Myths of modern physics Petrov read online. Everyone is wrong - Scientific Chamber of Curiosities — LiveJournal

This article was originally written by Vladimir Gorunovich for the Wikiknowledge website. This text has been revised and supplemented, including information removed by opponents of the New Physics from the Wikiknowledge website. Not everyone likes it when people know the TRUTH.

Elementary particles are the smallest indivisible objects in the microcosm (on the atomic, nuclear and subnuclear scale). Atoms and atomic nuclei of baryonic matter (and antimatter) are made up of elementary particles, and neutrino matter, which astronomers pass off as “dark matter,” is made up of electron neutrinos (ejected in gigantic quantities by stars). It has been experimentally established that elementary particles simultaneously have corpuscular and wave properties (corpuscular-wave duality), as well as the presence of electromagnetic fields in elementary particles.

With the discovery of elementary particles, science (physics) asked about their number and structure. While about ten elementary particles were discovered, every elementary particle was considered truly elementary. Attempts were made to explain the structure of elementary particles based on the electromagnetic field, but it was not possible to immediately construct a field theory of elementary particles. Gradually, this direction of physics went into the shadows, and remained in the shadows until 2010 until the successful completion of part of the work that lasted more than a hundred years and led to the creation of a field theory of elementary particles and the construction of a scientific picture of the microworld.

Simultaneously with classical field theory in physics, work was carried out to create quantum field theory, which came to the fore in the 20th century. The basis of quantum theory is the following statement: interactions are discrete in nature and are transmitted using interaction carriers - quanta. However, in reality only photons and other elementary particles were discovered in nature. Therefore, the elementary particles themselves were chosen as undetected carriers of interactions between elementary particles. For this purpose, elementary particles are attributed the possibility of temporary existence in a virtual state, in violation of the law of conservation of energy. Well, since the existence of virtual particles is short-lived, it was taken on faith, without proof. The era of manipulation of the laws of nature has begun.

Proposed in 1964, the quark model (later the Standard Model of elementary particles), operating within the framework of quantum theory, states that elementary particles (participating in hypothetical strong interactions) have a complex structure and consist of hypothetical quarks. To provide a mathematical basis for the quark hypothesis, unitary symmetry was invented. But quarks could not be detected in nature, at any energy (every time we were given supposed traces of them). Then quantum theory had to come up with a mechanism to prevent the appearance of quarks in free form. To do this, the supposed carriers of the hypothetical strong interaction, also not found in nature (gluons), were endowed with unique properties - the ability to create similar ones when moving (confinement). It is clear that the law of conservation of energy was once again ignored. Thus, a “scientific” justification for the non-observability of quarks in nature was invented, and this was taken for granted.

Despite the apparent success of the Standard Model of elementary particles and quantum theory, work on the field theory of elementary particles has never stopped. Progress in this direction of physics began in the mid-70s of the last century, when I made an attempt to combine the classics with the part of quantum mechanics that does not contradict it. Thus, the introduction of quantum numbers made it possible to obtain the correct spectrum of the ground states of elementary particles (which included the photon, leptons without the tau lepton, mesons, baryons, vector mesons). The promise of this area of ​​physics became visible. Further work, which took place simultaneously with the development of computing technology and the advent of computers (which make it possible to calculate the interactions of not only electric but also magnetic fields) led to a significant advance in the field theory of elementary particles.

At the moment, the field theory of elementary particles describes the entire spectrum of elementary particles, in which naturally there can be no place for fictional quarks, gluons, gravitons, gravitinos, and even the Higgs boson (but this mathematical fairy tale is a separate topic). In addition, field theory explained how electric charge elementary particles and why it is quantized, how constants arise magnetic fields elementary particles and what nuclear forces actually are. But the most important result of the field theory of elementary particles is that again all the laws of nature apply, including the unloved quantum theory and its gauge bosons is the law of conservation of energy. Of course, field theory has not been able to find answers to all questions - but this is largely a matter of time, and new questions will arise - it happened with other theories, and it will be so with this one.

The result of the field theory of elementary particles is the emergence of a scientific picture of the microworld, and it will determine the development of physics as a science in the coming decades.

