|
|
|
The Need for a Free Discussion of the Validity of Physical
Theories
|
The general approach of a typical journal of physics to a free critical
debate of existing physical theories is very far from being
satisfactory. Indeed, the publication of articles presenting pros and
cons concerning existing physical theories practically does not
exist in many journals. One may wonder why the modern community of
physicists has adopted this practice.
For example, every factory that has a minimum of self-respect, devotes
efforts to QA (Quality Assurance) of its products.
Note that the history of
scientific theories teaches us that
not all theories survive the test of time. (See e.g. the Bohr-Sommerfeld
old quantum theory, illustrated by the picture on the upper-left hand side of this page.)
Another aspect of this matter is that the status of
a truly correct theory can only be improved if it is tested critically
every once in a while. Hence, people who genuinely believe in a
specific physical theory should support such a debate.
On the other hand, the suppression of a critical debate certainly does
not make a positive contribution to the progress of science. Referring
to this issue, it is interesting to cite a statement from S. D. Drell's final speech as
president of the American Physical Society (APS). In his description of
referees of APS's Journals,
he uses the following quotation: "We have met the enemy
and he is us" (see [1], p.61 second column,[2]). In my
personal experience, I have seen reports of many excellent referees.
However, there are too many referees belonging to a different category.
Considering them, I must say that I cannot deny Drell's description.
This site is dedicated to a free discussion of several theoretical
elements of physics which are proved here to be erroneous. This is a
very important assignment because everybody understands that physics
cannot make a real progress on the basis of theoretical errors.
Readers' responses will be published as appropriate.
References:
[1] S. D. Drell, Physics Today, 40, 56 (August 1987).
[2] Click here.
|
|
|
|
Is Theoretical Physics on the Right Course?
|
Even today, there are thousands of physicists
looking in vain for particles or effects predicted
by existing theories. Here is a short list of arguments
indicating problematic subjects:
Do We Need Strings for a Monopole Theory?
For many decades, thousands of physicists have tried to find a Dirac monopole.
In spite of these efforts,
the existence of this particle has not been established.
The Dirac monopole theory relies on irregularities called strings.
Now, a system of monopoles and fields (without charges) is
dual to ordinary electrodynamics of charges and fields. Hence, it
is free of strings. For this reason, one
does not understand the need for strings in a monopole theory.
Doubts Concerning the Klein-Gordon Field Theory.
The Klein-Gordon field function Φ(xμ)
depends on a single
set of space-time coordinates xμ.
Therefore, like the Dirac field Ψ(xμ),
it describes a
structureless pointlike particle.
Now, unlike Dirac particles (electrons, muons, quarks etc.), the existence of
pointlike KG particles has not been established. The theoretical side
of the KG equation has flaws of its own.
Thus, for example, in the case of the Schroedinger equation,
Ψ*Ψ represents the particle's density. Hence, the dimension of this
Ψ is [L-3/2]. On the other hand, the dimension of the KG function Φ is
[L-1]. For this reason, the
nonrelativistic limit of the KG equation disagrees with the Schroedinger equation.
Does the Standard Model Provide a Theoretical Interpretation for Hard
Photon-Nucleon Interaction?
Experiments prove that the interaction of a hard photon with a proton is about the same as its
interaction with a neutron. It follows that interaction of a hard photon with charged constituents
of nucleons cannot explain the data.
At present, the idea of Vector Meson Dominance (VMD) is used for this purpose. However, the PACS
system and the xxx arXiv define VMD as a phenomenological idea. Moreover, it has been
proved that VMD is inconsistent with well established physical theories.
(See
The Idea of Vector Meson Dominance.)
Hence, the Standard Model has no
acceptable theoretical interpretation for the hard photon-nucleon interaction.
Detailed discussions of these subjects and of other ones can be obtained from an activation
of items found in the Subject part of this site.
|
|
|
|
|
|
