Introduction and Abstract of the book "Great mistakes of the physicists" Introduction of the book ------------------------ History of science tells us that there were many theories having widespread acceptability during long times such that based on their acceptability many additions were added to them till finally a research or a scrutiny showed their invalidity and contrary to all of their additions and widespread acceptability sent them easily to the archives of history, what has remained being more solid and more scientific superseding theories or at least those seeming to be so. Let's see that, contrary to all of the apparent validity and acceptability and additions, what would cause a researcher to dare to oppose a theory and to scrutinize its bases succeeding in changing the theory in this way. The answer is clear: The researcher firstly looks into the theory with an acceptance view. Secondly, he or she tries to become thoroughly conversant with all the details of the theory. Thirdly, in the case of weakness of the theory, the points of weakness, like some tied knots, find an annoying state in the mind of the researcher, and he or she spends all his or her mind and time to obviate them. Fourthly, little by little the knots are untied and the difficulties are solved and logical supersedings appear. What can be said about the contemporary theoretical physicists is that many of them are practically content with only the first phase; they accept many of the current theories only because of their widespread acceptability and add more and more additions to them without any serious scrutinizing of their details in order to find out their validity or invalidity. A smaller group of the physicists proceed to these scrutinies, but don't attach any importance to the mental knots created for them and charge them to the weakness of man's perception or of the logic of the mathematics! This book is a collection of some physical articles searched on the basis of some scrutinizing in the above-mentioned manner. Each of them has been a set of knots that for their untying a great logical endeavor has been made. In this explanatory introduction, we introduce them in three categories. Contemporary physics, ie the physics related chiefly to the last century, has been extremely associated with two subjects which at present bear the much familiar titles of Quantum Physics and Relativistic Physics. These physicses are still presented under the title of Modern Physics although they were born many years ago, and it seems that their novelty is not because of their lateness but is because of the difference they have with the logic of the classical physics. It is said that for perception of these physicses one must go out of the frame of the classical logic. There will be no problem in this act if firstly superseding frame exists, secondly it is logical ie in principle is really (not only seemingly) a frame, and thirdly in principle this act is necessary ie really there exit some phenomena which the logic of the classical physics is not able to justify them and it is proven that such a justification is not possible, not after encountering a phenomenon which we are not able to justify it by the classical physics at present we merely try immediately to create new frames of logic or try to find a position for it in the numerous current frames of non-classical logic without trying to think that whether it has any position in the frame of the classical physics or not. In other words it is not true that the physicist to hide his or her inability to justify a phenomenon by trying to justify it in any probable possible way by retouching the logics by their inconsistency there won't remain any basis for any genuine work. Is it difficult to be said that we now don't know or only know a little but we are trying to know, without any haste and trying to disturb everything? A group of the articles of this book proceeds chiefly with what on which the quantum physics has been based. In an article the famous relation E=h is rejected analytically (11); in another article we proceed with the real justification of the photoelectric effect, and the justification of this relation by this way is also rejected (10). With a full beauty and simplicity the Compton effect is justified in the classical manner (2), and this is the case for the Stern-Gerlach experiment (5) and Franck-Hertz experiment (16) in two other articles. Some other phenomena which are thought as quantum phenomena are also justifed classically in an article (12). It is tried that the wave equation to be solved for the cylindrical wave, and in this way it is shown that how weak the bases of the struggles for solving the Schrodinger wave equation are (14). We justify the Hall effect and we see that maybe no longer it is necessary that the twentieth century physicists believe in forces exerted on "nothing" according to their belief (8)! Another group of the articles proceeds chiefly to the bases of the relativistic physics. In an article the electromagnetic theory is generally revised in details and in an interesting manner it is seen that how easy the relativity is hindered from resorting to this theory in its justification (13). In another article we see that attraction of the stars light passing beside the sun is simply optical and it is not necessary to consider it as gravitational (3). By investigating the stellar aberration in rejecting the existence of ether we shall see in another article that how surprising the current reasonings in support of the relativity are involved in apparent weakness (4). Another group of the articles proceeds chiefly with some material which are basically not related to the modern physics although more or less will be related to it. Some quite sure mistakes in the electrostatics will be shown in a detailed article study of which should be done with great attention (6). In some articles it is shown that how some quite open mistakes are still current in the world of physics (7 and 9), and because of the cursory passing of the physicists over them, their existence in the preliminary textbooks has exposed the prestige of the physics to danger. And in a very important, brief and simple article (1), existence of the geomagnetic field has been justified careful and deep study of which is recommended particularly in comparison with the current unsatisfactory theories in this respect (including the theory of dynamo). In an article we try to see what mass and force are, and we shall see that distinguishing between inertial and gravitational masses is invalid (15). We try to find out what actually the conductor is and in this respect we discover that probably volume of the electron is so much bigger than what is thought at present (18). It is shown that in a polished surface, solid matter has not flowed and filled unevennesses of the surface as the current theories state (17). That the torque exerted on a stationary body is zero must not be presented as an axiom (19). As appendices (A1 and A2), the simple solution to the famous four-color problem is presented and Goldbach's conjecture is proven. What