My 192nd published book

New Physics throws out-- the Lagrangian, Hamiltonian, Hermitian and matrix algebra, plus the Dirac Equation// Physics focus

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Kindle edition

Preface: AP's 192nd book of Science// Translating Dirac's Hamiltonian and Lagrangian into New Physics of the AP-EM Equations of Electrodynamics. The reason these fancy math artifices are thrown out is because Old Physics had the Maxwell Equations full of errors, -- missing terms and outright false law of no magnetic monopole. So in order to get some reasonable solutions to experiments on Maxwell EM theory, these artificial math methods had to be hauled in to patch up the error filled Maxwell Equations.

Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of page 257 ---- in Dirac's book "The Principles of Quantum Mechanics" 1957, showing how much of physics had become a game of algebra manipulation for the reason that Maxwell Equations were so very much error filled equations. And that playing games of matrices could overcome some of the error filled Maxwell Equations.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0B51LPKCR
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ June 23, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 584 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 80 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

On Sunday, June 26, 2022 at 5:01:07 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Sunday, June 26, 2022 at 12:28:00 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > On Sunday, June 26, 2022 at 3:55:05 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > On Sunday, June 26, 2022 at 3:17:40 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > It was some years ago 2017-2018 where I cited the reference to a 840 MeV particle, matching my proton torus of 840 MeV.
> > > >
> > > > Let me see if I can improve upon that reference. What I will try to fathom, is how pions and protons can remove the muon stuck inside the proton torus, and leave behind a bare proton torus of 840MeV. Can a pion go inside a 945MeV proton + muon, and that pion combine with the muon and pull itself out of the proton torus, leaving only the proton torus structure.
> > > Now I think I found some luck here. For the pion pi_0 has 35MeV rest mass.
> > >
> > > And we can safely say due to experimental constraints the proton= proton+muon, and neutron are precisely 945MeV.
> > >
> > > And for some experimental reasons the measure of the muon rest mass is always in excess of 105MeV but should be exactly 105MeV. So why experimentally should the proton and neutron fall short of 945MeV its true quantity, yet the muon always a tad bit more than its true measure of 105MeV. Perhaps baryons in measurement fall short of true value and leptons exceed true value due to the fact that we need magnetic monopoles to measure both baryons and leptons, and in the use of magnetic monopoles they tip the scale higher on leptons and lower on baryons.
> > >
> > > For example the magnetic monopole at 0.511 MeV (using Halliday-Resnick-Krane 1992). So that it is really 0.5 MeV.
> > >
> > > And the pion pi+ is 140 MeV decaying into muon + neutrino should actually be 135, just the same as the pi_0.
> > >
> > > These skews of measure from reality, is caused, I believe by the fact we have to use magnetic monopoles of 0.5MeV to measure all these particles, and by doing so, the fact that it is a monopole skews in favor for more lepton mass and less baryon mass.
> > >
> > > But notice, if you will that the pion_0 is 135MeV, and in my 2016-18 writings I was careful to note this 30 MeV difference between muon and pion.. For some reason the 30 MeV is crucial to units of elementary particles.
> > >
> > > For notice that 135 X 7 = 945
> > >
> > > And notice that 105 X 9 = 945
> > >
> > > So in some sense, we can take the pion to be a fancy type of muon.
> > >
> > > And in this fancy structure of the pion, it can penetrate inside a Proton torus of 840MeV and this pion can combine with the muon stuck inside and the two -- the pion + muon escape the 840MeV proton torus, leaving behind a empty proton torus.
> > >
> > > This is what I suspect is the evidence of the 840 MeV particles reported.
> > >
> > > Now, I am looking for a different type of experiment, where we have an abundance of muons, yet no protons. And that 9 muons combine to form a proton torus with muon inside.
> > >
> > > So I am looking for a muon rich environment with no protons present, and all of a sudden, comes into existence a proton, by the combining of 9 X 105MeV to form a 840MeV proton torus with a 105MeV muon inside.
> > So yes, well, I changed my mind, "The Proton rest mass is 840 MeV" is a separate book for me, my 198th book. It is way way too technical for High School students. I will revise that High School book.
> >
> > But write a separate new book for my "physics focus series" where this book belongs.
> >
> > For example now, taking a look at the pi mesons, the pions have pi+ as 140 MeV and the pi_0 as 135MeV. That mindless idiocy of the Standard Model, having 5 extra MeV for one pion over another pion. (I am using the Appendix F in Halliday,Resnick, Krane PHYSICS, 4th edition, volume 2, 1992.)
> So let me evaluate which particles listed in that Appendix F are direct composites of the muon 105 rest mass.
>
> Of course, what started the show to open is that 9 x 105 is both the proton and neutron at 945, the difference of 7 in proton and 5MeV in neutron is the measuring instruments of magnetic monopole 0.511 is off from 0.5 MeV.
>
> The Upsilon listed at 9460 is 9460/105 is dead on at 90 X 105, with tiny Sigma Error.
>
> The B-meson at 5278 if we take 105 X 49 is 5145 and subtract from 5278 is 133MeV so then B-meson is a composite of 1x140 + 49x105 is 5145+140=5285 and so for a Sigma Error we have 5285/5278 = 0.1% sigma error.
>
> Next is the Psi particle at 3097 and that would be a particle composed of 28x105 = 2940 plus 1x140 equals 3080 and for a sigma error of 3097/3080 = 0.5% sigma error.
>
> Next, let us look at the Lambda particle the next heavier after the neutron is 1116MeV. That would be a composition of 10x105 = 1050 plus 2x35 = 1120MeV and that is sigma error of 1120/1116 = 0.3% Sigma error.
>
> So, we begin to see a pattern for these elementary particles of physics, that they are all compositions of 105MeV muon or its Energy unit of 35MeV. That 3 of 35 in energy makes a muon itself.
>
> And this is what the Schrodinger equation is searching for in the mechanism of converting waves into rest-mass.
>
> Have a look at the Wikipedia page on Schrodinger Equation and its wavefunction is a accumulation of all the waves forming a singular so called mass. This is how New Physics forms mass out of waves, they combine to alter their wave nature and conglomerate forming a geometrical mass, and when they are collided some of those original waves disperse as waves light waves of energy.
>
> Old Physics was ignorant with their Standard Model and the pathetic Higgs boson as mass giver.
>
> In New Physics, mass formation is the Schrodinger equation causing separate waves to lump together in a somewhat permanent structure of multiples of 105 muon rings or as 35MeV energy units. The proton itself is 8x105 to form a 8 ring torus. The muon is a single ring of 105MeV.
>
> AP's 199th book of science is "How rest mass is formed in physics particles".
>
> AP's 200th book of science is "TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, graduate college".

