In the beginning 20 centuries in physics happened events, which one
strongly changed its contents. There were two reasons lying in the ground
of these events.
The first reason was that all attempts to be out from empiricism of a
classic mechanics and from its logic of construction have appeared
unsuccessful. In spite of the fact that the researchers were not satisfied
with impossibility of extract directly from this theory neither principles
of a short-range interaction, nor mechanism of gravitation, nor properties
of world medium, with which one all this connected.
Attempts to be pulled out from rigid frame of a classic mechanics
within the framework of the definite rules have resulted in occurrence of
its several versions constructed on the basis of different sets of initial
principles. From that one three principles were constant: Euclidean space,
Newtonian time and law of conservation of mass. It is a power mechanics of
a Newton – Euler – Laplace. It, so-called field mechanics, based on a
principle of least action of Mopertuy, Euler and Lagrange, on an energy
conservation law of Lagrange, Hamilton, Jacoby and Ostrogradskiy. And, at
last, it is a forceless mechanics of Hertz.
The second reason was, that the researchers, as it seemed them, could
not explain facts and natural phenomena were detected in frameworks
already constructed classic mechanics. It also has formed the basis for
origin STR, GТR and quantum mechanics.
However STR and GТR based on such postulates, which one could not be
compatible with existence of world medium and, furthermore, space, time
and mass jointed in interdependent essences start to be distorted by speed
of bodies.
Refusing ideals (world outlook concepts) of classic mechanics, namely:
Euclidean space, unified universal time and law of conservation of mass,
which one are fundamental world outlook categories of materialists, lead
to the sharp protest of the researchers and philosophers, which one
adhered and adhere of the materialistic concepts. For this reason there
was an acute scrambling against STR and GTR, which one does not cease for
one second since these theories arose. However apologists of the
relativistic theory managed to capture dominating positions in scientific
establishments, where they have taken advantage to the full.
Probably, only it can explain the fact that the experiment on optician
of moving mediums conducted before and after appearance of STR, were used
partially, only in that part, where they do not contradict STR. Or they
were given only formal relativistic explanation, which one, as a rule, is
not founded on causality and on common sense.
However it is possible to state following now:
Researches of rotatory effect conducted by Garris in 1912 [2], Sagnac
in 1913 [3], Michelson and Gel in 1925 [4], Pogany in 1926 [5], simply
prove, that the ether exist. In this occasion S. Vavilov,
ex-president АSс.USSR, has noted [6], «If the phenomenon of Sagnac was
discovered earlier, than the zero outcomes of experiments of the second
order were found out, it, certainly, would be considered as the brilliant
experimental proof of an ether (is selected by me – N.N.)». It is only to
be surprised: why «would be considered», instead of is considered?
Experiments on a dragging of an ether by moving mediums, conducted by
Fiseau in 1851 [7], Heck in 1868 [8], Michelson and Morly in 1886 [9] and
Zeeman in 1914 [10], have shown, that there is a partial dragging of ether
(and, therefore, ether takes place to be). Experiments verify a hypothesis
of the Fresnel [11], who inferred, that the drag coefficient is equal:
k = 1 – 1/n2, where:
(1)
k – drag coefficient of the Fresnel.
n – factor of refraction of medium.
Michelson experiments 1880...1929 [12], Michelson and Morley 1887 [13],
Morley and Miller 1904...1905 [14], Miller 1921...1925 [15] display, that
there is a partial dragging of an ether by the Earth, which one makes more
than 90%, but less than 100% on its surface.
Moreover, Miller`s experiments have shown, that the partial dragging of
an ether decreases with increasing of an altitude above surface of the
Earth.
Besides, discovery of a phenomenon of a stellar aberration by
D. Bradley in 1725 [16], Remer`s observation in 1675 [17] on
non-uniformity of periods of eclipses of Jovian satellites at removal and
approach to Earth and Sagnac`s phenomenon have shown, that the speed of
light adds with speed of the receiver (when a partial dragging of an ether
by the Earth or installation in experiment does not introduce the
appreciable contribution) on a classic addition formula of speeds.
So far as STR 1) is incompatible to the fact of existence of an ether
and 2) is based on a relativistic addition formula of speeds of light and
receiver (speed of light does not add with speed of the receiver), it is
necessary to recognize, that it contradicts experiment. Its conclusions,
specially in a part of interdependence of invariants, their «bending» near
to mass and from speed, transformation of mass in its property – energy
and on the contrary, is simple non-scientifically and, therefore, are
unauthorized. Waiving them also is required.