Let's summarize what has been said:

• 1. Quantum theory, together with the Standard Model, states that each elementary particle participating in the hypothetical strong interaction (called a hadron by quantum theory) consists of quarks - but quarks (as well as gluons) have not been detected in accelerators or in nature at all what energies, and the exchange of virtual particles contradicts the laws of nature.
• 2. Field theory states that elementary particles (with a quantum number L > 0, the existence of which for elementary particles is established by field theory) consist of a rotating polarized alternating electromagnetic field with a constant component. Such elementary particles must have:
• constant electric field,
• constant magnetic field,
• wave alternating electromagnetic field.

The presence of these fields in elementary particles with a non-zero rest mass, as well as a gravitational field (created by the electromagnetic fields of elementary particles), has been confirmed experimentally by physics for a number of elementary particles.

We encounter electromagnetic fields, both constant and variable, at every step. According to field theory, the number of elementary particles is infinite, and each elementary particle (with quantum number L > 0) has an infinite number of excited states. Well, elementary particles have wave properties precisely due to the presence of an alternating electromagnetic field. This is how the microworld appears from the point of view of the field theory of elementary particles.

Elementary particle with quantum number L > 0 in field theory

The structure of the proton in field theory: the cross section of its electromagnetic fields. Where E are the vectors that create a constant electric field, H are the vectors that create a constant magnetic field, and yellow the region of alternating electromagnetic field is indicated.

As we see, the field theory of elementary particles describes all elementary particles and explains their structure based on electromagnetic fields that actually exist in nature. Thus, the idea of ​​my great predecessors is confirmed.

Today, physics is changing rapidly, despite the monopoly on “truth” established by the Standard Model and the media that call themselves scientific, but in reality just make money from science. Therefore, you should not blindly believe everything that is printed and distributed in them. mass media. The stream of mathematical fairy tales that swept physics in the second half of the 20th century, and posing as the highest achievement of science, is in reality an imitation of science: a set of beautiful pictures drawn on a computer and abstruse theoretical constructions that do not correspond to reality. A genuine theory must strictly operate within the laws of nature, or prove them wrong - and not manipulate them.

WITH point of view of quantum theory all elementary particles are divided into two classes:

• fermions- elementary particles with half-integer spin;
• bosons- elementary particles with integer spin.

Quantum theory introduces the following (from its point of view existing) fundamental interactions:

At the same time, in addition to the hypothetical strong interaction and weak interaction, quantum theory introduces a special electromagnetic interaction, instead of the electromagnetic interactions that actually exist in nature (discarding the interactions of the magnetic fields of elementary particles that did not fit into quantum theory).

According to the types of fundamental interactions introduced to it Quantum theory divides elementary particles into the following groups:

• hadrons- elementary particles participating in all types of fundamental interactions (postulated by quantum theory), both really existing in nature and fictitious;
• leptons- fermions participating in electromagnetic and hypothetical weak interaction (quantum theory);
• gauge bosons- photon, intermediate vector bosons and supposed carriers of interactions (within the assumptions of quantum theory).

Here are indicated the supposed quantum theory and the Standard Model, but not found in nature: quarks, gluons, graviton, Higgs boson (under the guise of the allegedly found Higgs boson, they slip us a newly discovered elementary particle: the vector meson), but mesons and baryons are not indicated, since quantum the theory does not consider these elementary particles to be truly elementary. In addition, quantum theory classified some vector mesons as elementary particles because it believes that they are carriers of the weak interaction (postulated by quantum theory) - these are W- and Z-bosons. Quantum theory does not consider the remaining vector mesons to be elementary particles.

According to the field theory of elementary particles, all elementary particles are divided into groups according to the (established by it) quantum number L, which underlies the spin. From the infinite set of possible spin values, only zero (L=1) can be distinguished, since for this group of elementary particles (mesons) it is impossible to distinguish a neutral particle from an antiparticle.

All elementary particles are divided into the following main groups:

• photon
• leptons
• mesons
• baryons
• vector mesons

Moreover, the number of baryons and vector mesons in the ground state in nature is infinite. This classification breaks down elementary particles according to quantum number L.

Elementary particles: fragment of the spectrum of ground states (according to field theory).

