This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Top page (correct Bohr model including the two-electron atoms) General (special) relativity is wrong ? Right angle lever paradox, Electric wire paradox have been solved ? Why strange charges are generated from neutral states ? Misunderstanding in ordinary electromagnetism textbooks. Charge and current densities relationship. "Shut up and calculate !" state continues "forever", unless we deny Relativity.
Why strange charges are generated from neutral states ?
[ Lorentz transformation is wrong. ]
(Fig.1) Lorentz transformation → new charges generated.
According to the special relativity, charge (= ρe ) and current (= J ) transform like spacetime (= ct, x, y, z ) under Lorentz transformation. ( These are called four vector currents. ) (Eq.1)
In Fig.1, from the viewpoint of S frame, the current J is neutral. But the instant the observer starts to move in the x direction, the neutral electric wire becomes positively charged. As a result, a negative external point charge is attracted to the positive wire ONLY in S' frame, which means paradox. And of course, the total charges of one wire is not conserved just by the simple observer's movement, because neutral becomes positive. This means special relativity breaks down in electromagnetism. Here, we explain why this strange phenomenon occurs in the relativistic electromagnetism and misunderstanding in ordinary relativity textbooks. (Eq.1') Lorentz transformation.
[ Lorentz force needs "new charge" generation. ]
(Fig.2) Lorentz force needs new charges.
From S frame of reference in Fig.2, the neutral electric current is flowing in the minus x direction. So the numbers of positive and negative charges included in the wire are the same. ( ρe = 0. ) One external positive charge (= e+ ) is at rest from S frame. As a result, there are no magnetic and electric forces acting on the stationary charge. ( Magnetic force is ev×B, and the particle's velocity "v" is zero in S frame. ) (Fig.2')
But when the observer is moving in the x direction (= S' frame ), the external positive charge is moving in the minus x direction from the viewpoint of the observer. So from S' frame, the positive charge experiences the magnetic force (= ev×B ), and moves downward to the wire ONLY in S' frame. This is paradox, so to stop the charge, new positive charges are generated in the neutral electric wire, and its electric field cancels out the magnetic force in the relativity.
[ Total charges included in one wire is NOT conserved. ]
(Fig.3) Negative charges are removed only from S' frame in relativity ?
As you know, positive and negative charges mean proton and electron. According to the special relativity, in S frame, protons and electrons included in one wire are equal in number, because it is neutral. But in S' frame, negative electrons are removed more than positive protons from the electric wire ! As I explain later, the quantum charge e or e+ is a scalar constant in QED, which is different from charge density. Because total charge is charge density × volume.
Why such a unreasonable phenomenon happens in the relativistic electromagnetism ? (Fig.4) Observer "teleports" negative charges in special relativity ??
To be precise, total electric charges in a wire loop are conserved even in the special relativity. So in the relativistic electromagnetism, negative charges in the upper wire are instantly transported into the lower wire just by simple observer's movement !. This means the observer has the "supernatural power" or the special relativity is wrong.
[ Fatal paradox of special relativity. ]
(Fig.5) Observer's "looking power" moves the charged particle ?
In Fig.5, near the neutral current wire loop, one minus charge and one plus charge are at rest in S frame. ( The distance between them is supposed to be very long. ) But from the S' frame, these charges are attracted to the current wires, which generate strange charges, as shown in Fig.5, right. This direction shows weak point of the special relativity. Because, the magnetic force, which acts on the charge can NOT be parallel to the charge's moving direction (= minus x direction in S' ). So the electric force acting on the charge cannot be canceled out by the magnetic force. ( We cannot use the relation of eE - ev× B = 0. ) This means the special relativity breaks down. Paradox of Fig.5 has nothing to do with hidden momentum.
[ Observer's viewpoint is so important ?? ]
(Fig.6) "Neutral" wire remains "neutral" !
As you feel, a neutral wire remains neutral irrespective of the observer's movement. Because a "neutral" wire means it contains protons and electrons of the same number.
