10- Why Feynman & Dirac were not smart enough in physics// AP's 192nd book// Translating Dirac's Lagrangian, Hamiltonian, Hermitian into New Physics of the AP-EM Equations of Electrodynamics// Physics focus by Archimedes Plutonium

There I was about a month or two ago. I wanted a vacation from pure physics and pure mathematics for I had published TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS from 1st year college to 4th year college and it sort of zapped me dry. And I wanted to do just biology as I entered another drought summer of 2022, that is taxing on the mind. Find out that I, King of Science is impossible to take any vacation from pure physics. Even if I tried, I cannot get away from it.

And I was going through some Amazon orders and saw a advertisement for Dirac books. I own his Directions in Physics and a advertisement for a Tesla book The True Wireless. And so I said to myself, AP, you are not getting any younger and there maybe a key idea in those books to help you on the way to the science of Reincarnation.

I was under a vacation away from pure physics, and so I pick up this book by Dirac on Quantum Mechanics to see what he had to say and just reading a few pages on 13 June 2022, I realized that all this horrible god awful math of Lagrangian and Hamiltonian and matrices were artificial math. Math concocted because the Maxwell Equations of 1860 were all error filled. So to make physics problems come out correctly in the math, all this ugly math dragged in from the realms of mathematics to patch up the error filled Maxwell Equations. So, there, a vacation blown and now in 19Jun2022 I realize it is virtually impossible for me to take a vacation away from physics. It is about 2 weeks after reading a few pages of Dirac's 1964 of Lectures On Quantum Mechanics. And this book is a lasting result of reading a few pages of Dirac.

Tonight I am going to start to assemble the pages already written and publish this 192nd book of mine.

So good was this pure physics lead in to this 192nd book, that I am going to later, convert this book into part of a textbook and include it into my TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, 4th year college.

--- quoting my 178th book ---
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, Architecture of Light Waves & Energy, 4th year College
by Archimedes Plutonium

Preface: This is 4th year College Physics and the important ideas of physics to learn as last year undergraduate school is the architecture and geometry of the Light Wave & Energy in physics. This is New Physics and not Old Physics. New Physics is defined as physics that knows and uses the true electron of atoms is the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus and doing the Faraday law, creating new electrical energy that is storaged in the neutrons of atoms until they grow from 1eV into 945MeV and then create a new higher atomic numbered atom or emitted as radioactivity. Old Physics mistakenly identified the electron of atoms as the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole. In 3rd year College we studied the architecture of the interior of atoms. In 4th year College we study the architecture of Light Waves & Energy.

The template book for 4th year College is Feynman's 1985 book of QED.

Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of the template book for this book. Feynman's 1985 QED, quantum electrodynamics, showing my plastic toy model of DNA and my cut-outs of 4 bent circles that each bent circle represents one magnetic monopole. I arranged the monopoles into a single strand of a cycloid wave.
--- end quoting my 178th book ---

But now that I stop writing pages and preparing for publication, I have to ask a personal question of both Dirac and Feynman and all the physicists up to 2016, when I discovered the real true equations of EM theory, and throw out the Maxwell equations as error filled.

The question is bluntly, why was Feynman and Dirac too stupid in physics to realized that the Light Wave had to have equal equations for the Magnetic field as compared to Electric field. The E and B waves of any particular Light Wave are equal in dimensions and strength. Yet both Dirac and Feynman have different math formulations of E-field versus B-field. Is it showing how sadly lacking are the premiere physicists of the 20th century, lacking logical intelligence. Both spent their entire lives doing physics. So why did not the thought, or idea-- all individual light waves must have identical E field compared to B-field, only difference is one is 90 degrees situated from the other. So, obviously that idea never crossed their minds.

Now we can fault both Dirac and Feynman for not seeing that 9 times the muon rest mass comes within sigma error of the mass of either the proton or neutron, suggesting that the muon is the real true electron of atoms. We can forgive them of that oversight. But we really cannot forgive them of the oversight that the E field and B field must be mathematically identical in order for Light Waves to exist.