Elementary particles: fragment of the spectrum of ground states and excited states (according to field theory)

There are no weak interactions (postulated by quantum theory) in nature, and the degree of participation of elementary particles in nuclear forces (actually existing in nature) is determined by the quantum number L (see Structure of elementary particles) and the energy concentrated in a constant magnetic field. With an increase in the quantum number L, the percentage of energy concentrated in a constant magnetic field of elementary particles and the value of the rest mass increase - therefore, the degree of participation of the particle in nuclear (“strong”) interactions also increases. So, of the “four” types of fundamental interactions (assumed by quantum theory), only two- electromagnetic and gravitational, as well as the corresponding physical fields.

At the same time, electromagnetic interactions differ from the electromagnetic interaction taken into account by quantum theory - electromagnetic interactions take into account the interactions of not only electric, but also magnetic fields (the existence of which quantum theory “forgot”).

• There is only one systematization of elementary particles and their excited states, which follows from the field theory of elementary particles.
• Quantum theory, by introducing quantum numbers that do not exist in nature (isotopic spin, strangeness...), managed to systematize only part of the elementary particles.

Main article: Field theory of elementary particles

In accordance with classical electrodynamics and Einstein’s formula, as well as the field theory of elementary particles, the rest mass of an elementary particle is defined as the equivalent of the energy of its electromagnetic fields:

Where definite integral is taken over the entire self-electromagnetic field of an elementary particle, E is the intensity electric field, H - magnetic field strength. All components of the own electromagnetic field are taken into account here: constant electric field, constant magnetic field, alternating electromagnetic field. This is consistent with the fundamental interactions that actually exist in nature. No fabulous Higgs boson creates the rest mass of elementary particles, and cannot create it, since it does not create their electromagnetic fields.

By placing an elementary particle in an external electric or magnetic field (for example, a proton or neutron in an atomic nucleus), we change the energy value of the electromagnetic fields of the elementary particle, and therefore the value of its mass. Thus: the mass of an elementary particle, its average lifetime (including decay channels) depend on the electromagnetic fields in which the particle is located, and not only on the magnitude of its speed of movement (as follows from SRT).

Main article: Field theory of elementary particles

The field theory of elementary particles introduces the definition of the field radius of an elementary particle (r 0~), as the average distance from the center of an elementary particle (with quantum number L > 0), at which an alternating electromagnetic field rotates:

L is the principal quantum number of an elementary particle;
ħ - Planck's constant;
m 0~ - mass contained in the alternating electromagnetic field of an elementary particle;
c is the speed of light.

The structure of the proton in field theory (cross section) (E-constant electric field, H-constant magnetic field, alternating electromagnetic field is marked in yellow).

Electron structure in field theory (cross section)

Structure of the neutron in field theory (cross section)

As can be seen from the presented figures, electric fields of elementary particles - dipole.

In the pictures, an electron looks smaller than a proton, but in reality the field radius of an electron is 600 times larger than a proton (and neutron), therefore, an electron cannot fall onto an atomic nucleus - the linear dimensions of an electron exceed the linear dimensions of any atomic nucleus(even the hardest ones). The electron is not present inside the neutron, but is created by the electromagnetic field during the decay of the neutron, naturally together with an electron antineutrino, which has an even larger size (than the electron).

Only part of the rest mass of an elementary particle is concentrated in m 0~:

M 0 - rest mass of an elementary particle.
m 0= - mass contained in a constant electric and constant magnetic field of an elementary particle.

The radius of the region of space occupied by an elementary particle is defined as:

The radius of the annular region occupied by the alternating electromagnetic field of the elementary particle was added to the value of r 0~. It must be remembered that part of the value of the rest mass concentrated in the constant (electric and magnetic) fields of an elementary particle is located outside this region, in accordance with the laws of electrodynamics.

Main article: Field theory of elementary particles

According to the field theory of elementary particles, elementary particles with a quantum number L > 0 can also be in an excited state, which differs from the main one by the presence of an additional torque (V). Physics has already experimentally discovered many such states in elementary particles. Examples are shown in the figures:

pi meson subgroup

proton subgroup

Main article: Theory of particle gravity

The theory of gravity of elementary particles, which appeared in 2015, established the presence of an electromagnetic form of gravity in nature. At the same time, it is necessary to clearly understand: in nature there is not a gravitational field of matter, but gravitational fields of the elementary particles of which this matter consists. This is a superposition of vector fields, and they are added according to the rules for adding vectors at each point in space (and not as scalar quantities, followed by multiplication by a unit vector, for reasons of symmetry).