And of course, the observer has no supernatural power of teleporting the charges without touching them. So the relations among charge, wire, and space on the earth are important and related. ( Observer who doesn't touch them has Nothing to do with them. ) All charges including our human bodies on the earth are moving with the earth, so it is natural the "electric field" among them are also moving with the earth. And the light speed completely depends on the mediums such as air and water on the earth. When the external point charge is at rest, it means the point charge is at rest with respect to the space (= medium ) on the earth. And when it is moving, it causes de Broglie waves with respect to the earth. ( Of cource, in this case, the interpretation of Michelson-Morley experiment changes. ) (Fig.7) "Neutral" wire remains "neutral" !
Lorentz transformation of the special relativity was gotten from the idea that the light speed is always constant "c" in all frames of reference. But this idea causes fatal paradoxes. So we need to change the interpretation of Michelson-Morley experiment, in which the constant light speed is due to some medium moving with the earth. ( Actually, they didn't deny the medium moving with the earth. ) In this case, the "neutral" wire remains "neutral" and strange teleportation of charges does NOT happen just by simple oberver's movement.
Misunderstanding in ordinary electromagnetism textbooks.
In some ordinary electromagnetism ( or relativity ) textbooks, the mechanism of strange phenomenon of Fig.2 is explained from the viewpoints of minus and plus charges. ( Though there are not so many books. Try finding them. ) But these explanations cause the "division" of the electric wire into two lines , as shown in Fig.8 ! (Fig.8) "Division" of one electric wire into two ??
Here, S' frame is moving in the x direction at the velocity v with respect to S frame. The electric wire is at rest with respect to S frame. From the observer at rest with respect to the electric wire (= S frame ), the electric wire is supposed to be neutral. So the plus ( ρ+ ) and minus ( ρ- ) charge densities are equal in S frame , as follows, (Eq.2)
In S frame, only minus charges are moving in the x direction at v. So the current density Jx and current = current density × cross section (= A ) become as shown in Eq.2. And plus (external) charge q is at rest with respect to the electric wire in S frame. So this charge q does not experience any forces (= F ) including electric and magnetic Lorentz forces from the electric wire. And the length of this electric wire is supposed to be " l ". (Fig.9) Lorentz contraction between charges.
According to the relativistic theory such as QED, the unit charge e and -e must be Lorentz-invariant scalar. ( The unit charge e and -e do not change under Lorentz transformation. ) So the charge density ρ changes in inverse proportion to distances between charges (= l0 ). (Eq.3)
As shown in this page, a moving thing is Lorentz contracted according to the relativity. Plus charges are at rest in S frame, and moving in the minus x direction in S' frame. So the distance between plus charges becomes shorter in S' frame, which causes the increase in the plus charge density ( ρ'+ > ρ+ ). On the other hand, the minus charges moving in S frame stop in S' frame. So the distance between minus charges becomes longer in S' frame, which causes the decrease in minus charge density ( ρ'- < ρ- ) . As a result, the total charge density ( × A ) in S' frame becomes plus ! (Eq.4)
And the total current density ( J'x ) in S' frame becomes (Eq.5)
( Even if you separate the plus and minus charges and calculate, you can get the same result. ) From Eq.4 and Eq.5, we calculate the electric and magnetic forces (= Lorentz forces ), (Eq.6)
Also in S' frame, the total forces Fz acting on q becomes zero. So the strange new charge generation from the neutral current is necessary in the special relativity. ( If these new charges are not generated, the charge q+ moves downward only in S' frame. ) So Lorentz transformation of Eq.7 is indispensable for Lorentz force law. ( As I explain later, this transformation is necessary for the normal relation among charges and currents, if Lorentz transformation is right. )
(Eq.7) Lorentz transformation.
