Member

In 1982, Alain Aspect conducted an experiment in order to examine Bell?s Theorem. His experiment is considered to confirm the non-local action principle. As is known, the local action principle is an Aristotlean concept, and even Einstein never completely rejected it.

Bell?s Theorem has been established by considering de Broglie?s postulate. Therefore, if the duality of the wave-particle should be considered a property of the helical trajectory, as proposed by Natarajan(1), then we would have to consider the results of Aspect?s experiment from a new viewpoint. The present paper analyses Aspect?s experiment by considering the model proposed by the author in the paper A Model of the Photon.

Quantum Mechanics considers the duality wave-particle through the interpretation proposed by de Broglie. The diffraction has been detected for the elementary particles, as electrons, protons, neutrons, and molecules. Considering these experiments, I show here that there is a grave incompatibility between this solution of Quantum Mechanics and the Michelson-Morley experiment if we replace light by protons, and Michelson?s interferometer is replaced by a crystal. The paper proposes a solution able to eliminate such an incompatibility.

The hydrogen atom of Quantum Mechanics (QM) is not compatible with some phenomena that require a model of a corpuscular electron orbiting the proton (as was considered in Bohr?s model). Therefore, we realize that Bohr?s model is compatible with phenomena that cannot be explained if we consider the model of QM. The model of QM cannot explain the experiments made in 1989 by the Nobel Laureate Dr. Hans Dehmelt as well (they show that the electron peruses the space between two levels of energy, a fact in disagreement with the model of QM).

Therefore, there are phenomena compatible with Bohr?s model (but they are incompatible with the model of QM), and there are phenomena explained by the model of QM (but they are incompatible with Bohr?s model). Then it seems that a satisfactory model of the hydrogen atom (able to explain all the phenomena) must be able to conciliate Bohr?s model with the model of Quantum Mechanics. The fundamental requirements that such a new hydrogen atom must satisfy are proposed here.

One of the stronger arguments against the theoretical model of the neutron performed by the structure n=p+e is the neutron?s spin, which is 1/2, because from the concepts of Quantum Mechanics a structure p+e would have to have an entire spin, but the experiments have shown that the neutron?s spin is 1/2. However, I argue that the structure n=p+e must be analyzed from two considerations, as follows:

1. First of all, we must consider that spin is not a clear concept in Physics.
2. As the theorist does not know what the electron?s spin actually is, and before trying to understand what happens with the electron?s spin in the structure n=p+e it is indispensable to get a comprehensive notion about what the spin actually is.

Herein we will analyze step by step the arguments that led to the conclusion about the existence of the electron?s spin. Furthermore, as the author already has proposed in his model for a new hydrogen atom[1] where the electron moves through the helical trajectory, here we will analyze the Stern-Gerlach experiment by considering the electron?s helical trajectory in the hydrogen atom, which has been used by Phipps and Taylor when they made an experiment by using the Stern-Gerlach technique.

From the existence of the inverse spectrum we infer an unquestionable conclusion about the emission and absorption of photons by the atom: there are two mechanisms, one for absorption, and another for emission, and they are different. If there should be no difference between the two mechanisms, the inverse spectrum would not exist in Nature. Moreover, since Quantum Mechanics does not consider two different mechanisms for emission and absorption, we conclude that the atom model of QM does not represent the fundamental depiction of the atom?s working. That is why it is indispensable to propose a new hydrogen atom, in which the emission and the absorption happen through different mechanisms.

A new hydrogen atom that works through two different mechanisms for emission and absorption has been proposed in Paper Number 4. Here we show how the electron jumps between non-consecutive levels.

There are many vital questions not answered by the current model of neutron in Nuclear Physics. When a model is unable to answer all the vital questions satisfactorily, an unavoidable question arises: is such a theoretical model indeed the fundamental model used by the Nature? The neutron is not a fundamental particle, because it suffers decay. However, in all the nuclei the neutron is a fundamental brick of their structure.

Therefore, if the model of the neutron has not the same structure of the neutron used by the Nature, obviously that such a fact shall have fundamental repercussions in the development of Nuclear Physics. It is obvious that we cannot get a satisfactory model of the nucleus having as a point of departure a wrong model of the neutron.

Here we propose a new model of the neutron. In later papers, a new nuclear model will be proposed. These two models will be a new point of departure for the establishment of new foundations for a New Nuclear Theory.

