Welcome Forums Gravitation Einstein

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 61 total)
  • Author
  • #583
    Gyula Szász

    I think, the four kinds of elementary particles, e, P, p, E were always in our universe, in earlier time they are only arranged otherwise on each other as today.

    God order the particles on each other with the help of probability. You and I are not very different, only the arrangement of protons, electrons and positrons are somewhat differently.


    Bill Eshleman

    So be it, to infinity,
    and from infinity.

    World without beginning
    nor end. — Amen

    Gyula Szász

    … and God does his work with simple laws of Nature and with probabilities. Laplace’s demon was not right configured. The laws of Nature are non-deterministic, however causal. Exact inertial conditions are scientifically unknown.


    Bill Eshleman


    YES, most indubitably yes; God most certainly works
    with the most simple of laws. And your theory is
    what I believe to have the closest connection with
    what God has to work with.

    There is a line separating what God is responsible
    for and for what intelligent creatures like ourselves
    are responsible for; exactly where that line lies is
    still a mystery to us, but it is most certainly there,

    The worst problem is when our superstitious elements
    attribute(blame) everything to a deity. Personally,
    I do not even give credit to a deity for creating
    DNA; DNA is more likely the creation of intelligent
    creatures. The superstitious folks give deities the
    credit for both happiness AND sadness; they praise a
    deity(s) when the enemy is vanquished and scream bloody
    murder when the enemy vanquishes us.

    These types of reasonings are the creations of ourselves,
    not the creations of a “father” in heaven. God does not
    allow bad and good things to happen; both good and bad
    happen because of ourselves; God is not responsible for either.

    We are responsible for what we sow, and we reap what we

    You have become a dear friend, and I have grown by your
    tutelage; and I sincerely hope that I’ve said nothing to
    offend you.


    Gyula Szász

    Dear Bill,

    thank you for your kindly assistance. You have followed my argumentation to a more simple physics as the modern physicists proposed. The key starting point was the introduction and consequent handling of the conserved elementary gravitational charges. Again the prevailing opinion, the gravitational and the inertial masse are not equal and it can be also experimental confirmed. The gravitation is unified with the electromagnetism and the gravitation is also build in the particle physics. Only the sources of the interaction field are quantized and the interactions propagate with c. At the moment, I cannot do more for a generalization (and simplification).

    The biggest problem of the academic physics is that their followers believe on the weak equivalence principle and on the energy-mass-equivalence. In “reality” none of these equivalences are physically valid principles. For instance, virtual particles do not exist and all instable particles are composed on the four kinds of stable elementary particles e,p,P and E. Thus, the neutrons and the neutrinos are composed particles, similar to muons and pions. These are not elementary particles. I can explain both masses of the instable particles; I need neither the Higgs-particle, nor quarks. The whole accepted standards of modern physics must be given up.

    I would like meet you personally if you take occasional a visit in Europe. I have adequate room for sleep and residence. I live with my family in Ingelheim am Rhein, near to Frankfurt and Mainz. The environment is very nice. Do you visit sometime Europe? Then I could demonstrate how wrong my spoken English is.


    Bill Eshleman

    Dear Gyula,

    Thanks so much for your gracious offer of a visit to
    your home in Germany. But unfortunately I am not well
    enough to travel.

    On 6 May, I was admitted to the Malcolm Randel VA
    Medical Center with chest pain. On 8 May I suffered
    an MI in hospital and on 9 May I received a stent to
    deliver blood to my left ventricle. I feel much better
    than I have felt in a long time, but am tied to the
    hospital for weekly blood tests to make sure that no
    problems should occur because of my “thick” blood.

    The same offer goes to you though, should you find
    yourself in sunny Florida USA.


    Gyula Szász

    Dear Bill,

    I wish you to feel better and that your status would be stable. On September 2009 I have also a threefold by-pass operation and my state of health would be stable up to now. In that time, I have much trouble with ZARM-FAB at the University in Bremen. They didn’t allow the continuation of my fall experiments at the drop tower and I had a court case what I lost 2011. It was very stressful. At the end, an “expert” form the LM University München claimed that the weak equivalence principle holds, but in physical reality, it is not true. I have lost much money and the possibility to continue my fall experiment for the confirmation of the UFF violation. In my following fall experiment, I wanted to move the test bodies to move also in vacuum. The academic physics has interim won.

    I have escaped from Hungary to Germany on 1956 after the revolution without my parents, and I have studied physics in Giessen and Mainz.