Since the gravitational fields of a substance are created by the electromagnetic fields of the elementary particles of which this substance consists, the question arose about the nature of the inertial properties of the substance.

In equation 137 of the theory of gravity of elementary particles, it was established that the kinetic energy of the electromagnetic field of an elementary particle is equal to the kinetic energy of its inertial mass.

It follows: the electric and magnetic components of the electromagnetic field of an elementary particle create the inertial properties of the field matter that makes up the substance of the Universe.

Thus, the theory of gravity of elementary particles proved that the gravitational fields of matter and the inertial properties of matter are created by the electromagnetic fields of the elementary particles of which this matter consists. - PHYSICS of the 21st century has refuted the mathematical FAIRY TALE about the “Higgs boson”.

The elementary particles that make up the matter of the Universe are a form of electromagnetic field matter and this form of matter does not require any fabulous “Higgs boson” along with its fabulous interactions invented by the Standard Model and quantum theory. Of course, you can invent a new form of matter, but it will be a new mathematical FAIRY TALE.

This article was originally written by me for the Wikiknowledge site, but was removed from this site for the reason: “vandalism.” Here I give full text deleted article without changes so that you can form your own opinion.

Main article: Theory of particle gravity

The information in this block of the article is reliable until it has been vandalized.

Since the matter of the Universe is a source of gravity, and at the same time the matter consists of elementary particles, it follows that the sources of gravity are the elementary particles themselves. Studying elementary particles, physics has experimentally established the presence of the following electromagnetic fields in elementary particles with a non-zero rest mass:

• constant electric field,
• constant magnetic field,
• wave alternating electromagnetic field.

The gravitational field of elementary particles is created by their electromagnetic fields, in accordance with classical electrodynamics and Einstein's formula.

These are all obvious things that follow from Classical electrodynamics - a SCIENCE created by the works of the greatest physicists of the past and the famous formula of Einstein. Any physics student who knows classical electrodynamics can verify the reliability of this formula by repeating its derivation in the Gaussian system of units adopted in classical electrodynamics. The theory of gravity of elementary particles is an alternative to the Quantum theory of gravity, the construction of which has been promised to us for decades.

Notations from the field theory of elementary particles are introduced:

To simplify mathematical expressions, a free stationary elementary particle is located in the (X,Y) plane with the center coinciding with the origin. Z is equal to the height above the plane of the elementary particle.

The gravitational field strength of an elementary particle in the outer region (outside the annular region of the elementary particle):

The strength of the symmetrical component of the gravitational field created by the annular region of an elementary particle in the outer zone (outside the annular region):

In the theory of gravity of elementary particles, naturally, there was no place for gravitons, gravitinos and, of course, the fabulous “Higgs boson”, for which they are trying to pass off as an ordinary vector meson with persistence worthy of better use. The prevailing opinion in physics that: “gravity and magnetism of any elementary particle begins with the Planck value, where any carriers of gravity or magnetism are completely excluded” is consistent with the Theory of Gravity of Elementary Particles only in the second part: carriers of gravity are completely excluded in nature.

It follows from the equations that the gravitational field of a free elementary particle at rest carries information about the rest mass of the particle, its location in space, spin orientation, and also its field radius (r 0~). Obtained by the theory of gravity of elementary particles, the equations of gravitational field strength can be reduced to generally accepted ones, assuming in them that the field radius of an elementary particle (r 0~) is equal to zero, which cannot be in nature - point sources of gravity are a product of mathematical fairy tales.

The theory of gravity of elementary particles has proven the validity of the postulate of the General Theory of Relativity (GR) about the identity of gravitational and inertial masses. In relation to the elementary particles that make up the matter of the Universe, gravitational and inertial masses are equal in magnitude and are created by the electromagnetic fields of elementary particles. The limiting case for the theory of gravity of elementary particles in the macrocosm is Newton's law of universal gravitation, consistent with the data of general relativity for the real values ​​of the intensities of gravitational fields created by elementary particles of matter in the Universe (proton, neutron, electron, ...).

