
pertinent to any given subject or entity can ever truly be
acquired. When applied to the science of physics, the
study of knowledge and justified belief or epistemology,
becomes particularly important because it clearly sets
out the criteria needed to outline a proposition in
physics. The question that presents itself is in
determining what criteria fulfill the term „justified‟?
The „coherentist‟ approach to science, in which a
theory is validated if it makes sense of observations as
part of a coherent whole, subsequently became
prominent due to W. V. Quine and others. Some thinkers
such as Stephen Jay Gould sought to ground science in
axiomatic assumptions, such as the uniformity of nature.
Others, though in the minority, like Paul Feyerabend
(1924–1994), are vocal in arguing that there is no such
thing as the "scientific method", and that all approaches
to science should therefore be allowed, including
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Dilip D James
6
explicitly supernatural ones. Scholars like David Bloor
and Barry Barnes represent yet another approach to
thinking about science which involves studying how
knowledge is created from a sociological perspective.
One of the approaches to science taken by continental
(European) philosophy is a perspective taken from a
rigorous analysis of human experience. What counts as a
good scientific explanation is a closely related question.
In addition to providing predictions about future events,
society often generates scientific theories to provide
explanations for events that occur regularly or have
already occurred. The criteria by which a scientific
theory can be said to have successfully explained a
phenomenon, as well as what it means to say that a
scientific theory has explanatory power has been
investigated by Philosophers.
The deductive-nomological model is one early and
influential theory of scientific explanation. It says if the
scientific explanation for the occurrence of the
phenomena in question has been derived from
a scientific law 3 it may be considered a successful
model. This view with its authoritarian overtones has
been subjected to substantial criticism, resulting in
several widely acknowledged counter examples to the
theory. 4
When the thing to be explained cannot be deduced
from any law it is especially challenging to characterize
what is meant by an explanation because it is a matter of
chance, or otherwise cannot be perfectly predicted from
what is known. 5. The key to a good explanation lies in
unifying disparate phenomena or providing a causal
mechanism 7 maintains one counter argument.
The range of philosophies of the particular sciences
is practically unlimited; from questions about the nature
of time like those raised by Einstein's general relativity,
to the implications of economics for public policy. The
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Neo-Classical Physics or Quantum Mechanics?
7
question of whether one scientific discipline can be
reduced to the terms of another is a central theme
underlying the philosophy of science. For instance, can
individual psychology be reduced to sociology or can
physics be reduced to chemistry? Some particular
sciences are subject to the general questions of
philosophy of science with greater frequency than are
others. The question of the validity of scientific
reasoning, for example, is seen in a different guise in the
foundations of statistics. The question of life-or-death
arises as a matter of course in the philosophy of
medicine when the problem of what counts as science
and what should be excluded is considered.
Additionally, the philosophies of psychology,
biology, and of the social sciences explore whether
objectivity can ever be achieved in scientific studies of
human nature or alternatively, are inevitably shaped by
values and by social relations.
The question of how one can infer the validity of a
general statement from a number of specific instances is
often taken for granted although in actual fact it is not at
all clear, while on the other hand should the truth of a
theory be inferred from a series of successful tests? 8
Consider the following example, for hundreds of days in
a row, each morning, a farmer comes and feeds a
chicken. Using inductive reasoning the chicken may
therefore infer that the farmer will bring food every
morning. Instead, the farmer comes as usual one
morning and kills the chicken. Is scientific reasoning in
any sense more trustworthy than the chicken's
reasoning?
To acknowledge that induction cannot achieve
certainty is one approach, but the observation of multiple
instances of a general statement can at least make the
general statement more probable. Through using
deductive reasoning the chicken would be right to
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Dilip D James
8
conclude from experience gained from all those
mornings that it is likely the next morning that the
farmer will again come with food, even if it cannot be
certain. Yet, what precise probability any given evidence
justifies being attributed to the general statement
remains a difficult question to resolve. To declare that all
beliefs about scientific theories are subjective, or
personal is one way out of these particular difficulties
and that how one's subjective beliefs should change over
time 9 is merely evidence of correct reasoning.
