Jeremy0922

The image given by relativity theory is only a phantasm, but not an actual description for real phenomena, because the observation method selected by Einstein has obvious error for moving object. So, SR and its consequences need us to rethink.

It is nice to discuss the problems about foundation of physics with you and the scientists on SFN. By my opinion, Lorentz's transformation from SR is only satisfied to the special example in Einstein's thought experiment, because the different length and time will be gotten for different observation position in rest frame for the same moving rod at same time. So, Lorentz transformation should be related to observation position. The space-time transformation from SR is not reliable, and the discussions about the deductions from SR (such as "pancake") will become to be unimportant.

That is an observation, or the deduction from SR? That is an observation, or the deduction from SR?

I think that is an important and serious problem for us to understand the conceptions of space and time correctly. I do not hope we get a new theory which comes from a misunderstanding about the observation error.

The observation result need corrections for different methods, but space and time do not need.

Space and time are not related to C and motion of object essentially. Einstein introduced his thought experiment to observe moving object, is only optical test method with errors. these errors relate to speed of light, the observe position, and the velocity of moving object, and blong to experimental errors caused by test method.

Space and time are the basic conception used to describe the physical events taking place in, lighting is one of them. Lighting and its speed could be applied to measure the time interval, but should not effect on the definitions of time and space. If the velocity is very high and closed to light speed c, according SR, the space contraction will be obvious. But for the above measurement, the length of moving rod is also the same with rest frame, because Lb is not related to c and V.

If “length contraction phenomena” is true, then any measurement will get the same result, but the above method get a different one. So, I think the space-time transformation is the experimental system error caused by the observation method in Einstein's thought experiment for a moving rod.

"Time dilation" and "space contraction" are the important deductions from Einstein's special relativity(SR), based on "the principle of constant speed of light in vacuum" and the observation of moving objects in his thought experiment. Actually, Einstein's thought experiment is one kind of observation of length for a moving object with an invariable velocity, and there are many methods for us to be selected to measure the length of a moving object. for an experimental measurement, the errors caused by the method and equipment must be considered and be applied to correct the results. Lorentz's transformation from SR, which is only satisfied to the special example in Einstein's thought experiments, should not be understood as space-time transformation for any moving object, because a different result will be given by a different measurement. Selecting two points (D1, D2) on the trajectory of the moving object, testing the times that the moving object reach at and leave these two points D1 and D2, separately, t1, t1' and t2, t2', the length (Lb) and the velocity (V) of the moving object will be gotten by the measurement results of these times and the distant (L) between D1 and D1, as shown in following figure. the velocity V is: V= L/(t2-t1) or V=L/(t2'-t1') the length Lb is: Lb=V(t1'-t1)=L(t1'-t1)/(t2-t1) or Lb=V(t2'-t2)=L(t2'-t2)/(t2'-t1') Clearly, the measured result Lb does not relate to the velocity of the moving object V and light speed c by above measurement. Therefor, Space would not be changed by motion. Is that right ?

After view the discussion on SFN, the editor of Galilean Electrodynamics (GED) think my work is good one, and accept my submission. I think GED provide us an opportunity to share our work, and respect the editors.

Any interpretation about quantum mechanics or wave function, should be able to get the center field model for atom by its conception. That is necessary for reliable theory, but none of the current interpretations about quantum mechanics can do it.

For a moving bar, the measure result of the length do not relates with its motion and speed of light, if we select two points on trajectory of the moving bar and measure the times that the moving bar reach and leave the points.

It could be changed by the disturbance. I think the conclusion of MMX given by Michelson need to be reconsidered, because his analysis was incomplete.

Sorry, in my post, the motion of media Indicates the relative motion of media to interferometer but not the absolute motion of it, because the effect of the moving media on propagation of light beam is relate to the relative velocity of media to interferometer.

Only if the velocity of moving media u is zero. but if u is not zero, the direction of light beam SB will be changed to SB', and will come back to S' after reflected by mirror b. So, S' is not at the same position with S absolutely, isn't it??