In conclusion, I will add the definition of “vandalism” from the world Wikipedia: Vandalism is one of the forms of destructive (destructive) deviant behavior of a person, during which objects of art and culture are destroyed or desecrated, “Larousse” draws attention to the fact that “Vandalism is a state of mind, forcing the destruction of beautiful things, in particular works of art.”
English sources draw attention to the legal aspect of vandalism: “Vandalism is the deliberate destruction or damage of private or public property”

I write what corresponds to my KNOWLEDGE OF PHYSICS - that is, the TRUTH. If my knowledge, acquired by me from my teachers and independently from SCIENTIFIC literature and the Internet, does not correspond to reality, this must be PROVED. I will not accept FAIRY TALES on FAITH, no matter how big names and scientific degrees are behind them. I am a PHYSICIST, and the criterion of truth for me is EXPERIMENT.

Usually I don’t spend time on links and detailed explanations for those who do not have knowledge of PHYSICS and higher mathematics as part of the program of the physics department of a university - it is already sorely lacking. This time, I will make an exception and explain in great detail how and from what I obtained the equations for the gravitational field of elementary particles. To those who have the relevant knowledge, I apologize for the "excessive" detail. Let's get started.

By studying the structure of the substance of our planet and the closest star to us - the Sun, physics and chemistry have established that this substance consists of atoms. In addition, physics in the 20th century established that an atom consists of a nucleus and electrons rotating around it. Having discovered the presence of elementary particles of the proton and neutron in nature, physics has established that atomic nuclei are made up of them, and that these nuclei contain more than 99.9% of the mass of the entire atom, which creates its gravitational field. (The figure is easily obtained by those who know elementary mathematics by comparing the mass of an electron with the elementary particles that create the nucleus of an atom.) The initial data can be taken from any REFERENCE BOOK on physics. I am used to using the reference book: “Tables of physical quantities, reference book, edited by I.K. Kikoin, Atomizdat, Moscow (1976)”, created in an era when physics was still a SCIENCE. You can take the most modern and most accurate data on measuring the values ​​of the rest masses of the elementary particles that make up the atom from the world Wikipedia in the articles “proton”, “neutron”, “electron”. It FOLLOWS that the gravitational field of an atom, more than 99.9%, is created by the elementary particles of its atomic nucleus (protons and neutrons), and all theories of gravity that attribute a different origin to the gravitational field of matter CONTRADE to the experimental DATA of PHYSICS of the 20th century. But only the supporters of these “theories” do not want to take into account the VERDICT OF NATURE and are fighting against the data of PHYSICS, palming off their ideas as the highest “achievement” of science - which is actually a SCAM in physics.

An atom of a substance is not a ball with mass m, but has a certain structure that determines the pattern of the gravitational field created by the atom. The picture of the gravitational field of an atom of matter, more than 99.9%, is determined by the structure of the atomic nucleus and the structure of the elementary particles included in its composition: the structure of the proton and neutron.

To derive the basic equation underlying the Theory of Gravity of Elementary Particles, we will use the results of the works of the greatest physicists of the past: Newton, Maxwell, Ampere, Faraday, Einstein - we will use Newton’s law of universal gravitation, the equations of Classical Electrodynamics (a genuine scientific theory) and Einstein’s formula (as I I think greatest discovery, which allowed me to build the Field Theory of Elementary Particles and the Theory of Gravity of Elementary Particles). I attribute Quantum electrodynamics, developed in the 20th century, not to the achievements of SCIENCE - but to games of the MIND. You can come up with any super-fashionable theoretical construction, and then pass it off as the highest achievement of “science” - but the Universe doesn’t care at all, literary creativity of people. In the twentieth century, especially the second half, many similar theoretical constructions were invented within the framework of UNPROVED statements of quantum “physics”.

Let us remember what physics of the 20th century learned about the proton, neutron and their electromagnetic fields (the most recent information can be found in the articles “proton” and “neutron” on the world Wikipedia).