One of the arguments advanced is that what
scientists do is not inductive reasoning at all but rather
reasoning based on inference as to the best explanation.
According to this theory, science is about hypothesizing
explanations for what is observed in specific instances
rather than about generalizing. As discussed earlier on, it
is not always clear what is meant by the "best
explanation." A popular rule of thumb that plays an
important role in some versions of this approach is that
of Occam‟s razor, which counsels choosing
the simplest available explanation. Occam's razor, is a
problem-solving principle attributed to William of
Occam (c. 1287–1347), a Franciscan friar in England
who was a scholar, philosopher and theologian. The
principle can be interpreted as stating among competing
hypotheses, the one with the fewest postulates should be
selected.
Returning to the example of the chicken, it would
be simpler to suppose that the farmer cares about it and
will continue taking care of it indefinitely but more
likely that the farmer is fattening it up for slaughter?
Attempts have been made by philosophers to make
this heuristic principle more precise in terms of
theoretical frugality or other measures. It is generally
accepted, that there appears to be no such thing as a
theory-independent measure of simplicity although
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Neo-Classical Physics or Quantum Mechanics?
9
various measures of simplicity have been brought
forward as potential candidates. In short, there are as
many different measures of simplicity available as there
are theories themselves, and the job of choosing between
measures of simplicity appears to be every bit as
problematic as the task of choosing between theories. 11
Generally, on a basic level, when making
observations by looking through telescopes, studying
images on electronic screens, recording meter readings,
and so on scientists agree on what they see, e.g., the
thermometer shows 40.9 degrees C. But it is possible for
these scientists to possess divergent reasoning about the
theories based on observations that have been developed
to explain these observations, if this happens they may
disagree about what they are observing. Theory-laden 12
observations are those observations that cannot be
separated from theoretical interpretation.
All observation involves both perception and
cognition. That is, observation are made by actively
engaging in distinguishing the phenomenon being
observed, rather than passively from surrounding
sensory data. Therefore, one's underlying understanding
of the way in which the world functions affects the
manner in which observations are affected, and that
understanding may influence what is deemed worthy of
consideration, is perceived or noticed. In this sense, it
can be argued that all observation is theory-laden. 13
Should science aim to determine ultimate truth, or
are there questions that science cannot answer?
Scientific theories ought to be regarded as true, claim
Scientific realists since science aims at truth rather than
the approximately true, or the likely true. Scientific anti-
realists argue, conversely, that the aim of science is not
truth, especially truth about un-observables like
electrons or other universes. 14
While instrumentalists
argue that scientific theories should only be evaluated on
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Dilip D James
10
their utility. To make predictions and enable effective
technology is in their view the purpose of science. The
question of whether the theories are true or not is beside
the point.
The success of recent scientific theories is often
used as an argument by realists who use this as evidence
for the truth (or near truth) of current theories. 15
The
success of false modeling assumptions, the many false
theories in the history of science, 17
the failure of
epistemic morals are often pointed to by Anti-realists
either 19
as evidence against scientific realism 20
or are
termed postmodern criticisms of objectivity. The
antirealists attempt to explain the success of scientific
theories without reference to truth. 21
Some antirealists argue that the success claimed by
scientific theories is primarily focused at being accurate
only about observable objects and is judged by that
criterion. 22
Values intersect with science in different ways.
There are epistemic values that mainly guide scientific
research. Scientific enterprise is embedded in a
particular culture and values through individual
practitioners. Both product and process emerge as values
from science and can be distributed among several
cultures in society.
`There is considerable scope for values and other
social influences to shape science even if it is unclear
what counts as science, how the process of confirming
theories works, and indeed to determine what the
purpose of science is. Values can play a role ranging
from determining which research gets funded to
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Neo-Classical Physics or Quantum Mechanics?
11
Get Complete Book At Educreation Store
www.educreation.in
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.
Sample Copy. Not For Distribution.