The second theory, GTR, claiming on a role of the theory of
gravitation, has kept away from causality of physical phenomena still
more. It represents a set of equations and special section of mathematics,
in which one there is no place physical sense not only, but also common
sense in general.
Both these theories STR and GTR not only were not set by the purpose of
finding of dynamics of interactions on the basis of a short-range
interaction and existence of terminal velocity of interaction, but also
have put barrier to development of such theories.
Waiving the relativistic theories is made in offered article. And the
theory of a Newton – Euler – Laplace is developed by a method of
introduction in it of principles of a short-range interaction.
Outgoing from the requirement of a short-range interaction...
If to consider the law of universal gravitation with the materialistic
positions it gives the hint to the researchers that between gravitating
mass through space the information on their value and about change of
distance between them is permanently transmitted.
F = γm1m2 /
R2
(2)
For corresponding of the transmitted information to values of masses,
it is necessary, that the bearer of information would be somehow connected
to mass; that the bearers of information from each body exchanged in space
by the information and returned one to its gravitating bodies. At last,
bearer of information should be a propulsive body of an mechanism of
gravitation.
The theory of the mechanism «of sources – drains of an ether» by
Riemann [18], Pearson [19] and Shott [20] corresponds to such
requirements. Besides, this theory naturally explains a dragging of ether
by bodies, which one in this case should depend on value of mass, and
existence of an ethereal lens curving a course of light rays near bodies.
The conclusion about finiteness of speed of interaction is especially
relevant, which one is connected to properties of transmitting medium that
is a major property of a short-range interaction.
The theory «of sources – drains of an ether» can indicate the reasons
of motion of bodies in space. The process of formation of a matter in
space should be, presumptively, outcome of fluctuations of pressure in
ether. Then, the gradual disintegration of a matter into ether expiring in
space, is a reason of interaction, which one predetermines, in turn,
causality of motion and observance of the laws of preservation of energy
of a momentum and mass. Therefore, motion of electrons and planets on
orbits is not perpetuum-mobile, but the natural physical process passing
with an expenditure of energy, having of its regularity and finite
time.
Properties and laws of a short-range interaction
The theory of screens [21], pulsation [22] or «of sources – drains of
an ether» are the mechanical theories of interaction. They imply clear
obvious reasons of transfer of potentials on distance by means of
intermediate medium depending on certain initial properties of bodies and
medium itself (a screen, oscillation or disintegration of matter). In the
first case there is a difference of impulses returned by medium to
interacting bodies from their external and internal parties. In the second
and third cases there is an low pressure in an interval between bodies,
which one causes them to approach.
The transmission of action on distance by a material medium from a
point to a point with certain velocity dependent on properties of this
medium is called as a short-range interaction. Time of interaction, speed
of interaction and relation of force of interaction to a relative velocity
of interacting bodies characterize the short-range interaction.
The necessary time for full change of a potential in a point, connected
with a trial body, from the moment of a beginning of its motion is named
the time of interaction.
The speed of interaction is connected to properties of the
transmitting interactions medium and, besides, depends on processes
(dynamics) happening in medium at interaction. In theory of Newton – Euler
this problem was not considered behind absence both test data and
theoretical elaboration. STR and GTR have limited themselves of the
greatest possible speed of bodies, equal speed of light in vacuum.
Moreover, it was not connected with speed of interaction, and was declared
only on the basis of mathematics.
Conducting analogy to a speed of sound, taking into account, that the
power transmission (impulse) is possible through air only with a speed of
sound, the speed restriction of bodies in air by this speed is right in
the event if the body has no a jet engine. From here follows those
concepts: the greatest possible speed of bodies and speed of operation on
distance via medium are different phenomena.
Relation of force of interaction to a relative velocity of
bodies, on a line by their connecting, are considered in this work
below in connection with transactions incorrectly called (Helmholtz) «by
school of a long-range action», Gauss became founder of which one
[23].
From positions of the laws of a short-range interaction, laws of the
retarded potential actually are laws of dynamics of interactions. It is
possible to state that law of universal gravitation (2) and Coulomb's law
for electrical interaction is statics of gravitational and electrical
interactions. But they are incorrect for moving masses and charges
relatively one another.
