3 myths of physics, especially in textbooks. 3

Here are 3 myths of physics, especially prominent in textbooks followed widely, which I have addressed in last 3 years.

1. Myth; That there are two types of charges, positive and negative and the neutral is just a result of both positive and negative.

Fact; there are actually 3 elemental charges, positive, negative and neutral. each of these properties are represented by their respective elementary particles.

eg neutral is the charge of “photons” and “neutrino”, both elementary charges without any further constituents and a composite elementary particle “neutron”. Neutron being composite its constituent’s charge add up to zero.

semifinal

2. Last year in a text book in Indian High School curriculum, I spotted and corrected with my students, the following:

Myth; there are only 3 quarks that have been detected or FOUND/confirmed so far, in nature.

Its based on a knowledge that was true more than 3 decades ago. All quarks, 6 of them, have been confirmed as hypothesized, the last of them was confirmed 2 decades ago. So there is really no reason why these facts should have been omitted from the text books that are updated every few years as such. Who are our experts?

3. During my freelance research, I have pointed out the following fact within last 3 or 2 years. A recurring myth in very advance texts of physics, concurrently followed in major and wide number of universities around the world, some of the finest texts in the field of particle physics and widely believed to be excellent, which they are nonetheless.

Myth; (particle life time and range of forces) A (force carrier) particle is long range if its mass is zero. Lifetime is the uncertainty that gives rise to an energy which is equivalenced through Einstein’s mass-energy relation and mass being zero, we have an infinite range as range is inversely proportional.

Fact; This is murky waters. Its a manipulation of sorts. Experimentally life times are quite arbitrary, while mass is supposedly fixed. Neutrino has a mean-life from 15 seconds to 10 billion seconds in order of magnitude .. I have hypothesized that’s possible, because it has such a high energy, and given it can’t lose this energy via any possible processes, it must live that long.

So that also explains why protons have a 10^30 years life time and why we are possible. These little heroes took some energy from Big Bang, so much it was for them and there so was no other process that could waste these energy, that they had to exist till nature found a contingent way to create us.

Suck Creationism Now ?

Also there are 4 force carrier particles, photons, gravitons, gluons and (Z, W) Bosons. The last, Z and W are not zero mass particles. Gluon is detected but not definite, that is, its zero mass is not definitive, also its range is sub-nuclear. Gravitons are so far only hypothetical. Photons are the only one therefore which subscribe to the “zero mass infinite range” scheme.

Please check this out from my research in 2011, September, same month 3 years ago; article on neutrino properties, in September 2011.

“Amazing: The life time to mass ratio of the neutrino is a mystery. Reactor life-time to mass is 20 times that of accelerator type and the solar type is half a billion times higher than the accelerator type. This definitely has got something to do with energy? Well everything does.

Now, mass must be the rest mass which must be fixed among the 3 neutrino flavors, if not individually. Still that means life time is higher if a high energetic reaction produces it. Can it be like that?

Shall we create a new field of research “energy can determine how long you will live” ? Perhaps everything in a high-energetic reaction is living for quite long because there are no processes that the participant finds itself in, where it can waste it’s energy. On earth therefore, the life time of constituent matter is small, unless a high energetic process produced it and the matter constituent survived for quite long.”

3 comments

  1. Reblogged this on Invariance Publishing House ! and commented:

    Text books are often haphazardly written. Even when they are excellently written and widely followed as marvels of academia, they carry traditional dogmas in the name of science. While the governments and private org spend massively to constitute experts who are to guide us in having well written and factual text books, these experts totally miss out on the important facts that need to be corrected in various ways … That doesn’t happen and we produce learned citizens with limited knowledge on their own subject matter.

    “science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” –Richard P. Feynman.

    Like

  2. Pingback: Time to vote your favorite scientist ! « Invariance Publishing House !

  3. Pingback: We are into semifinals. « Invariance Publishing House !

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s