|0960||A. Einstein versus W. Heisenberg (see text and document below)|
|0311||The EM fields of the theory|
|0854||The subtle interplay between the EM fields and the metrics|
The search for unity inside theoretical physics, especially between the theory of relativity (A. Einstein) and the quantum approach is an approximately hundred years old fundamental quest. It has occupied many brilliant brains and it does yet occupy them today.
Although the affirmation may sound a little bit pretentious, my toy-theory proposes a new path connecting the two pillars of modern physics. Let describe the main idea.
W. Heisenberg has pointed out the fact that positions and speeds form two separate and independent sets of observables. He also suggested that energies and lapse of times were following a similar logic. There is, for now, no operator representing the time and, at least at a technical level, this absence is blocking the progression.
Therefore, I decided to consider the simplest transposition of that suggested interdependence; in extenso, the product: (delta energy. delta lapse of time). The situation realizing the minimum of that product is labeled as “quantum limit”. After that, considering the physical units involved in such a relation, I realized that it was possible to inject any force and, in peculiar, the Lorentz force density into it. I also understood that Heisenberg’s relation was able to yield a polynomial of degree two allowing both, the simultaneous intervention of my extrinsic method and the one of E. B. Christoffel’s historical work on the preservation of these polynomials.
This is the central skeleton of my toy-approach. It must certainly be fine-tuned and generalized. If it is the right manner to connect the two main pillars of modern theoretical physics, this is a scoop and an essential stone for future progressions. If Heisenberg would have been able to confront his thoughts with the calculations of E. B. Christoffel’s, he would certainly have suggested a similar idea.
Within that new approach, the preservation of elements of lengths appears to be a plausible consequence of the preservation of the quantum limit. This conclusion will certainly not receive any positive echo in the scientific community; just because it is not academic, not politically correct and contradicting the mainstream. Or for a simpler reason: because it is false. You are deciding.
© Thierry PERIAT, 14 January 2019.
Everybody knows Einstein’s masterwork (The general theory of relativity – GTR). Only a few specialists remember exactly how it has been built. In that document, I exhume E. B. Christoffel’s work which is (i) continuing Riemann’s work and (ii) one of the mathematical pillars of the GTR. I demonstrate that that work can be applied either for the preservation of the (ds)2 (the historical case) or for the invariance of Planck’s limit as well (my proposition), without being obliged to be in contradiction with the solutions of the GTR. It turns out that, in doing so, I just preserve the inverse of a non-degenerated 4D metric. The bonus of that demonstration is a new family of electromagnetic fields depending on that metric and on its variations. The v4 has been proposed to the review General Relativity and Gravitation but not approved for publication. The v5 has been published for the first time on the 16th of September 2018.
Back to the page: The Lorentz-Einstein Law