If we admit "earth medium (= ether ) " instead of special relativity, the charge q feels the de Broglie wave of the electric current. ( The movement of the charge with respect to the earth "medium", is equal to the generation of de Broglie wave. ) And if the charge q is moving, it causes de Broglie wave, too, and interacts with current's de Broglie wave. This idea is more natural than special relativity, because this does NOT cause the violation of the conservation of the total charge in the electric wire. ( We can naturally think the mysterious magnetic field B is related to de Broglie waves of the charged particles. ) Even if we obey the special relativity, the total charge MUST be conserved. From the viewpoint of the moving observer (= S' ), the total length of the electric wire is Lorentz-contracted (= shortened ). Using Eq.3, the total plus charge amount in S' frame becomes (Eq.8)
OK. the total plus charge in the whole electric wire is conserved safely. But how about the minus charge ?? Using Eq.3, the total minus charge in S' frame becomes ( of course, they exist in the same shortened electric wire as plus charges ! ) (Eq.9)
Strange to say, the total minus charge is NOT conserved, as shown in Eq.9 ! If you think that one electric wire is separated into the two different-length wires just by simple observer's movement ( Fig. 8 ), the total minus charge is conserved. But it is impossible. This means the special relativity is wrong in the electromagnetism. And as shown in this page, these definitions of the relativity cause self-contradiction and paradox. "Hidden momentum" method seems to use the different center of rotation. ( But for example, the earth revolves around the sun and rotates on its own axis. These two rotations are different things. ) So can we insist that we have completely solved this paradox ? (Fig.10) Electron charge (e-) is Lorentz-invariant scalar.
According to the quantum electrodynamics (QED), electron charge (e-) does not change under Lorentz transformation. (= Lorentz invariant scalar. ) Actually, the constant charge "e" is used in the fine structure constant and magnetic moment in QED. ( To be precise, the charge e + permittivity of the vacuum is constant. ) Here we explain this invariance from the viewpoint of classical electromagnetism and special relativity. The electron is a point particle. But here we suppose the length of the electron is "l", as shown in Fig.10. From Eq.7 and Lorentz-contraction, the total charge of one electron does not change under Lorentz transformation (= Fig.10 right). Because even if the length "l" is contracted, the charge density ρ is increased and cancel each other.
Charge and current densities relationship.
(Fig.11) Total charges are conserved in all reference frames.
In Fig.11, the charges and box are moving with S' frame at v with respect to S frame. In S' frame, two charges (= 2 × q' ) enter box during dt', which means 2q' is increased in the box during dt' (= Fig.11A). From the viewpoint of S frame, we suppose the charge q' becomes q. ( Actually the charge "e" doesn't change. ) Also in S frame, two charges (= 2 × q ) enter the box during dt, which means 2q is increased in the box during dt. So in all reference frame, the relation between charge density ρe and current density J must be satisfied. ( When the charge amount of "Q" enters some place per second, charge "Q" is increased per second. It is quite natural. ) (Fig.12) Charge and current densities relationship
In Fig.12, charge density ρe means the electric charge per unit volume, and current density J means an electric current per cross-sectional area. So considering the movement of the electric charges, the relationship between charge and current densities in the infinitesimal box ( V = Δx Δy Δz ) are (Eq.10)
Charge density ρe = C / m3 (= coulomb per volume ), current I = C / s (= coulomb per second), current density J = C / s m2 (= coulomb per second per area ). From Eq.10, we get (Eq.11)
If you believe in the special relativity, the time (= ct ) and space (= x, y, z ) coodinate need to change as four-vector under Lorentz transformation. ( Of course, if we admit "earth ether" instead of special relativity, this strange Lorentz transformation does NOT need to be used. ) (Eq.12)
where S' frame (= x', y', z', t' ) is moving in the x direction at the velocity v with respect to S frame (= x, y, z, t ). Eq.12 is equal to (Eq.13)
And in any inertial reference frame, the relationship between charge and current density must be satisfied, as shown in Fig.12. (Eq.14)
To satisfy Eq.14, the charge and current density must change as four-vector like time and space coordinate, which causes "strange" phenomenon as I explained above. And this leads to breakdown of special relativity in the electromagnetism ! (Eq.C-1) Classical mechanics.