As to a Coulomb's law, it was generalized on speed of interaction by
the several researchers, due to what there are some kinds of
electrodynamics: of Gauss, Weber, Clausius, Ritz, Riemann,
F. Neumann, K. Neumann, Grossman and other. However only law of
the Weber [24] meets an experimental and empirical electrodynamics created
by researches of Oersted, Arago, Ampere and Faraday.
Subsequently, relativists have declared the formula STR based on a
factor of the Lorentz as a true electrodynamics, because the
electrodynamics of the Weber did not respond a general relativity. It
became possible due to the factor of the Lorentz close enough described an
electrodynamics on large speed range. However hereinafter they have taken
self-deception, asserting that the relativistic laws of motion of
fundamental particles on accelerators are correct down to 0,9998 speed of
light. The matter is that speed of particles is determined through a
factor of the Lorentz from the retrieved energy. It is difficult to
dispute with relativists how correctly they determined the energy of
accelerated particles (I, for some reasons, is not bent to trust to
relativists). The careful researches are indispensable for this purpose.
However it is possible with confidence to assert, that if the laws of the
retarded potential were applied to definition of speed, its calculated
value would be much lower, that, probably, corresponds to a reality.
Gerber generalized the law of universal gravitation on speed of
interaction in 1898 [25]. The displacement of perihelion of planets,
calculated by this law, correspond observable. Besides, the law of
graviodynamics explains justice of a law of universal gravitation for a
circular orbit, as the derivative of a scalar value of distance between
planets (on a line them connecting) enters in it, which one is equal to
null at a circular orbit. The derivative is value of the second order of
smallness at the elliptic orbit (and is responsible for an abnormal
perihelion displacement).
Thus it is possible to state, that the main basis of origin GTR,
abnormal perihelion displacement of a Mercury and other planets, moving at
elliptic orbit, was explained and described by the law within the
framework of a classic mechanics 17 years prior to origin of a
relativism.
The form of the law of the retarded potential depending on a
hypothesis of the mechanism of interaction
The scheme of interaction of a trial body at free fall in a field of a
central force. An inference about longitudinal vibrations of a trial
body
Energy of motion of a trial body at free fall taking into accont
longitudinal vibrations
Length, frequency and energy of longitudinal vibrations
Noskov N.K., To a Problem on the Restriction of Field of Application
of a Classical Mechanics. SPE «Print», Institute of high-energy physics,
Academy of Sciences; Kaz. SSR, Alma-Ata, 1991.
F. Harress. Die Geschwindigkeit des Lichtes in bewegten
Körpern. Dissertation, Jena, 1912.
G. Sagnac. L'éther lumineux démontré par l'éffect du vent
rélatif d'éther dans un interférométre en rotation uniforme. C. R.,
1913, 157, p. 708...710.
A.A. Michelson. The effect of the Earth's rotation on the
Velocity of light. I. Astrophys. J., 1925, 61, p. 137...139;
A.A. Michelson, H. Gale. Idem II, Astrophys. J., 1925, 61, p.
140...145.
B. Pogany. Über die Wiederholung des Harres – Sagnaschen
Versuches. Ann. Phys., 1926, 80, p. 217...231.
S.I. Vavilov. The experimental basis of a relativity theory.
The collected works. v. 4, Akademisdat, M., 1956. In Russian.
Fiseau. About a hypothesis concerning a light ether and about one
experiment, which, apparently, shows, that the movement of bodies
changes velocity, with which light is propagated inside these bodies. C.
R., 1851, 33, p. 349...355.
M. Hoek. Determination de la vitesse avec laquelle est
entrainée une onde lumineuse traversant un milieu en mouvement. Arch.
Neerl., 1868, 3, p. 180...185; 1869, 4, p. 443...450.
A.A. Michelson, E.W. Morley. Influence of motion of the
medium on the velocity of light. Amer. J. Sci., 1886, 31, p.
377...386.
P. Zeeman. Experiences sur la propagation de la lumiére dans
les milieux liquides ou solides en mouvement. Versl. Akad. Amster.,
1914, 23, p. 245.
O. Fresnel. The letter to Arago «Concerning influence of
movement of the Earth on some optical phenomena». 1818.