Michelson-Morley Experiment (MMX) is one kind of optical interference of two beams of light. So the explanation of the the results from MMX should depend on the conception of light interferenc. The two coherent light sub-sources (S and S') are made by the splitter mirror in MMX, and a time difference will be produced by moving media. Meanwhile the space difference of the two sub-source will be produced too, i.e. the position of S' will not be at the same point with S, as shown in follow figure. Optical interferenc at the observation point O in MMX Thereby, the Optical interference fringes at observation O is determined by the difference of optical path between S-B'-S'-O and S-A-S-O. Clearly, this defference of opitcal path includes the effect of the space different of the two coherent light sub-sources, and is different to the current solution of MMX which the space different of the two coherent light sub-sources is not considered. I don't known the understanding above is correct, or not? If it is right, and what will happen to the interpretation about MMX?

Please tell me which journals will publish my manuscript?

The effect of electron spin on the energy of hydrogen atom and the interaction among orbits for complex atoms and molecules should be considered to give more specise models about matter structure, and will explain and predicted the hyperfine spectrum of them one by one. The couples of spin-orbit of electron and orbit-orbit of electrons could be introdruced to treat them. My manuscript is only the first step to give a classical electromagnetic structure for atom, molecule and solid-state matter.

The structure and linear spectrum of hydrogen atom can be explained completely in terms of classical mechanics and electromagenetic conception without any additional hypotheses. I believe it is a misunderstanding for the resonance of orbits of charged particles in hydrogen atom to be explained by particle wave daulity and matter wave, which is caused by the misunderstanding of the radiation of moving charged particle system with negative energy. It is necessary for scientist in the world to rethink the current undrerstanding about electromagnetc radiation of moving charged particle, because that is the foundation to cognize the phenomenon related to light, including Lorentz transformation and Schrödinger equation.

But, everyone kowns the nucleus is moving. According to the interpretation of probability wave, the motion of the nucleus will be random, then the electrostatic field of the nucleus will be random too.

Continuous thread "Why don't we build the model of hydrogen atom independently by QM? " http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=49857

Physicists should face the mistakes and courage to correct it.

Of course, any scientific theory must fit to the experimental observation and science rule. The conception of probability wave will not give a certain image of atom, and make the world become into a black cloud of charged particles. My model above is from classical mechanics and classical electromagnetic laws and conceptions proved by experimental observations.

This is one of the important factors to understand the motions of charged particles system with negative energy. As a classical mechanical system, the energy conservation and mechanical relationship among the charged particles must be considered. Radiation of charged particles should be considered firstly, because the system will be unsteady if the radiation can not be counteract within system. Effect of spin of charged particles is very impotant for solution of the system, if we consider a steady state of your model, the frequency of spin should be equal to (natural number times of ) the frequency of orbit. In this case, your problem may be simplified. It is not convenient for us to apply the Maxwell's equations to deal with charged particles. The electric and magnetic interactions among the moving charged particles could be treated with model of point charges and changing electric current elements by classical electromagnetics laws. If the forces on the particles in cluding radiation reactions are solved, the mechanical and energy equation of system could be get to analyze the relative problems. From the consequence from Schrödinger equation, we could obtain some physical quantities such as energy, frequency and radius of the electron, and the solution of modal functions, in the case of resonance of ground orbit occurs. In principle, the parameter of modal orbits could be deduced from them. for ground circular orbit of hydrogen atom, the velocity of electron could be obtained from its energy. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged In my manuscript , I have proved by means of classical theory The current understanding about electromagnetic radiation of moving charged particle is wrong, and there is an steady natural orbit for hydrogen atom, and steady Schrödinger equation of hydrogen atom could be deduced from orbit resonance of ground state hydrogen atom The effect of spin of the electron and rotation of orbit will be considered to obtain more precise model of hydrogen atom, this is our further work to be treated and the spectroscopy of charged particle system with negative energy such as atom and molecule will be explained one by one.

Hi! ambros you can find my manuscript at http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=48176 I hope you give me your idea