remain are non-few other phenomena of the kind of the first and second categories, which we don't proceed to their classicaljustification, just as there are many other phenomena of the third kind that we don't proceed to their classical justification or to obviating the mistakes from their justifications. Namely, after careful studying of the articles of this book, maybe you can believe that those unconsidered phenomena of the first and second categories must have the same sensitivity as unconsidered phenomena of the third category, and no more. And maybe it can also be understood that we can have confidence in the frame of the classical logic trying to justify the unknowns in this frame. Rush of the plentiful empirical results of the physics of the 20th century cannot justify destruction of the frame of home, but we should look for the places of the existent things in the home and if we are not able to find the position of a phenomenon at present, we must commit this work to posterity. If, after careful studying of this book, you are made aware that much of its contents proceeding to the bases and being in the level of the first years of the undergraduate courses of physics, just because of this very reason and without any scientific encountering and because they are not in the category of the material being published enormously in the international journals of physics chiefly in praise and admiration of the modern physics, are rejected by some international first-rate physicists, won't you entitle the author to select the title on the cover of his book? Should the writers of the history of science confine lonliness of science to only the past eras? We read in the history of science that Fresnel, who was diligently defending the wave theory of light, answered Poisson, who was defending the corpuscular theory of light, when he had said to him "Your theory is not in accordance with my equations", that "The remedy is that you change your equations". Now, if by this book, we become able to prove that we cannot ignore so easily the logic of the classical physics, can it be said that what we can do with the huge amount of the material published in support of the modern physics? Logic, and only logic, must be the only guide. What presented as nonclassical logic will be acceptable only if it is really logic; but we believe that this is not really the case. I hope that, in next editioins of the articles of this book, in addition to the inclusion of new materials, I can proceed to the improvement of and necessary changes in the articles criticism of which by the readers is requested insistently. In the articles of this book there are many proposals for experiments related to the theoretical contents of the articles that since performing of them has not been possible by the author, accomplishing of them is left to the interested readers as a test for the validity of the articles. Hamid V. Ansari Abstract of the book -------------------- We use the following terminology here: ~A means the vectot A. [] indicates subscript. means 4. 0 Great misakes of the physicists _Return to logic. 1 Geomagnetic field determines ionization energy _Magnetic field of the earth comes into existence due to the movement of the freed electrons of the hot core of the earth along with the earth rotation. 2 Compton effect is a Doppler effect _Compton effect is completely a Doppler effect. 3 Deviation of light by Sun is optical _Deviation and speed reducion of the stars light passing beside the sun is completely an optical phenomenon. 4 Stellar aberration with ether drag _Stellar aberration is not in any contradiction with the ether drag. 5 Stern-Gerlach experiment is not quantized _Classical physics does not at all predict a uniform distribution for magnetic atoms of the beam in the Stern-Gerlach experiment. 6 Obvious mistakes in Electrostatics _The famous formula of the electrostatic potential energy in the current form U=1/2~D.~Edv is completely wrong and in it ~E must be replaced by ~E[]. Then, capacitance of a capacitor does not at all depend on its dielectric which indeed acts as a source of potential. Besides, there are two different kinds of potential difference for a capacitor; thus the results of the experiments of Millikan and Thomson to determine the charge and mass of the electron must be revised. 7 Surface tension theory; Glaring mistakes _Current relations p=4/R and =2/R for pressure difference between inside and outside of a bubble and a solid drop respectively are completely wrong. 8 Logical justification of the Hall effect _To justify the Hall effect it is not necessary to suppose existence of hole and of magnetic force being exerted on it (ie in fact on nothing). 9 Actuality of the electric current _Countrary to the current belief, existence of the electric conduction currnt is not because of the existence of any electric field in the conductor. 10 Photoelectric effect is not quantized _Empirical results of the photoelectric effect have a perfect classical justification, thus cannot result in the relation E=h exclusively. 11 Wrong construing of the Boltzmann factor _A quite wrong construing of the Boltzmann factor is current that just on the basis of this wrong construing the famous relation E=h has been derived (by Planck). Correct form of this factor is presented. 12 Wavy behavior of electron beams is classical _Gas molecules existent in the electric discharge tubes play role of a medium for the electron beams which thereby propagate as longitudinal waves showing wave phenomena; thus there is no need to suppose existence of matter waves. 13 Electromagnetic theory from a new viewpoint _Considering point magnetic charges fundamental equations of electromagnetism and Maxwell's equations are completed and modified. Therefore, no longer the action-reaction law is breached, form of the electromagnetic wave motion throughout its carrier medium is justified beautifully, and the relativity is hindered from resorting to the electromagnetism. 14 Cylindrical wave, wave equation, and mistakes _Wave equation (eg cylindrical wave equation or Schrodinger equation) cannot be solved for general spreading of the wave by using the method of separation of variables. 15 Definitions of mass and force; A critique _Mass is an undefined concept, and force is not anything but prevention of masses against each other, and separation of mass into inertial and gravitational is a wrong and useless act. 16 Franck-Hertz experiment is not quantized _What we see in the Franck-Hertz experiment isn't anything but a regular repetition of a breakdown voltage. 17 A wave-based polishing theory _In a polished surface, solid matter has not flowed and filled unevennesses of the surface. 18 What the electric conductor is _Probably the volume of electron is very larger than what is thought at present. 19 Why torque on stationary bodies is zero _That the torque exerted on a stationary body is zero must not be presented as an axiom. a1 Solution to four-color problem _The four-color problem is simple and solved easily. a2 A proof for Goldbach's conjecture _A busy problem solved by a systematic mind.