And can we even go much much further and say that the mysteries of Light Waves-- a constant maximum speed because the E field and B field match each other in quantity and in geometry. Can we say that Special Relativity, is all because the B and E fields of Light Waves must match one another in terms of mathematics. So that when Feynman writes the E field is E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] , yet writes that the B field is B = -e_r' X (E/c) that both Feynman and Dirac failed the physics of Light Waves.

But AP did not fail in 2016 where he writes that the E field is

E' = (V/(CB))' = V'CB/(CB)^2 - VC'B/(CB)^2 - VCB'/(CB)^2 which is Coulomb-gravity law.

and the B- field matches in math form as

B' = (V/(CE))' = V'CE/(CE)^2 - VC'E/(CE)^2 - VCE')/(CE)^2 which is Ampere-Maxwell law.

Should we blame the deficiency in logical reasoning of Feynman and Dirac, blame it on their belief that no magnetic monopole exists? No, for Dirac was adamant monopoles existed. I do not know how Feynman felt on monopoles. But magnetic monopoles non-existence as Gauss's law in Maxwell Equations in no real excuse for the failure of both Feynman and Dirac to realize that the Light Wave must have identical math form, format for E and B fields. This is just a blame on failure of logical intelligence.

What AP advises all students who want to be important in science, in physics or any other science, is take two years of College Logic, the second year with Symbolic Logic, which helps a mind to think straight, think clear. And hopefully clean out the cobwebs upstairs.

AP

9- AP's EM equations of V' is not just transformer law but electric generator efficiency// AP's 192nd book// Translating Dirac's Lagrangian, Hamiltonian, Hermitian into New Physics of the AP-EM Equations of Electrodynamics// Physics focus by Archimedes Plutonium

No wonder I needed a vacation from pure physics and math for I would never have arrived at all these insights if I had not landed upon Feynman's electric field equation in volume 1, of 28.3.

The equation of E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')]

For you see, in AP equations, 3 of the 4 differential laws are divisions, of dividing Voltage by CB, by CE and by BE. But there is one differential law that is not a division but simply a multiply of V' = (CBE)'. I had pegged that law to be the EM law of transformers.

So here I am in June of 2022, and I see one of my division laws in Old Physics of Feynman's 28.3.

So I am wondering to myself, could Feynman or someone else have stumbled onto a physics equation resembling V' = (CBE)' = C'BE + CB'E + CBE'.

Could I be so fortunate that Old Physics not only stumbled on the correct E' law of AP's EM equations, but that Old Physics also stumbled on the correct V' law of AP's EM theory.

No luck on that, but it made AP have to reinforce his V' law.

V' = (CBE)' = C'BE + CB'E + CBE' which is Transformer law
1st term as V production in a transformer -- 2nd term as inverse square root -- 3rd term as DC, AC synchronicity

So, yesterday and today I realize I have to further support and reinforce that V' law, and where I get that support is that I have to impose the Electric Motor Efficiency mathematics. This is best seen in the websites of EdisonTechCenter.

Again quoting EdisonTechCenter.org for their writing style is superior as educational—

The strength of your generator depends on:

"L"-Length of the conductor in the magnetic field
"v"-Velocity of the conductor (speed of the rotor)
"B"-Strength of the electromagnetic field

You can do calculations using this formula: e = B x L x v

Efficiency of electric generator is e = B x L x v

End quoting EdisonTechCenter.org for their writing style is superior as educational—
End quoting from my TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, 1st year college.

So, if AP combines transformers along with Electric Motor and generator efficiencies, then I end up with V' law of AP EM Equations.

This then begs the question,-- is transformer theory just a part of Electric generator theory. Is a electric motor that of a differential upon voltage???

8- First beginnings for Physics, Primal Axiom then..// AP's 192nd book// Translating Dirac's Lagrangian, Hamiltonian, Hermitian into New Physics of the AP-EM Equations of Electrodynamics// Physics focus by Archimedes Plutonium

Now I can see why I was craving for a vacation away from physics and math, for in a few days of time, while pondering the Electric field equation in Feynman Lectures on Physics 28.3 volume 1.