Now above all, AP prides himself in master logic, and that means I cannot do rest mass of proton first, before doing "How rest mass is formed". So I need to switch around 198th with 199th.

And I am helped here in having recently done book 192nd that discusses the Schrodinger equation, yet throws out the Dirac equation. But I need to mend book 192nd, for I throw out the Lagrangian, the Hamiltonian, the Hermitian as that those mathematical applications were only to patch up the error filled Maxwell equations. When we start with the AP equations of EM theory, you only need to plug in voltage, coulomb, magnetic field, electric field to get results. You do not have to do a torture chamber of math stupid methods of Lagrangian, Hamiltonian, Hermitian. However, I kept the Schrodinger equation for it is none other than F=ma of Newton law only for waves instead of particle.

However, their is a logical loophole in throwing out the Hamiltonian, yet keeping the Schrodinger equation which has a Hamiltonian.

So how does AP overcome that illogic?? It is easy to overcome the so-called-contradiction. For when writing the Schrodinger equation with a wavefunction on one side of the equation and a wavefunction on the other side with Hamiltonian of wavefunction is the contradiction in Old Physics.

Try writing in mathematics a equation such as Yz = Yx and solve for Y. So we divide by Y and end up with z = x. So we have to ask here, did physicists working with Schrodinger equation ever have a handle on math in the first place? As Feynmann says of the Schrodinger equation, it is a diffusion equation. That is alright.

What AP says of the Schrodinger equation, is that it is a fancy F = ma of Newton, only for waves. And F=ma can be rewritten as F/a = mass. And thus, the proper writing of Schrodinger equation is the total absence of the Hamiltonian b.s. such as for example what chemists Waser, Trueblood, Knobler in their excellent CHEM ONE textbook, 2nd edition, 1980, page 311 for a sample of the Schrodinger equation as given by E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2). CHEM ONE Schrodinger Equation is of the form F/a = mass and all Schrodinger Equations have the form of F/a = mass, without a pitiful obnoxious Hamiltonian.