First we think about the classical version of Eq.12 upper. In the classical mechanics, the strange transformation of the time, space and charge do NOT happen. S' frame is movig in the x direction at v, the current Jx needs to be added ρe v (= charge density × velocity ). Using Eq.C-1, the left side of Eq.14 is (Eq.C-2)
And the first equation of the right side of Eq.14 is (Eq.C-3)
Substituting Eq.C-2 and Eq.C-3 into Eq.14, (Eq.C-4)
As a result, in any frames of classical mechanics, the normal relation between charge and current is satisfied. The important point is that the following terms must not appear in the final equation. (Eq.C-5)
Because the terms of Eq.C-5 are independent from other terms. ( These terms can take any values independently from other terms. ) So if the terms of Eq.C-5 are included in Eq.14, this equation is broken. Next we think about the relativistic version. Using the relation (= Lorentz transformation ) of Eq.13, the left side of Eq.14 can be expressed as (Eq.15)
In Eq.15, the position of ( x', y', z' ) are specified somewhere in S' frame and independent from the time t'. So only t and x include the variable t' in this case. In the same way, the first term of the right side in Eq.14 is (Eq.16)
To make the relationship of Eq.14 Lorentz invariant, the charge and current densities need to transform like ( ct, x, y, z ). (Eq.17)
So, under Lorentz transformation, charge and current transform like (Eq.18) Lorentz transformation.
Inserting Eq.18 into Eq.15, Eq.16 and Eq.14, we obtain (Eq.19)
We can get original Eq.11. As a result, the special relativity needs the Lorentz transformation of Eq.18 in the electromagntetism. Eq.18 means even when the original charge density is zero ( ρe = 0 ), new strange charges ( ρ'e ) are generated from the neutral current ( Jx ) after Lorentz transformation (= Eq.21 ). (Eq.21)
"Shut up and calculate !" state continues "forever", unless we deny Relativity.
It is unfortunate that they conclude that neutrino is not faster than light in the recent experiment. But they performed the very long-term experiments ( for several years ) to conclude that neutrino is faster than light last year. Can they really deny this faster-than-light neutrino only by the very short-term experiment ( for only several weeks ) ? After the long winter vacation, it is natural that we should very carefully check all states of each machine spending "much longer" time ? This webpage is originally created to deny "quantum mechanics" (and QFT) rather than the relativity. But during that process, I noticed some important point about the relativity. Unless we deny the speciel relativity, we give up knowing "what things in the world actually are" forever. As long as we do not admit some substance in the vacuum, we must rely on "unreal" virtual particles forever. (Fig.13) What are "virtual" particles ? → "Shut up and calculate !" ( forever )
In this page, we show these virtual particles contradicts the special relativity in all inertial frames. And as shown in this page, the relativity includes basic self-contradiction such as "Twin paradox". If we consider gravitational and centrifugal potential time dilations, we can show these are really "paradox". (Fig.14) Dark matter is "rotation of space ether".
Furthermore. the stars near the edge in the galaxy are rotating much faster than we expected. This means general relativity breaks down in the galaxy rotation. If we admit some substance (= ether ) in the vacuum, we can explain these strange dark matter easily. You probably wonder why they did not notice the various paradoxes of the relativity for about 100 years. Of course, they already noticed these defects in the relativity. But all we could do was to choose relativistic Dirac equation which can combine "unreal" spin and relativistic effects, as long as "real" Bohr-Sommerfeld model can not solve very hard three-body problems using computer. ( Now as shown in the top page, we succeeded in expressing the three body helium atom correctly using Bohr Sommerfeld-based methods ). The important point is that the energy and momentum are the same degree in Dirac and Klein-Gordon equations, which is diffrent from Bohr-Sommerfeld model. (Fig.15)
Personally, I do not think that more than 15000 faster-than-light neutrinos investigated for several years are denied ONLY by very small value of 5 - 25 light-speed neutrinos. If the special relativity is wrong, it is inconsistent with all of the standard model, QED, and superstring theory. So they seem to be satisfied with this result. ( I understand their feelings. ) But unfortunately in this page or this page, the special relativity seems to include fatal defects.
2012/6/11 updated. Feel free to link to this site.