electromagnetic energy quanta of extremely small magnitude –so far not detected–

From: M. R. Carvajal <carvajal57@msn.com>
Subject: Proof that work transfers no energy

Dear Professor XXX:

 Although I am only a student, I casually found experimentally that, contrary to what we are taught at all levels, work does not transfer kinetic energy. The implications of this finding require that some parts of physics textbooks be revised. Attached please find the article, “The unified field theory,” where I expound this finding. I would like this article to be published by a journal, but I realize the article needs more work, which I cannot do, because of health problems. Please consider finishing this article as a coauthor or other agreement. I would appreciate your response.

 Sincerely yours,

 Mario R Carvajal

The unified field theory 

Mario R. Carvajal* 

Natural Science Research Institute, Reston, VA 20191-2803, USA. 

Considering that the fundamental forces of nature –gravitational, electromagnetic, weak and strong interactions– probably originate from a single field, physicists have long been looking for what they called the Unified field theory. We show that physicists may be right. We found experimentally that, contrary to common understanding, work does not transfer kinetic energy. All active (producing change) systems that can be observed require a constant supply of energy in some form to sustain their activity; if we assume that active systems that cannot be observed, such as the systems of particles that constitute atoms, have the same requirement, they must receive isotropically through space electromagnetic energy quanta of extremely small magnitude –so far not detected– (no upper or lower limits for the magnitude of photons has been found). The effects inherent to the process of atoms receiving this energy, and emitting their “spent” energy, appear to reveal the origin of the fundamental forces of nature. PACS numbers: 11.10.-z, 11.10.Cd, 11.15.-q 

The energy atoms would receive through space would enable them to react and combine with other atoms and form the myriad substances we know. The inverse-square law of gravitation can be derived from the momentum transferred to atoms during their reception of this energy [1]. The “spent” energy quanta emitted by atoms, which other particles cannot receive, nevertheless have momentum, which would be transferred to the particles they hit; the effect of these collisions depends on the mass and dimensions of the particles. Thus, the fundamental forces of nature may be produced by the energy the particles that make up atoms would either receive or emit –no upper or lower limit for the magnitude of electromagnetic energy quanta have been found. An indication that the foregoing assumption may be right, was found in a quantitative experiment in classical mechanics. In 1829, Gaspard-Gustave de Coriolis [2], a French mathematician and engineer, defined work as W =  F ds, which is mathematically equal to kinetic energy, (1/2)mv2 ; then it was assumed that work transfers kinetic energy, and that the work-kinetic energy theorem, W = ΔK [3], was always true, but that is not so: only when a force is applied directly on an object, the work done on the object equals its kinetic energy. When the same force is applied through a multiple-disk pulley on objects of different masses, their kinetic energies may be equal, greater, or less than the work done on the objects, in agreement with Newton’s second law, but disproving the notion that work transfers kinetic energy. Following is a brief description of an experiment that shows the above is true. Three identical three-disk pulleys, with disks of radii r, r/2, and 2r as illustrated in the FIG. below are used in this test. For simplicity, we assume the pulleys, fastened to a table through vertical axles, have negligible mases and there is no friction; blocks of masses m, 2m, and m/2 are attached to the cords whose other ends are wrapped around the disks of radius r, r/2, or 2r, respectively, as shown in the figure. A cord is wrapped around the disk of radius r of each pulley, with the other end left loose.

The concept of torque,  = r  F = r F sin, as a “twisting force” necessary to make an object rotate, was conceived by Archimedes, about 2200 years ago, that is, a long time before Newton clarified the meaning of force in 1686 with his three laws of motion. Now we know that two forces, one perpendicular to the other, are required to put an object in rotational motion. The length of a “moment arm” r attached to a pivot does not multiply the effect of a force: by definition, the moment arm is perpendicular to the direction of a force, and cannot change its magnitude: only another force, in the same direction of a given force, can change its magnitude. If work does not transfer kinetic energy, what is its origin? Because of the Doppler Effect [4], the atoms of an object traveling in the postulated field of electromagnetic energy quanta, or photons, would find the energy hv of the photons they absorb changed to,            2 1 ( / ) 1 ( / ) cos ' V c V c h h    , (1) where V is the speed of the object, c the speed of light, and  the angle of arrival of the photons with respect to the path of the object; integrating cos for all the possible angles of arrival of the photons, we obtain zero. Therefore, the Doppler Effect changes the energy of the photons the object absorbs to           2 1 ( / ) 1 ' V c h h . (2) But the factor in parentheses is the same factor generally used to find the total energy, i.e., rest mass and kinetic, of an object when it is moving, and its rest energy mc2 is known. This means that the change in the kinetic energy of a moving object is produced by a change in the magnitude of the energy the object receives to sustain its activity, due to the Doppler Effect, and not by the work done on the object. The fact that all observable active systems require a constant supply of energy in some form to sustain their activity led us to assume that systems that cannot be observed, such as those that constitute atoms, have the same requirement and receive isotropically through space electromagnetic energy quanta of extremely small magnitude to sustain their activity. The effects inherent to the process of atoms receiving, and then emitting their “spent” energy, appear to reveal the origin of the fundamental forces of nature. We hope the foregoing leads to a Unified field theory. _______________________________________________________ 

[1] http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/isq.html 

[2] G-G Coriolis, Sur le principe des forces vives dans les mouvements relatifs des maachines (J. De l'Ecole royale polytechnique 1832) pp. 268–302. 