    I am never been in sunny Florida and thank you for your offer. I don’t promise, but if your state of health is stable, we could perhaps arrange a meet. I would be very glad.


    Bill Eshleman

    Dear Gyula,

    Another of my favorite physicists is Max Tegmark. He has
    postulated (from Wikipedia) that:

    “Tegmark has also formulated the “Ultimate Ensemble theory of everything”, whose only postulate is that “all structures that exist mathematically exist also physically”. This simple theory, with no free parameters at all, suggests that in those structures complex enough to contain self-aware substructures (SASs), these SASs will subjectively perceive themselves as existing in a physically “real” world. This idea is formalized as the mathematical universe hypothesis,[11] described in his book Our Mathematical Universe.”

    I think Tegmark would agree that your Universe MUST exist
    physically. So I am even more displeased that your German
    colleagues ignore your effort. But I also think that
    Tegmark would wish that your effort would have a “parallel
    worlds” prediction for the probability part.


    Bill Eshleman

    I am probably insufficient and sophomoric in my interpretation
    of all the theories that seem to predict the Many-Parallel-
    Worlds concept…..

    But here is the assumption that I believe causes theories
    to predict MPW (MPW is not a theory, it is a prediction of
    many theories)….

    “Any thing that CAN happen, DOES happen.”

    For example,

    A particle aimed at a double-slit can miss both slits, or
    go through one slit, or the other slit. And when we detect
    an interference pattern, it simply MUST have gone through
    BOTH slits; a classically impossible thing to do, but must
    nevertheless be physically what happens.


    Gyula Szász

    Criticism on Einstein’s theories

    What are the grounds why Einstein could not unify the interactions in Universe?

    First of all, he did not recognize that the general uncertainty principle holds: the positions and the velocities of particles are never known exactly. That means, the laws of nature are non-deterministic. Einstein believed on a deterministic Universe.

    Einstein did not recognize that there exist stable elementary particles which carry two conserved charges. Only the masses of the stable elementary particles are invariant masses. These masses are not equivalent to energy. The elementary gravitational charges, gi, cause the gravitation and the elementary electric charges cause the electromagnetism. The gravitational and the electromagnetic interactions propagate with c.
    Einstein’s special relativity and general relativity are scientifically not correct constructed. These theories cannot be used in physics.

    Einstein’s ad hoc hypothesis about the light quantum, E = h∙ν was incorrect. The Planck constant, h, play the role of a Lagrange multiplier; the energy is not quantized.

    Einstein did not recognize that physical processes must be described in finite ranges of Minkowski space with an Lorentz-invariant Lagrange density. The action integral is not an expression of energy.

    Einstein’s imagination about energetic physics (E = h∙ν, E = mc^2, the stress-energy tensor with space-time deformation) were not useful to describe the Universe.

    Einstein was led the physical developments nowhere.

    In special, Einstein’s imagination about mass was disastrously: He connected the relativistic mass with energy and he belief on the weak equivalence principle, on the equivalence of the inertial and gravitational mass. But, he has thrown away the gravitational mass. He did not recognize that the UFF is violated. He belief that masses could be annihilated and created.

    Gyula I. Szász

    • This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by Gyula Szász.
    Gyula Szász

    Einstein was surely a famous man with unconventional ideas. But, I don’t believe anything on his physical theories. The tough standards in physics are based on Einstein’s theories and also the tough standards of physical journals. These standards are null and void.

    Gyula I. Szász

    Gyula Szász

    New Mass Concept in Physics

    Einstein’s imagination about mass was disastrously; he could not clear up what mass in physics is. He has created the weak equivalence principle then he believed on the equivalence of the inertial and gravitational mass. He did not recognize that UFF is violated. Einstein has connected the relativistic mass with energy and proposed that mass can be annihilated and created. He stated the energy-mass-equivalence principle E = m∙c^2. At the end in his general relativity, he has thrown away the gravitational mass. The modern physics takes Einstein’s concept about mass as fundament, but it could not cleared up in the last 100 years wherefrom the masses of particles are coming. Nowadays, the Higgs-particle is taken to explain the mass of particles. The question of quantum gravity is further on unsolved.

    If have broken with Einstein’s mass-concept.

    First of all, I have recognized that the gravitational mass and the inertial mass are different. This is confirmed in the violation of the UFF. The gravitational mass is derived from the conserved gravitational charges, gi ={± g∙mi} with help of the invariant masses mP and me of proton and electron. The universal gravitational constant is G = g^2/4π. The gravitational charges of the stable elementary particles, e, p, P and E, generate the time dependent gravitation field. In the expression of inertial masses appears the bound energy of particles, beside the elementary masses, mP and me. While the gravitational mass of a system, mg, remain always unchanged, the inertial mass, mi, is changing. We weight gravitational masses with balances; however, the inertial masses appear in the equation of motion under the influence of interactions. If the interaction is pure gravitation, in the equation of motion appear the relation of both masses

    mg(material)/mi(material) = 1 + Delta(material).