A.A. Michelson. Relative movement of the Earth and a
lightcarriing ether. Amer. J. Phys., 1881, 22, p. 120...129.
A.A. Michelson and E.V Morley. About relative movement of the
Earth in an lightcarriing ether. Amer. J. Sci., 1887, 34, p.
333...345.
A.A. Michelson, D.C. Miller. The report on experiment on
detection of effect Fitzgerald – Lorentz. The philosophical logbook, 8
(6), 680...685, 1905.
D.C. Miller. An ethereal wind. The report read in the
Washington Academy of sciences. Science, 1926, v. LXII, No. 1635.
D. Bradley. The letter to Galleo. 1728.
O. Römer. The proof concerning velocity of light. 1675.
Riemann. In: N.T. Rousver. A perihelion of a Mercury from
Leverje up to an Einstein. World, M., 1985, page 130. In Russian.
K. Pearson. Ether squirts. Am. J. Math., 13, p. 309...362,
1891.
G.A. Schott. On the electron theory of matter and the
explanation of fine spectrum lines and of gravitation. Phil. Mag. (Ser.
6), p. 21...29, 1906.
В. Thomson. On the ultramundane corpuscles of LeSage. Phil.
Mag. (Ser. 4), 45, 1873, p. 321... 332.
K.A. Bjerknes. The pulsation theory of gravitation. 1856. In:
N.T. Rousver. A perihelion of a Mercury from Leverje up to an
Einstein. Mir, M., 1985, page 125. In Russian.
C.F. Gauss. Transactions, v. 5, Royal science foundation,
Goettingen, 1867.
W. Weber. Werke, Vol. 4, 247... 299, Springer, Berlin, 1894.
Gerber P. Die räumliche und zeitliche Ausbreitung der
Gravitation. Z. Math. Phys., v. 43, p. 93...104, 1898.
Знаете ли Вы, что такое мысленный эксперимент, gedanken experiment? Это несуществующая практика, потусторонний опыт, воображение того, чего нет на самом деле. Мысленные эксперименты подобны снам наяву. Они рождают чудовищ. В отличие от физического эксперимента, который является опытной проверкой гипотез, "мысленный эксперимент" фокуснически подменяет экспериментальную проверку желаемыми, не проверенными на практике выводами, манипулируя логикообразными построениями, реально нарушающими саму логику путем использования недоказанных посылок в качестве доказанных, то есть путем подмены. Таким образом, основной задачей заявителей "мысленных экспериментов" является обман слушателя или читателя путем замены настоящего физического эксперимента его "куклой" - фиктивными рассуждениями под честное слово без самой физической проверки. Заполнение физики воображаемыми, "мысленными экспериментами" привело к возникновению абсурдной сюрреалистической, спутанно-запутанной картины мира. Настоящий исследователь должен отличать такие "фантики" от настоящих ценностей.
Релятивисты и позитивисты утверждают, что "мысленный эксперимент" весьма полезный интрумент для проверки теорий (также возникающих в нашем уме) на непротиворечивость. В этом они обманывают людей, так как любая проверка может осуществляться только независимым от объекта проверки источником. Сам заявитель гипотезы не может быть проверкой своего же заявления, так как причина самого этого заявления есть отсутствие видимых для заявителя противоречий в заявлении.
Это мы видим на примере СТО и ОТО, превратившихся в своеобразный вид религии, управляющей наукой и общественным мнением. Никакое количество фактов, противоречащих им, не может преодолеть формулу Эйнштейна: "Если факт не соответствует теории - измените факт" (В другом варианте " - Факт не соответствует теории? - Тем хуже для факта").
Максимально, на что может претендовать "мысленный эксперимент" - это только на внутреннюю непротиворечивость гипотезы в рамках собственной, часто отнюдь не истинной логики заявителя. Соответсвие практике это не проверяет. Настоящая проверка может состояться только в действительном физическом эксперименте.
Эксперимент на то и эксперимент, что он есть не изощрение мысли, а проверка мысли. Непротиворечивая внутри себя мысль не может сама себя проверить. Это доказано Куртом Гёделем.
Понятие "мысленный эксперимент" придумано специально спекулянтами - релятивистами для шулерской подмены реальной проверки мысли на практике (эксперимента) своим "честным словом". Подробнее читайте в FAQ по эфирной физике.