AP

I need an additional chapter in this book where I learned from writing this book that the major significance of the Schrodinger equation was mass giver. How waves of speed of light come together and form rest mass of particles. In Old Physics, their rest-mass giver was conjured up in the Standard Model with their silly and dumb Higg's boson. But the Standard Model never had an actual mechanism, never had physical law as the mechanism. Never had details of how rest-mass comes to be formed from waves at speed of light.

In New Physics, we provide details of how speed of light waves form rest-mass. We provide a mechanism from laws of EM theory.

And all of this is easily seen in Wikipedia's animation of the Schrodinger equation where two waves form a geometrical 3rd dimension figure that moves along a axis, keeping its shape as a rest-mass object.

Chem One textbook by Waser, Trueblood, Knobler, 1980, 2nd edition, show this picture on page 307 titled "De Broglie Waves for Permitted and Prohibited Orbits."

Feynman starts talking about the Schrodinger Equation in his volume 2, page 15-12 with the double slit experiment. Later on Feynman focuses upon the Schrodinger Equation not as a "mass giver" but wrongly focuses upon the equation as a diffusion equation. Not realizing that the double slit experiment is both wave and particle, not realizing that the combination of waves, actually forces into existence rest-mass particles. In other words, the particles were not there until given a chance for the waves to combine into rest mass particles.

But perhaps the best book to show that the Schrodinger equation is the "mass giver" equation is found in my High School physics textbook PSSC PHYSICS, Haber-Schaim, Cross, Dodge, Walter 1971, third edition (admittedly, my PSSC was an earlier edition). In chapter 5 of that book shows pictures of Waves, pages 90 to 105, and look at the last picture especially of two waves meeting head on and combining. This is what the Schrodinger Equation specializes in, the combination of waves moving at the speed of light and forming rest-mass particles.

Again, Wikipedia and many Internet sites show the combination of light-waves forming 2D and 3D geometry objects of rest mass.

Again, Old Physics sat around with the Schrodinger Equation but never understood it was the rest-mass giver of particles from waves.

For the origin of the Schrodinger Equation was to do for waves what Newton did for particles in his Force = mass times acceleration. So Newton had F = ma, and what Schrodinger did was find a equation for restmass = Force/acceleration. Of course in light waves there is no acceleration but all at a constant speed of light.

Now in volume 3 of Feynman Lectures on Physics, 1965 on page 2-2, Feynman shows a diagram of waves becoming rest mass particles only Feynman calls them a "wave packet".

The missed message of Old Physics, is that they never recognized that the Schrodinger Equation was a mathematics that turns waves into rest-mass particles.

AP

So, what is different about AP's Schrodinger Equation than any in Old Physics, is that AP is a skilled mathematician, not a amateur.

In Old Physics, they did not mind a equation that has what is solved for on both sides of the equation. Suppose I give you an equation asking you to solve for X as that of YX(constant j) = ZX(constant k). To a physicist of Old Physics, that does not bother him that what you want solved for is on both sides of the equation. So, why not divide by X and you completely get rid of X, and nothing to solve for. In the Schrodinger equation we have Y(first derivative X)(constant j) = Z(second derivative of X)(constant k). Which is a bit better than my first example where you divide out X completely.. Here we cannot divide out X the wavefunction completely but still we have the wavefunction on both sides of the equation and asked to solve for the wavefunction. It is still a mess.

Solution for the Schrodinger equation is an easy solution and is found in Chem One where they reformulate the Schrodinger Equation as being E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2). And I easily flip open some pages in CHEM ONE, 2nd edition, 1980 Waser, Trueblood, Knobler to page 311 for a sample of the Schrodinger equation as given by E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2). You see, what Chem One does is explain the Schrodinger equation as being Force/acceleration = mass of Newton, and thus you multiply both sides by (n^2*h^2* alpha^2) and you divide both sides by - (2*pi^2*Z^2*e^4), thereby leaving mass all alone on one side of the equation.

Feynman has no Schrodinger Equation for his math is screwed up with a wavefunction on both sides of an equation. Schrodinger had no equation of F/acceleration = mass for Schrodinger had his math all screwed up, with a wavefunction on both sides of the equation. We have to go to Chemistry such as Chem One textbook to find a Schrodinger equation with proper correct mathematics.

CHEM ONE does have a Schrodinger Equation of mass = F/acceleration in their m = (-E_n(n^2*h^2* alpha^2)) / (2*pi^2*Z^2*e^4). That is a Schrodinger Equation seeking rest mass of waves combining to form particles.