[3] Feynman, R.P., Leighton, R. B., and Sands, M., The Feynman Lectures on Physics (Addison Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, MA, 1963) Vol. 1, p.13-3. 

[4] Ashby, Neil and Miller, Stanley C., Principles of Modern Physics (HoldenDay, Inc., San Francisco, CA 1970) p. 104.
 

one of the greatest remaining tasks of physical research

From: Kacem Rochd <rochdkacem@gmail.com>

Subject: Emergence of gravity as a thermodynamic property of the gravitational system

I have a strong believe that gravity is a thermodynamic property as the temperature or the pressure, but it is not a force, because the superposition of two forces is additive (F = F1 + F2), while the mixture of two bodies temperatures is not additive, but instead an average of the two temperatures (T = (T1 + T2) / 2).

From a simple dimensional analyses of the Newtonian potential, it is found that the Newtonian potential and its dual (isomorphic) give rise to gravity by superposition, so that the orbital velocities or the gravitational accelerations are equal to the sommation to the half-velocities and the half-accelerations obtained with the first and the second derivatives of distance relative to time using equation of Newtonian potential and its dual respectively.

That the orbital velocity and the acceleration are respectively : V = (V(Newton) + V(Dual)) / 2 and A = (A(Newton) + A(Dual)) / 2

This is consistent with solar system dynamics.

Please, find my work (in progress) attached herewith.

Waiting for your critical response, I would like to thank you very much for your considerations and your time.

Kind regards,

kacem.

Preliminaries to a new theory of gravity

Introduction: Understanding Newtonian potential is one of the greatest remaining tasks of

physical research.

Dual to the Newtonian potential: From a simple dimensional analysis of the Newtonian
potential, we derive a dual to the Newtonian potential in the form of the ratio of the mass density in
4-dimensional temporal space to the mass density in 3-dimensional Euclidean space times the time squared times the inverse distance, that is :
∅ Newton = ∅ dual = τ ^{−2}
With
∅ Newton = − G ∗ M ∗ r ^{−3}
And
∅ dual = −ρ^t/ρ^d∗ τ^2 ∗ r^{−3}
In where ρ^t is the mass density in 4-dimensional temporal space, ρ^d is the mass density in 3-
dimensional Euclidean space, τ^{−2} is the temporal curvature, r is the radius of curvature, M is the
gravitational mass, and G is the Newtonian gravitational constant.
Gravitation: It follows from dimensional analysis of the Newtonian potential two ingredients for
a theory of gravity : 1) Duality of the Newtonian potential 2) D = (4 + 6) gravity which can be reduced to D = (1 + 3) gravity by assuming a coaxial superposition of two 3-dimensional Euclidean spaces and a spherical symmetry of one 4-dimensional temporal space.
Duality of the Newtonian potential implies that the radial velocities and the gravitational
accelerations are equal to the summation of the half-radial velocities and the half-gravitational
accelerations obtained by taking the first and the second derivatives of the distance relative to the
time using equations of the Newtonian potential and its dual respectively
...
Application: Computations based on the summation of the half-radial velocities and the half-
gravitational accelerations reveal that the 1D orbital velocities of the solar system planets and the
3D free-full accelerations at the surface of the Earth are consistent with the theoretical predictions
of the Newtonian gravity, ...
...
Cosmological implications : The theory implies that the 1D radial velocities and the 3D gravitational accelerations are consistent with the theoretical predictions of the Newtonian gravity
in the solar system region. There is a reasonable expectation that the dimensionality of the radial
velocities and the gravitational accelerations is a direct cause of discrepancy between the
gravitational mass and the visible matter mass in galaxies, galaxy clusters, and universe.
In fact, the departure of the 3D radial velocities and the 1D gravitational accelerations from the 1D
radial velocities and the 3D gravitational accelerations respectively is responsible for 1) an
underestimation of the gravitational mass by a factor of 9 relative to the 1D radial velocities, leading
to the problem of the dark matter (a negative mass shift), and 2) an overestimation of the
gravitational mass by a factor of 3 relative to the 3D gravitational accelerations, leading to the
problem of the dark energy (a positive mass shift).
Besides, the departure of the 3D radial velocities and the 3D gravitational accelerations from the 1D
radial velocities and the 3D gravitational accelerations respectively is responsible for 1) an
underestimation of the gravitational mass by a factor of 9 relative to the 1D radial velocities, leading
to the problem of the dark matter (a negative mass shift), and 2) no overestimation of the
gravitational mass relative to the 3D gravitational accelerations without causing the problem of the
dark energy (a null mass shift).
Negative mass shift : It follows from the coincidence of the 3D radial velocities with the 1D
gravitational accelerations or the 3D radial velocities with the 3D gravitational accelerations in a
gravitational system that the gravitational mass is equal to the luminous mass multiplied by a factor
of 9 relative to the 1D radial velocities...

Implication for extra dimensions: It follows from duality of the Newtonian potential the
emergence of (4+6)-dimensional spacio-temporal space which can be reduced to (1+3)-dimensional
spacio-temporal space by assuming a coaxial superposition of two 3-dimensional Euclidean spaces
and a spherical symmetry of one 4-dimensional temporal space centered on their origin.