A new model of the neutron n=p+s is proposed, where s is the selectron, a particle postulated by the Supersymmetry. The Nuclear Physics works with two models of the neutron. The Yukawa's model has several disadvantages (the most grave is the violation of the mass-energy conservation, although the theorists tried to justify it through the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle), because his model cannot explain some phenomena. The quark model (d,u,d) also cannot explain other sort of phenomena, and then the theorists use the two models, sometimes they use the Yukawa's model, and sometimes they use the quark model. However, they are two incompatible models, and it is difficult to believe that Nature works through the use of two incompatible models for the production of phenomena.

The theorists have abandoned the old Rutherford?s model of neutron because it seems that it cannot be reconciled with some principles of Quantum Mechanics. Nevertheless, herein it is shown that Rutherford's model can be reconciled with the principles of QM when we introduce the hypothesis of the helical trajectory.

In the current Nuclear Physics several nuclear models were adopted. Each model is applied for explaining a specific nuclear property. Although a model is able to explain a nuclear phenomenon (or a property of the nuclei), nevertheless, it is unable to explain several other phenomena and it is incompatible with other several properties of the nuclei. There is among the nuclear physicists the belief that it is impossible to have a unique model able to explain all the nuclear properties, and that any attempt for finding such a unique model is a waste of time. However, it is hard to believe that the Nature can use several different models for yielding the phenomena. In addition, what is the worst: as the models of the current nuclear theory are incompatible among themselves, how could the Nature operate by using incompatible models? Herein it is proposed a new nuclear model, which is UNIQUE, named the Hexagonal Floors Model. Through many posterior papers, we will show that such a model is compatible with the whole nuclear properties, and it is able to explain all the nuclear phenomena.

Basically, there are four nuclear models in the Nuclear Physics. They are: Liquid Drop Model, Fermi Gas, Model of Layers, Collective Model. There are fundamental incompatibilities between these models, and we will analyze them face to the nuclear properties inferred by experiments. Herein it is shown:

• Fundamental incompatibilities between the current nuclear models.
• Insufficiency of strong nuclear force as the cause of nuclei aggregation.
• A new nuclear property unknown by current Nuclear Physics.
• Incompatibility between Gamow?s theory and the experiments.
• Gamow explained a paradox by the introduction of other paradox.
• The use of the laws of ethics in Quantum Mechanics.

According to the nuclear Table(1) by P. Raghavan, the measurement of the electric quadrupole moment Q(b) for the majority of elements can be indicated by one unique value, concerning a specific method. For example, for the 3Li7 we have:

• 3Li7 Q(b) Method
• -0.0406ST MB,R
• -0.0370(8) CIAN
• -0.041(6)ST OD,OL
• -0.059(8) OL
• -0.040(11) CER

But the excited nucleus 8O18 has two different values of Q(b). For example, the method CER supplies two different values:

• 8O18 Q(b) Method
• -0.073(27) or -0.045(28) CER

It is not an error due to a lack of accuracy in the method. In reality -0.073(27) and -0.045(28) are two different and independent measurements, since one has an error ?0.027, and the other an error ?0.028. It is well to emphasize that from the current Nuclear Physics it makes no sense to think about the possibility of two or three different nuclear structures for the isotopes of 8O18, and therefore such a problem even does not exist in Nuclear Theory, and so the question is not taken into consideration by the nuclear physicists. In the whole table, from the 1H2 to the 99Es254, the same happens with only the following elements: 12Mg26, 14Si30, 14Si32, 16S32, 30Zn64, 32Ge70, 42Mo94, 42Mo96, 42Mo100, 44Ru98, 44Ru100, 44Ru102, 44Ru104, 46Pd104, 46Pd106, 46Pd108, 46Pd110, 48Cd116, 50Sn122, 56Ba134, 56Ba136, 56Ba138, 58Ce142, 78Pt198, 80Hg198, 80Hg200, 80Hg202, 80Hg204. In particular, the 50Sn122 has an interesting value of quadrupole moment: -0.28 = Q(b) = +0.14, by the method CER. Here we will try to understand why the experiments detect two different values of quadrupole moment.

In Nuclear Theory, the quadrupole moment is explained through the Collective Model. This model considers the same potential V(r) used in the Model of Layers, but with an additional consideration: the nucleus can suffer distortions. The distortion allows to the model to behave in order to reproduce the electric quadrupole moment and the magnetic moments, according to Nuclear Theory.