AP

So which of the AP-EM Equations is the Schrodinger Equation as given by CHEM ONE.
And I easily flip open some pages in CHEM ONE, 2nd edition, 1980 Waser, Trueblood, Knobler to page 311 for a sample of the Schrodinger equation as given by E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2).

This is the question before me. Which term in which equation of the AP-EM laws is the Schrodinger Equation?

Those 6 laws are these.

1) Magnetic monopole telling us what magnetism and electric current and magnetic field and electric field are.

2) New Ohm's law Voltage = capacitor-battery = quantity of current C times magnetic field times electric field. V= CBE. The equation of New Ohm's law is a math equation of volume Volume = length x width x height so we can expect that New Ohm's law is a measuring of volume in physics, volume of energy.

The next 4 laws are derivatives of all the possible 4 permutations of C, B, E, and V.

3) Rate of change of C, quantity current, C' = (V/(BE))' Faraday law.

4) Rate of change of B, magnetic field, B' = (V/(CE))' Ampere-Maxwell law..

5) Rate of change of E, electric field, E' = (V/(CB))' Coulomb law & gravity.

6) The rate of change of V= CBE as V' = (CBE)' as AC transformer law.

C' = (V/(BE))' = V'BE/(BE)^2 - VB'E/(BE)^2 - VBE'/(BE)^2 which is Faraday's law.
1st term as current production  -- 2nd term as Lenz law  -- 3rd term as DC, AC direction

B' = (V/(CE))' = V'CE/(CE)^2 - VC'E/(CE)^2 - VCE')/(CE)^2 which is Ampere-Maxwell law.
1st term as B production -- 2nd term as Displacement current -- 3rd term as parallel attract

E' = (V/(CB))' = V'CB/(CB)^2 - VC'B/(CB)^2 - VCB'/(CB)^2 which is Coulomb-gravity law.
1st term as E production -- 2nd term as inverse square of distance -- 3rd term as spin and orbit synchronicity

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

Review all of this, the EM equations of physics and mathematics.

Faraday Law is (V/(B*L))' = i' from the AP-Maxwell Equations you learned in 1st year College.

1) Magnetic primal unit law Magnetic Field  B = kg /A*s^2
2) V = i*B*L       New Ohm's law, law of electricity
3) V' = (i*B*L)'   Capacitor Law of Physics
4) (V/i*L)'  = B'     Ampere-Maxwell law
5) (V/(B*L))' = i'     Faraday law
6) (V/(i*B))' = L'      the new law of Coulomb force with EM gravity force

PHYSICS LAWS 

1) all the facts of chemistry and physics
2) Voltage V = kg*m^2/A*s^3 
3) Current i = A = magnetic monopoles 
4) Magnetic primal unit law Magnetic Field  B = kg /A*s^2 
5) angular momentum L = m^2/(A*s)
6) V = i*B*L       New Ohm's law, law of electricity 
7) V' = (i*B*L)'   Capacitor Law of Physics 
8) (V/i*L)'  = B'     Ampere-Maxwell law 
9) (V/(B*L))' = i'     Faraday law 
10) (V/(i*B))' = L'      the new law of Coulomb force with EM gravity force 

Algebra of 3D Calculus, for remember we did the algebra of

V' = (iBL)'
i' = (V/BL)'
B' = (V/iL)'
L' = (V/iB)'

--- quoting 1st year calculus from Teaching True ---
Using the Product Rule which is (fgh)' = (f'gh + fg'h + fgh')

Capacitor Law   (i*B*L)' = i'*B*L + i*B'L + i*B*L' 

V' = (iBL)' = i'*B*L + i*B'*L + i*B*L'  here we have three terms explaining capacitors

Ampere-Maxwell Law

Using the Quotient Rule, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/(gh)^2 

(V/i*L)' = B' =  (V'*i*L - V*i' *L - V*i*L') / (i*L)^2 

Maxwell had two terms in the Ampere-Maxwell law-- the produced magnetic field and a displacement current, but above we see we have also a third new term.