• The proton has a constant electric field, in the far zone, corresponding to the field of the elementary electric charge +e.
• Despite the fact that the total electric charge of a neutron is zero, the neutron has a dipole electric field created by dipole electric charges, according to the Standard Model +2e/3 and -2e/3, and according to the Field Theory of Elementary Particles +0.75e and -0, 75e. There is a slight discrepancy in the values ​​of dipole electric charges, which is understandable, because only one of the theories is scientific.
• The proton has a constant magnetic field. The magnitude of the magnetic moment of the proton was measured by physics with a high degree of accuracy, only it turned out to be ANOMAL for the Quantum “theory” and expected for the Field Theory of elementary particles.
• The neutron also has a constant magnetic field. The magnitude of the magnetic moment of the neutron was measured by physics with a high degree of accuracy, only it also turned out to be ANOMAL for the Quantum “theory” and expected for the Field Theory of elementary particles.
• Even the physics of the 20th century established that the proton and neutron have wave properties created by a wave alternating electromagnetic field. The existence of a wave alternating electromagnetic field inside these elementary particles does not contradict the data of the Standard Model. If we sum up the masses of the hypothetical quarks from which the proton and neutron supposedly consist, it turns out that more than 90% of the mass of the proton and neutron is NOT of a quark nature, which is consistent with the data of the Field Theory of elementary particles. The remaining less than 10% of the mass of the proton and neutron is called by the Standard Model “Quarks”, which create constant electromagnetic fields of elementary particles, and the Field Theory of elementary particles simply calls constant electromagnetic fields, without connection with the fabulous quarks, which have NOT been discovered in nature.
• The proton has not just a constant electric field - but a constant dipole electric field created by electric charges of the opposite sign, according to the Standard Model +4e/3 and -e/3, and according to the Field Theory of elementary particles +1.25e and -0.25e. There is a slight discrepancy in the values ​​of electric charges, which is understandable, because only one of the theories is scientific, but the second is a very high-quality fit to reality.

Further calculations will be carried out using elements of higher mathematics (those who do not know will have to understand differentials and integrals) in the absolute physical system of units CGS (centimeter-gram-second), which contributes to the understanding of physics. It doesn’t bother me at all that today this system of units is considered “OBSOLETE” - the laws of nature are NOT “obsolete”, but ALWAYS work, and if something works selectively (like fabulous interactions within the Standard Model), then this is NOT a law of nature, but mathematical TALE.

According to the Scientific data of Classical electrodynamics, the energy contained in the electric field (strength E) is equal to:

and the energy contained in the magnetic field (with intensity H, taking into account that in a vacuum: B=H):

Let us introduce the density of electromagnetic energy - the ratio of the magnitude of the energy of the electromagnetic field contained in a small volume of space to the magnitude of the volume of this space. Then for the sum of the electric and magnetic fields (both constant fields and alternating fields) we will have:

It is taken into account here that in a vacuum: D=E and B=H.

If the last equation is written in the modern international system of units SI, we get:

I hope you can clearly see the difference between this equation and the previous one - between “modern” and Scientific. - The International System of Units SI introduces additional difficulties in understanding physics, and physics of the 20th century has reached a quantum DEAD-LOCK.

Now, using Einstein’s formula, we obtain the density of the electromagnetic mass of an elementary particle:

Knowing the mass density, we can calculate the value of the mass of a small volume dv:

But according to the law of universal gravitation (or Newton’s Classical Theory of Gravity), this mass creates a gravitational field in the surrounding space with the intensity:

where G is the gravitational constant. Taking the integral over the entire space of an elementary particle, we obtain the equation for the strength of the gravitational field created by an elementary particle, which underlies the Theory of Gravity of Elementary Particles that I developed:

The gravity equation can be written in a more familiar form:

One feature of physics came to light here. Since force is a vector quantity, it must be integrated according to the rules for adding vectors at each point. Replacing a vector sum with its scalar equivalent will produce an error, especially in the near field. Considerations of symmetry should not replace the laws of nature.

And then, knowing the structure of an elementary particle, which is NOT a secret to me, and having mastered the mathematical apparatus, it is not difficult to obtain the remaining mathematical expressions for the gravitational field of an elementary particle. All this is described in detail in the first part of the Theory of Gravity of Elementary Particles.

The limiting values ​​of the gravitational field strength (G m) created by a stationary elementary particle for a proton, neutron, electron and electron neutrino are presented in the table. As you can see, with such real values ​​of the gravitational field strength, the effects of general relativity cannot be observed.