Nevertheless, if a nuclear model has the ambition of reproducing theoretically the quadrupole moment, it must have some nuclear features, otherwise it will be unable to reproduce the phenomenon. Herein we analyze the nuclear electric quadrupole moment with the aim of understanding how a nucleus can yield the phenomenon. In addition, we will verify if the Collective Model indeed succeeds in reproducing it, as claim the nuclear physicists.

In the 1950?s decade the physicist Wu and collaborators discovered that in the decay 27Co60.28Ni60+e+.? the emission of electrons has a preferential direction. Therefore, she discovered that in the beta decay there is not a conservation of the parity. Herein we analyze Wu?s experiment. In addition, we will show that its results constitute another strong evidence that corroborates the hypothesis of axial distribution of nucleons about the z-axis into the nuclei.

As it is known, from the idea of empty space is not possible to conciliate the special relativity with the general relativity, the reason why after 1916 Einstein tried to bring back the concept of ether to the Physics. His attempts proposing some solutions by considering the ether's hypothesis are described in a Kostro?s article(1). However, the idea of empty space is also incompatible with many other phenomena.

Then we realize that in 1905 Einstein did not consider many fundamental questions concerning the space?s structure. He was paranoiac with the problem of light propagation, and he neglected a lot of phenomena which interpretation makes sense only with the hypothesis of the ether?s existence. However, even with respect to the problem of light propagation he did not exhaust all the possible alternatives for the interpretation of Michelson?s experiment, as we will see in the paper The Sound of Ether. Besides, as he confessed, he never knew ?what are these quanta of light?, and therefore it would be impossible for him to discover the fundamental solution for the problem of the space?s structure. Then it is obvious that several posterior discoveries of science did not fit to the idea of empty space. For example, we can remember that it is impossible to conciliate the concept of duality in the sense of de Broglie with the Earth?s motion about the Sun if we persist in keeping the hypothesis of empty space, as we have already showed in the Paper No. 3. In several former papers the author has analyzed so many fundamental questions in Physics, by considering a different new way of research never tried before by any scientist: through the proposal of non-classical micro-models. Here we analyze what sort of structure the ether must have, taking in account four points of departure:

1. The experiments with the electromagnetism.
2. The non-classical micro-models proposed in former papers.
3. The new nuclear model proposed in the Paper No. 18 (although here the new nuclear model is not analyzed, however the working of the gravitational flux into the nuclei has been decisive for the author?s comprehension about the ether?s structure).
4. The items 1, 2, and 3 above connected by the Logic.

In the end of the present paper, the author analyses his method of research.

Along the development of Quantum Mechanics in the 20th Century the physicists came to the conclusion that the Nature operates through statistical laws. The emission of alpha particles by the radioactive nuclei was one of the stronger contributors for the establishment of that conclusion, because the theorists did not succeed in finding a dynamical cause responsible for the alpha particles emission, which distribution by unit of time is conform to Bernouilli?s distribution of probability. Herein we shall show that:

1. The theorists arrived to that conclusion because the current nuclear models of Nuclear Physics are not compatible with a dynamical cause for the alpha particles emission. As it will be seen here, such an incompatibility with a dynamical cause is decurrent from the feature of those nuclear models: they have a radial distribution of nucleons inside the nuclei (see the paper Critique to the Models of Nuclear Physics).
2. From the author?s new nuclear model it is possible to explain the alpha particles emission through a dynamical cause, because his new model has an axial distribution of nucleons inside the nuclei. At the end of the present paper we talk about how the alpha decay can be a phenomenon in the inverse way of that through which the deuterons (or hydrogen) captured by a heavy nucleus cause transmutation by cold fusion.

Taking as a point of departure the author?s model of fermions, here is proposed a hypothesis: the strong nuclear force is a special sort of gravitational interaction. Such hypothesis is analyzed taking in account the following points:

• Existence of three sorts of gravitational interaction between two protons.
• Influence of the spin in the interaction by the strong force.
• Binding energy of the deuteron.
• Missing of strong interaction between leptons.
• Structure of muons and neutrinos.

The ultraviolet catastrophe paradox was not entirely solved by Planck?s solution. A new interpretation is proposed for the meaning of his postulate, based on a new understanding of the interaction energy-matter. As a consequence, a new interpretation is also proposed for the Bose?s distribution. In 1999 the Physical Review Letters has published a paper by two Brazilian physicists describing an experiment made in the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG-Brazil), which results demonstrate to be correct the new interpretation for Planck?s postulate proposed herein.