Faraday Law

(V/B*L)' = i' =  (V'*B*L - V*B' *L - V*B*L') / (B*L)^2

------------
V' = (iBL)' = i'*B*L + i*B'*L + i*B*L' reduces to
    = iBL + iVL + iBL'

i' =  V'*B*L/ (B*L)^2  - V*B' *L/ (B*L)^2  - V*B*L' / (B*L)^2 reduces to
i'     = B^2*L/ (B*L)^2  - V^2 *L/ (B*L)^2  - V*B*L' / (B*L)^2 further reduces
    = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - VL'/BL^2

B' =  V'*i*L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i' *L/ (i*L)^2  - V*i*L' / (i*L)^2 reduces to
B'    =  B*i*L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i *L/ (i*L)^2  - V*i*L' / (i*L)^2 further reduces to
  = B/iL - V/iL - VL'/iL^2

L' = (V/i*B)' = (V'*i*B - V*i' *B - V*i*B') / (i*B)^2  reduces to
L' = i*B^2 / (i*B)^2   - V*i *B / (i*B)^2  - V^2*i / (i*B)^2 further reduces to
    = 1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2

--------

(1) V' =  iBL + iVL + iBL'

(2) i'  = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - VL'/BL^2

(3) B' = B/iL - V/iL - VL'/iL^2

(4) L' = 1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2

Alright, so I replace L' in (1) with 1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2

I get V' =  iBL + iVL + iB*(1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2 )
             =   iBL + iVL + B - V - V^2/ B

Doing the replacement in (2)

i'  = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - VL'/BL^2
   =  1/L - V^2/B^2*L - V*(1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2) /BL^2
   =  1/L - V^2/B^2*L  - (V/iBL^2) - (V^2/iB^2L^2) - (V^3/(iB^3L^2))

Doing the replacement in (3)

B' = B/iL - V/iL - VL'/iL^2
    =  B/iL - V/iL - V(1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2)/iL^2
    =  B/iL - V/iL - (V/i^2L^2) - (V^2/i^2*B*L^2) - (V^3/( i^2B^2L^2))

Is there any geometrical significance I can ascribe to this? There are some cubes involved.

AP

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 3:41:25 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> So which of the AP-EM Equations is the Schrodinger Equation as given by CHEM ONE.
> And I easily flip open some pages in CHEM ONE, 2nd edition, 1980 Waser, Trueblood, Knobler to page 311 for a sample of the Schrodinger equation as given by E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2).
> This is the question before me. Which term in which equation of the AP-EM laws is the Schrodinger Equation?
>
>
>
> Those 6 laws are these.
>
> 1) Magnetic monopole telling us what magnetism and electric current and magnetic field and electric field are.
>
> 2) New Ohm's law Voltage = capacitor-battery = quantity of current C times magnetic field times electric field. V= CBE. The equation of New Ohm's law is a math equation of volume Volume = length x width x height so we can expect that New Ohm's law is a measuring of volume in physics, volume of energy.
>
> The next 4 laws are derivatives of all the possible 4 permutations of C, B, E, and V.
>
> 3) Rate of change of C, quantity current, C' = (V/(BE))' Faraday law.
>
> 4) Rate of change of B, magnetic field, B' = (V/(CE))' Ampere-Maxwell law.
>
> 5) Rate of change of E, electric field, E' = (V/(CB))' Coulomb law & gravity.
>
> 6) The rate of change of V= CBE as V' = (CBE)' as AC transformer law.
>
> C' = (V/(BE))' = V'BE/(BE)^2 - VB'E/(BE)^2 - VBE'/(BE)^2 which is Faraday's law.
> 1st term as current production -- 2nd term as Lenz law -- 3rd term as DC, AC direction
>
> B' = (V/(CE))' = V'CE/(CE)^2 - VC'E/(CE)^2 - VCE')/(CE)^2 which is Ampere-Maxwell law.
> 1st term as B production -- 2nd term as Displacement current -- 3rd term as parallel attract
>
> E' = (V/(CB))' = V'CB/(CB)^2 - VC'B/(CB)^2 - VCB'/(CB)^2 which is Coulomb-gravity law.
> 1st term as E production -- 2nd term as inverse square of distance -- 3rd term as spin and orbit synchronicity

Apparently the entire Schrodinger Equation is just one of the 3 terms in the E' differential equation of AP-EM laws of physics. In Old Physics, the Schrodinger Equation stood as some monolith over quantum mechanics. In New Physics, the Schrodinger Equation is nothing but 1 of 3 terms in the E' equation of electricity magnetism.

The Schrodinger Equation is the physics of "mass giver" for it transforms Light Waves into rest mass particles. This explains why double slit experiments see both wave and particle, because the electric field is causing waves to become rest mass particles.

The clue given by CHEM ONE authors gives us a clue in their Schrodinger formula of E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2) with a footnote: alpha = 1.113*10^-10 C^2J^-1 m^-1 which is Coulomb force.

AP