I showed what and how I obtained, based on the knowledge gained by physics and my own modest knowledge of the microworld. Any physics student with relevant knowledge (knowledge of Classical electrodynamics, Classical theory gravity, Einstein's formula and masters mathematical analysis) can easily deduce the equation of gravity of elementary particles and thereby verify the reliability of the equation presented above. A scientific physicist who also has the appropriate knowledge should be able to easily cope with this task. As for physicists who do not have such knowledge, the question arises about the quality of the higher physics education they received. But to be a scientist and fight science is impossible in a normal situation, but if this happens, it means that a NEW THEORY was born, which rejected part of the previous “knowledge” as ERRORAL and there is a struggle for the further development of SCIENCE. It is understandable that supporters of outdated theoretical constructs want their own beliefs to be perceived under the guise of scientific data - therefore, any information that contradicts them is deleted. The article in section 7.1 was removed from the Wikiknowledge website by an opponent of New Physics with the tacit consent of the site administrators, without evidence of its error. After I restored it as reliable information, I received a block on the Wikiknowledge website with a final warning and an accusation of vandalism. Thus, it is allowed to write only what does not go beyond the BELIEFS of Quantum “theory” - but then what does this site have to do with genuine SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE if it is mercilessly deleted. Why is it necessary to prove the presence of electromagnetism in nature to those who have a cell phone in their pocket, have a computer at home or at work, and heat food in a microwave, which cannot work without electromagnetic fields? - They just don’t want to hear what doesn’t suit them, and as a result, the SCAM in physics continues. As for the world's Wikipedia, it has long declared me a personal enemy - I'm disturbing them... .

Here is a list of “theories of gravity” from the world’s Wikipedia. It is not difficult to count how many of them have been invented, but there is only one place for a theory that truly corresponds to nature, and why it must necessarily be occupied by one of the theories on the list.

During medieval obscurantism, scientists were burned at the stake so as not to infect humanity with the infection of scientific knowledge. Today, SCIENCE is fought in a modern way, using gagging and blocking. And to the proposal to supporters of the Standard Model to look at the world from the standpoint of Classical electrodynamics and physics, you hear a short answer: “I don’t understand,” as if Maxwell and Faraday did not exist in the history of physics.

When SCIENCE is silenced, its place is easily taken by all sorts of FAIRY TALES that imitate SCIENCE. And then on TV channels with the Sciense prefix, programs appear promoting pseudoscientific tales about the big bang, quarks, gluons, the Higgs boson, dark matter, dark energy, gravitons, antigravity... in which little is left of the genuine Sciense. When at the beginning of the 20th century, supporters of Classical physics warned about the consequences of abandoning Evidence-based physics, they did not want to hear them, in the wake of euphoria from discoveries. But, as they warned, simultaneously with genuine scientific data, a stream of abstract theoretical constructions poured into physics, studying something of their own and posing as the highest achievement of science. Today, for those who do not know Classical electrodynamics, it is difficult to distinguish genuine scientific knowledge from the huge amount of pseudoscientific rubbish that imitates science, and publications that make money on science will not help here (mathematical TALES have penetrated into them, under the guise of modern “achievements”). Mathematical tales of the 20th century have already penetrated even school physics textbooks and are deceiving children.. But no matter what the authors of FAIRY TALES write, for example, about the Higgs boson, an elementary particle passed off as the Higgs boson cannot create mass in the Universe, much less destroy the Universe, which is what the Theory of Gravity of Elementary Particles has PROVED. At one time, Einstein called similar tales nonsense (he did not live to see the creation of the mathematical tale by Higgs and was not able to appreciate it), but today this is considered the highest achievement of science and was even awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics. - What is happening in physics today reminds me of the fairy tale about the Naked King. By making WRONG decisions, the Nobel Physics Committee was NOT acting in the best interests of Physics. At one time, Alfred Nobel forbade giving the Nobel Prize to mathematicians; at that time he could not yet guess about the harm that mathematical TALES would bring to physics of the 20th century. But in the 20th century, a way was found to circumvent this ban of Alfred Nobel, and PHYSICS prizes began to be awarded for mathematical TALES, presented as the highest achievements of science, but in reality products of the imagination of their authors and supporters. As a result, instead of developing, physics has reached a quantum dead end. Thus, the road leading to today's REALITY was paved with good intentions to “eliminate injustice” towards mathematicians. Maybe we’ll award Nobel Prizes for the “multiplicity of Universes”, for “wormholes”, or for the “subspace” in which they “move” spaceships Hollywood, thanks to the energy drawn from the vacuum. What difference does it make which FAIRY TALE is awarded? Nobel Prize in PHYSICS - the science of NATURE, but what will then be left of SCIENCE is probably what the supporters of Classical physics predicted at the beginning of the 20th century.