Consider a nucleus of oxygen 8O16, with the nucleon 2He4 in the center performing a flux responsible for the aggregation of the 6 nucleons 1H2 distributed as a hexagon about the central 2He4. If we consider that such a flux is of electromagnetic origin, the nucleus 8O16 would have to have the structure shown in Figure A, in order to get ? = 0 & i = 0 for the 8O16. But we cannot imagine any reasonable cause (based on the laws of Physics) for that arbitrary distribution: three nucleons 1H2 with spin up in the left side and three nucleons 1H2 with spin down in the right side. From the philosophical viewpoint, it makes no sense. Therefore, before 1996 the author was not satisfied with his new Hexagonal Floors nuclear model. That is why in 1996 the author has started to suppose that the flux created by the central 2He4 would not have an electromagnetic origin, and he has launched an enterprise for trying to discover what sort of flux it could be. From the enterprise, he discovered the definitive coherent structure of the nucleus.

Recent experiments(*) with superluminal phenomena are suggesting that Einstein?s interpretation for the light behavior needs to be re-estimated. There are physicists believing that a natural consequence of these experiments can be the breakdown of the fundamental principle of relativity. From this point of view, not only Einstein?s philosophical interpretation of the Theory of Relativity can be wrong, but also all the mathematical formalism of the theory is threatened. The eminent mathematician Dr. Waldyr Rodrigues wrote at the end of a paper(1): ?The existence of superluminal electromagnetic waves implies the breakdown of the principle of relativity?. Herein we will analyze the light behavior starting from the physical model of photon proposed in the author?s paper A Model of Photon.

The space has electromagnetic properties, according to the Relativity Theory, it can have a contraction, a property compatible with the hypothesis of a space fulfilled by the ether, and so we may expect that the electromagnetism is a property of the ether. The electrosphere of an atom has also electromagnetic properties.

Then it is reasonable to suppose that there is a participation of the ether?s contraction in the equilibrium of the electron into the electrosphere. When Bohr, and after him many other physicists analyzed such equilibrium of the electron, they did not take in consideration the participation of the space?s contraction, since the space was considered as an empty thing. Herein we analyze the hypothesis that Pauli?s principle can be a consequence of the participation of the ether in the equilibrium of the electrosphere. It is also shown that the atom of Quantum Mechanics is unable to explain the diamagnetism.

The Letts-Cravens experiment is described by M. Srinivasan in his Report on the ICCF-10 (accomplished in August-2003). At the end of the experiment?s description, Srinivasan says: ?Several theoreticians are presently trying to model the possible mechanism of coupling between the laser and the deuterium loaded lattice?. However, what sort of models can be tried? As it is known, according to Quantum Mechanics cold fusion cannot exist. Therefore, for the explanation of the results obtained in several cold fusion experiments, it is necessary to introduce new principles missing in Quantum Mechanics. However, only new principles are not enough for the enterprise. Actually cold fusion needs a new model of neutron, a new nuclear model, and a new hydrogen model of atom. New principles are proposed in the author?s Quantum Ring Theory, as for instance the spin-fusion, the accordion-effect, the contraction of the ether, etc. The main models proposed are the following:

1. a new model of neutron n=p+e, where the electron is tied to a quark up of the proton through the spinfusion phenomenon,
2. a New Nuclear Model of Hexagonal Floors, where the accordion-effect is responsible by several nuclear properties, as for example the changing of the nuclei distortions, measured by the nuclear electric quadrupole moment.
3. a new hydrogen atom, where the contraction of the ether works into the electrosphere. Here we analyze how these models, working by new principles, can help us understand the results obtained in the Letts-Cravens experiment.

The working of the Marinov Motor is unquestionable evidence that something is missing in the current electromagnetic theories, and it seems that the incomprehension of such a fact by some academics derives from the practice among the theorists in privileging the quantitative arguments, as made by the engineer Cyril Smith in the Correspondence(1) of Frontier Perspectives. Here we analyze the Marinov Motor from the qualitative viewpoint.

Kozyrev?s transaction of the dissipative process is understood now as manifestation of macroscopic nonlocality, which most prominent property is transaction in inverse time. A new explanation is proposed here. The author hopes this paper would encourage the researchers to investigate the present new explanation for the forecasting effect.