    The mass defect, Delta(material), is between – 0.109% (hydrogen atom) and + 0.784% (56Fe isotope).

    Supposed, besides the gravitation only the electromagnetism exist as interaction between particles and both interactions propagate with c, an action integral is constructed in finite ranges of Minkowski space and with Lorentz-invariant Lagrange density, from which the Lorentz-invariant equation of the fields and the particles could be derived. The electromagnetism is also caused through conserved elementary charges. This formulation is valid for all possible velocities of particles. The elementary masses mP and me can be neither annihilated, nor created. For the most physicists is unusual that the elementary gravitational charges have two signs; that means repulsive gravitational interaction also exists. It is the case if two gravitational charges, Gi and Gj, have different signs. The static gravitational force is

    F(rij) = – Gi∙Gj∙rij/4∙π∙rij^3.

    Newton’s force equation

    F(rij) = – G∙Mj∙mj rij/4∙π∙rij^3,

    is valid only if the masse Mj and mj are connected to gravitational charges with the same sign and in this case the masses are connected to the conserved gravitational masses of bodies.

    I’m going on to explain the new mass concept.
    The gravitational mass mg of a proton-electron (P,e) system is

    mg(P,e) = mP – me = proton mass – electron mass = gravitational mass of hydrogen atom.

    The proton-electron system could have different bound energies, 13.8 eV, 2.04 MeV and even E(bound:P,e) = (mP+me)∙c^2 depending on the values of Lagrange multipliers. These bound energies correspond to states which have different inertial masses

    mi(P,e) = mP + me – E(bound:P,e)/c^2.

    The electron-positron, νe = (e,p) system has the gravitational mass zero,

    mg(e,p) = 0.

    This system contains the positronium and the electron-neutrino, νe = (e,p), depending on the bound energy. Electron and positron pair can neither annihilate, nor can be created.

    An instable neutron N =(P,e,p,e) has the calculated gravitational mass

    mg(N) = mP – me = 937.761 0821 MeV/c^2,

    which is the same as that of the hydrogen atom. The inertial mass of instable neutron is measured in nuclear physics

    mi(N) = 939.565 4133(58) MeV/c^2.

    The gravitational mass of an electric neutral isotope with the mass number A is A time the hydrogen atoms gravitational mass

    mg(isotope;A) = A∙( mP – me) = A∙937.761 0821 MeV/c^2.

    The natural mass unit of electric neutral matter is

    Mass Unit = 937.761 0821 MeV/c^2.

    If we weight matter with a balance, we weight a multiple of this Mass Unit.

    In nuclei there are also positrons present. An electric neutral isotope consists of A = NP protons, Np positrons and (NP + Np) electrons. The inertial mass of an isotope, mi(A,Z), which is measured in mass spectrometers, is different from its gravitational mass

    mi(isotope;A,Z) = A∙( mP + me) + 2∙Np∙me – E(bound;A,Z)/c^2,

    E(bound;A,Z) is the bound energy of all particles in the isotope. From the (NP + Np) electrons are Z bound in the atomic shells and (A – Z + Np) in the nuclei.

    Notice: The nuclear physicists calculate the bound energy of nuclei incorrect. They take

    En.ph. (bound;A,Z)/c2 = Z∙ mP + N∙ mi(N) – mi(isotope;A,Z).

    In the nucleus of an isotope, eltons (E) are obviously are not present then free eltons are not detected at the decays of nuclei. In particle physics elton is also called “antiproton”. The proton-neutrino, νP = (P,E), has the gravitational mass zero. For both neutrinos the inertial mass are also zero mi(neutrino) = 0, this condition define the neutrino states. At the neutrino decays of nuclei, we must pay attention; the neutrino could be electron-neutrino of proton-neutrino.

    In particle physics the calculation of gravitational masses of particles is simple. I give some examples. The charged muons, μ+ and μ-, are composed of five elementary particles

    μ+ = (p,P,e,p,E), μ- = (e,P,e,p,E).

    The decays are

    μ+ → p + νe + νP, μ- → e + νe + νP.

    The gravitational masses of μ± are that of the (invariant) mass of an electron

    mg(μ+) = mg(μ-) = me = 0.510998910(13) MeV/c^2.

