Enter the content which will be displayed in sticky bar


Physics G: Photons Would Not Spin
Year: 2008
Keywords: Photons, Spin
  • Physicist, Author
    (Ontology, Fundamental Physics, Relativity, Philosophy of Science, History of Science)
    Curriculum Vitae and education:

    I studied civil engineering at the Technical University in Graz, Austria, where I was assistant professor at the Institute for Mechanics for twenty years. During this time I studied also philosophy and history of science. Since then I have had the opportunity to be a private scholar.

    Research interests and research goals:

    Ontological foundations of physics, i.e. the nature of the basic concepts: Movement, space, force, charge and quantity of matter. The nature of the derived concepts time and energy. The nature of inert mass. Category mistakes in physics. Axiomatic of mechanics. Relativity theory. Quantum physics. Ontology, explanations, crucial experiments and unexplainable phenomena concerning the Rutherford-Bohr atomic model. There is no valid empirical evidence for the existence of an atomic shell structure with spinning nucleons and electrons. The nature of radiation and of the so-called \"particle-wave duality\". The Planck formula for quantized energy of radiation is not a natural law. Problems of the concept of a photon: a wave without amplitude and a corpuscle without charge but with spin.

    So-called inertial forces are not explainable for corpuscles in a vacuum. Inertial forces are crucial for the existence of an electromagnetic medium that explains inertial forces due to a resistance.

    Proposal of a different atomic model of hydrogen: Elementary permanent ring magnets are the building blocks of hydrogen. Empirical evidence that hydrogen is the building block of all elements. Magnetic coupling, the only atomic force. Formation of elements. Atoms are oscillators. Spectral lines represent resonant frequencies and not quantum jumps. Chemical bonding is due to magnetic coupling and not due to valence electrons.

    In Uranium fission the energy balance for binding energies is violated when the formula E = mc2 is applied. In this formula, the concepts energy and inert mass are conceptually incompatible; therefore the formula is a limited empirical rule and not a natural law.

    Electric current is not a flux of charges but a propagation of an oscillating state of charges.

    PS: A remark considering my name: Correctly written it should be Marin?ek, whith the pronounciation Marinshek. There is not enough place for special signs in the www, so my www name is Marinsek.

    (Look for not yet finalized papers at http://www.marinsek.com/)