|
Why Classical Mechanics limited
The law of sufficient ground and its role in science
In this article, from the perspective of classical philosophy, I explain why Newton's laws do not work in quantum mechanics. Then, from the same point of view, I explain the nature of the conflicting definitions of micro particles etc... According to formal logic, all categories and laws in any science have scientific meaning only within the limits of the sufficient grounds on which they are identified, because only in this case, the scientific concepts and discovered laws retain their (unambiguous) identity as a necessary condition, on which the formal logic is based.
Many opponents to dialectical logic diminish or deny its importance, arguing that all the discoveries in science are made based on formal logic, without any assistance from dialectical logic. The perversity of this claim just shows that many philosophers and scientists do not understand the simple fact that the formal logic includes the most important element of dialectical logic: the law of sufficient ground, discovered by Leibniz.
This sufficient ground is nothing more than a qualitative basis, in relation to which our knowledge is built through formal logic, and is the subject of analysis of dialectical logic in terms of its development. In other words, the dialectical logic shows us which laws govern the development of this qualitative ground and how the latter becomes its opposite.
Let us take physics as an example. In physics, there are many sections that deal with a variety of qualitative grounds. For example, it examines the behavior of solid bodies and their interactions among themselves, the behavior of gases, the behavior of fluids, electricity, magnetism and so on.
Everyone knows that laws defined in relation to one qualitative ground are meaningless if they are applied to another qualitative ground; gas laws cannot be transferred to the behavior of solid bodies and vice versa, the laws of mechanics do not make sense to study electromagnetic field etc... But it is interesting to note the fact that the various qualitative grounds transform from one to another during the process of their development, and therefore represent opposites. For example, under rising temperature, a solid body turns into its opposite, liquid, and the latter turns into its opposite, gas.
Dialectical logic discovered the general laws of conversion or development of these qualitative grounds (see my article "Formal and dialectical logic as unity of opposites or the development of the classical philosophy"), and formal logic discovered the laws that every science uses to discover the content of these qualitative grounds.
The key features of the body: Mass and Physical Field Answers to all these WHY are in the simple fact that the basic property of the body, along with its mass, is its the opposite property of being as a physical field. Each mass creates a field, so the mass and the field mutually determine the existence of each other. There can be no mass without a field and fields without mass. For example, a mass has a gravitational field, it can be strong or weak depending on the size of the mass. Any charged particle represents a static field. A body composed of atoms,where around their nucleus the charged particles revolve and create electromagnetic fields and so forth. In our daily lives we are dealing with bodies, a pattern of behavior of which is determined by their mass rather than their field, which is very weak and has no effect on their behavior. But if any body gets in a strong physical field, its behavior will be determined by its physical field and not by its mass. Take for example, levitation of frog in a strong magnetic field or a weightless astronaut in satellite. The fact that the definition of the body includes two opposite properties, mass and physical field is not the exception but the overall situation in the real world. For example, a magnet in its definition includes the two opposite, positive and negative poles, an electric charge in its definition includes the two opposites, + and -; people in its definition includes the two opposites, men and women and etc.. We are so accustomed to one-sided definition of the body as a mass that we can not believe in weightlessness of the body, when it shows its dominance properties as the physical field.
The physical field as a new qualitative ground When we study the behavior of the body in the physical field in general (gravitational, electrostatic, electromagnetic, magnetic, nuclear, etc.), then it becomes a qualitative ground, in relation to which the laws of behavior of body are determined, and it is opposite to the qualitative ground which the classical mechanics is based on . Further, the interaction of fields (the field of the body and the outside field) in relation to the interaction of the mass of body is the opposite qualitative ground , for this reason the laws of behavior of the body on the new basis would be at variance with the laws of behavior of the body, defined in relation to the old base (mass). For example, what is common for all these fields is that the force with which they are operating on a physical field of the body does not depend on its mass. Discovered by Galilei the law of free fall states that the force with which bodies are attracted to the earth (the movement of the body in a gravitational field) does not depend on their mass; or another example, on a particle with charge q, placed in an electric field with strength E, a force F = Eq and ect. Hence the conclusion that the notion of mass has no physical meaning in relation to the use of force in the new qualitative ground , the interaction of field of body and an external field. From this we can conclude that under the accelerated motion of the body in the field by its forces, the body will not experience inertial forces or overload, which caused by the action of mechanical forces on it, considered in classical mechanics. See my description of the UFO below. Further, when the body moves in a field under the action of the field’s forces, there is no the second body, and therefore there are no forces that arise as a result of this interaction. In a field, the body does not move from jet forces, based on the 3 rd law of Newton (for example, a missile) but thanks to the force of the field. It follows that under the motion of the body in the field Newton's third law also does not make sense. The body may reach enormous speeds comparable to the speed of light, or far beyond it, only through the force of fields that we know or are not familiar with yet, but not by the 3rd law of Newton, which reflects our initial knowledge of the world.