    The electric neutral four-particle system, (P,e,p,E), is most possible classified as a third kind of neutrino in particle physics, as the tau-neutrino ντ then the gravitational mass of this particle system is zero. The name electric neutral muon, μ0, would also fit to this particle. The assigned names, tau-neutrino or electric neutral muon, depends of their bound energy. The inertial mass of the charged muon is measured to be

    mi(μ+) = mi(μ-) = 2∙mP + 3∙me – E(bound; μ±)/c^2 = 105.6583715(35) MeV/c^2.

    The bound energy is remarkable great, compared to the bound energies of the nuclei

    E(bound; μ±)/c^2 = 2∙mP + 3∙me – mi(μ±) = 1772.418787 MeV/c^2.

    We continue the discussion of the masses of particles with those of the charged and neutral pions. The pions have the compositions

    π+ = (p, P,2e,2p,E), π- = (e, P,2e,2p,E),
    π0 = (P,2e,2p,E).

    The gravitational masses of charged pions are again equal to the mass of electron, and that of the neutral pion is zero. It is not surprising that the inertial masses of charged pions

    mi(π±) = 2∙mP + 5∙me – E(bound;π±)/c^2
    = 139.57018(35) MeV/c^2

    are noticeable different from the inertial mass of the neutral pion

    mi(π0) = 2∙mP + 4∙me – E(bound;π0)/c^2
    = 134.9766(6)MeV/c2,

    since the bound energies and the compositions are different. The decays of charged pions are known

    π± → μ ± + νe.

    However, the often discussed decay of neutral pion

    π0 → 2 γ

    is physically impossible. Also events with the production and subsequent decay of “a new particle pair”:

    p + e → τ+ + τ− → p + μ- + 4 neutrino or → e + μ+ + 4 neutrino

    are also physically impossible.

    I could continue the discussion of the masses of additional particles, those of kaons and baryons, Λ, Σ, Ξ, etc., but, at any time I would have the problem that I must have exact knowledge of the number of (e,p) and (P,E) in the considered particles. For this, model calculations could help, then I have a variation principle for the calculation of bound energies with the Lagrange multipliers, as h0 = h/387 and h, with the invariant masses, mP and me and the elementary electric charge, e, of the stable elementary particles e, p, P and E. The variation principle is able to determine stable and instable particle states. At instable states the simultaneous determination of the bound energy and life time is possible. http://www.atomsz.com.

    Obviously, we don’t need the weak- and the strong-interactions, we have alone the electromagnetic interaction. Furthermore, we don’t need gluons, partons, or whatever quarks. The stable elementary particles are not composed of quarks. And we don’t need obviously the Higgs-particles for the explanation of the masses of particles. The problem of quantum gravitation is also solved with the implementation of elementary gravitational charges.

    Gyula I. Szász

    • This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by Gyula Szász.
    Bill Eshleman

    Dear Gyula,

    Yes, I am able to consider that Einstein’s SR and GR, are
    only elaborate catalogs of physical reality which appear
    to actually “break-down” at the extremes. IE, is a photon
    and a graviton “particle extremes” needed to be the sub-structures of electromagnetic and gravitomagnetic waves? Or are those hypothetical particles merely erroneous parts
    of mathematical models that are really catalogs that ignore
    physical causality?

    And if the conventional efforts are merely catalogs, do
    they also predict the extreme of Many-Parallel-Worlds,

    Yes, I’m thinking that the prediction of MPW should also
    be on your lists of “things-not-needed” and/or “things that
    cannot exist” and/or “things that could not happen”.

    That MPW only exists in popular literature, and nowhere
    else, is refreshing because of its overwhelming influence
    on both the fields of entertainment and cosmology.


    Gyula Szász

    Dear Bill,

    photons, gravitons and Many-Parallel-Words are “things-not-needed” and/or “things that cannot exist” and/or “things that could not happen”.

    Electromagnetism and gravitation are caused by conserved elementary charges and the time dependent fields propagate with c. Time and space are connected in the Minkowski space. But the stable particles e, p, P and E with their two kinds of elementary charges can physically not be localized in a point of Minkowski space. The positions and velocities of particles are never known exactly.

    However, electromagnetic and gravitational waves exist and they propagate with c. There is physically no contradiction between the existence of two invariant elementary charges of particles and the uncertainty of their positions and velocities.


    Gyula Szász

    The propagation of the two fundamental fields with the constant velocity c is independent of the state of the emitting particles.


Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 61 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.