In the field where the body begins its movement from V = 0 and where its speed proportional to the force of the field, and does not depend on the mass of its body, the first law of Newton is also losing the physical sense. For example, if the force is reduced to zero, then acceleration of the body and its speed decreases to zero. The most common characteristic of the field (a new qualitative ground) I gave, is based on terrestrial experiments, but there is extraterrestrial evidence of the correctness of my reasoning. For the first time in human history I discovered that aliens live in our Earth's atmosphere. Once per week I go to Manhatten, Columbus Circle, to show people their existence. Every time around 20 people who asked me to show AFO (Aliens Flying Object), saw them with their own eyes. Since 01/2008 every day around the clock I see AFOs (Aliens Flying Object), around 100, hovering over my area at altitude 15-50 miles. They move as slowly as 0.1 mph, sitting stationary in the sky, and accelerating at up to 60 and more miles per second, defying all physical laws with which we are familiar. For their movement they use the free energy of fields.Their spaceship, which can reach 10-20 km in diameter, can rotate itself around its axis for 5-7 seconds. For their movements they use the free energy of a field rather than a jet force based on Newton's third law. Examples of UFOs specifically show us that they do not experience the law of inertia: at a speed of 100 km /sec, they can stop instantly. They do not experience at high acceleration the action of inertial forces, which leads us to conclude that the mass under the interaction of the body with a field, plays no role and, therefore, within these limits, it has no physical meaning. For this reason, the 2nd law of Newton in the field loses its meaning as well.
All these facts prove once again that in the interaction of a large body or micro particles with a field, the Newton's laws lose their physical meaning. (see my article on internet: "aliens live in our Earth's atmosphere).
Summing up the laws that qualitatively define a field, acting on the body. The First Law: The body is in motion until the force of the field is applied to it, or acceleration of the body directly proportional to the force with which the field acts on the body. Second Law: force with which the field acts on the body, is proportional to the strength of the field and does not depend on the body's mass. Of course, there are general laws, which remains in force in relation to other qualitative grounds. For example, the law of conservation of energy makes sense in many qualitative grounds (different sections of physics), just because they are closed systems, for which the law defined. If the system is open, then the meaning of the law loses its physical meaning. For example, if an electrical device works at the expense of free energy ("perpetual motion"), then to base calculations on this law will be totally wrong. These findings about a new qualitative ground (field) suggest a good reason to question the scientific importance of the theory of relativity by A. Einstein.
Explanation of contemporary controversies in physics from the standpoint of Physical Fields
In 1924, the French physicist Louis de Broglie put forward a "mad" idea, suggesting that all the particles - electrons, protons and whole atoms have wave properties, but physics has yet to explain the conflicting definitions of particles. That is, an electron behaves like a particle in one case, and like an electromagnetic wave in another, so what is it? From the point of view of dialectical logic, these contradictive definitions of electrons or any other particles exist because these contrasting properties of the electron are caused by opposite qualitative grounds, on which the experiments took place. In two-body interaction (the collision of two particles), the body behave as a mass, in the interaction of the body and the physical fields, the body behaves as a field.
At this point the philosophical explanation of this phenomenon has stopped, although the task of physics from this point is only beginning: to find a reason behind the change of behavior of charged particles under interaction with the field.
One of the problems of modern quantum mechanics has proven that, "Firstly, the processes occurring in nature, are controlled by pure chance. Secondly, contrary to classical mechanics, one can never make simultaneous predictions of position and momentum, with arbitrary accuracy. For instance, electrons may be considered to be located somewhere within a region of space, but with their exact positions being unknown". The point is that the motion of particles in the field becomes more complicated as a result of their interaction. If physics examines the process of the interaction and figures out the shift of the particles in the field, etc., the problem will disappear. Thus the processes of quantum mechanics are governed not by chance, but by all the same causal connections, which have yet to be discovered. The understanding of how the laws of physics work in relation to certain qualitative grounds will bring clarity into the conflicting phenomena faced by physics at the present stage.
Ilya Stavinsky
02/01/2009
|