LITERATURE:

Formulas and are taken from E. Purcell, Electricity and Magnetism, Nauka, Moscow (1971). The formulas are taken from the world Wikipedia article “Electromagnetic Field Energy”. Einstein's formula is known to whom it is attributed. I hope the authorship of the law of universal gravitation is also known.

In physics of the second half of the twentieth century, many mathematical fairy tales appeared, passed off as achievements of science. Here are some mathematical tales related to elementary particles.

Main article: Standard Model

In 1964, Gellmann and Zweig independently proposed a hypothesis for the existence of quarks, from which, in their opinion, hadrons are composed. It was possible to correctly describe the spectrum of the then known elementary particles, but the invented quarks had to be endowed with a fractional electric charge that does not exist in nature. Leptons did not fit into this Quark model, which later grew into the Standard Model of elementary particles, at all - therefore they were recognized as truly elementary particles, on a par with the invented quarks. To explain the connection of quarks in hadrons (baryons, mesons), the existence in nature of strong interaction and its carriers, gluons, was assumed. Gluons, as expected in Quantum Theory, were endowed with unit spin, the identity of particle and antiparticle, and zero rest mass, like a photon. In reality, in nature there is not a strong interaction of hypothetical quarks, but nuclear forces of nucleons - and these are DIFFERENT concepts.

This is what the list of “elementary” particles looks like from the perspective of the Standard Model (picture taken from the world’s Wikipedia).

• out of 17 cubes, only FOUR remained in their places - this is less than 25 percent, and only because they did not immediately fit into the quark model and were forced to be recognized as elementary, on a par with fairy-tale quarks.
• Instead of gauge bosons - fabulous carriers of interactions (often fictional) that violate the laws of nature, within the framework of Quantum theory, there are simply vector mesons in nature (there is such a grouping of elementary particles with an integer spin different from zero), and more than ten of them have already been discovered, and Even more will be discovered: no fabulous interactions will be enough to attribute to them all the vector mesons, the number of which is INFINITY.
• As for the photon, the carrier of electromagnetic interactions of electromagnetic fields of elementary particles are these electromagnetic fields themselves, in full accordance with classical electrodynamics - SCIENCE.

50 years have passed. The fictional quarks were never found in nature and a new mathematical fairy tale was invented for us called “Confinement”. A thinking person can easily see in it an outright mockery of the fundamental law of nature - the law of conservation of energy. But this will be done by a thinking person, and the storytellers received an excuse that suited them as to why there are no free quarks in nature.

The introduced gluons were also NOT found in nature. The fact is that only vector mesons (and one more of the excited states of mesons) can have unit spin in nature, but each vector meson has an antiparticle. - Therefore, vector mesons are in no way suitable as candidates for “gluons”, and they cannot be attributed the role of carriers of the fictitious strong interaction. There remain the first nine excited states of mesons, but 2 of them contradict the Standard Model of elementary particles itself and the Standard Model does not recognize their existence in nature, and the rest have been well studied by physics, and it will not be possible to pass them off as fabulous gluons. There is one last option: passing off a bound state of a pair of leptons (muons or tau leptons) as a gluon - but even this can be calculated during decay.

So, there are no gluons in nature, just as there are no quarks and the fictitious strong interaction in nature. You think that supporters of the Standard Model of elementary particles do not understand this - they still do, but it’s sickening to admit the fallacy of what they have been doing for decades. That’s why we see more and more new mathematical pseudoscientific fairy tales, one of which is “string theory.”

Main article: Fundamental interactions

By studying nature, physics has experimentally established the presence of electromagnetic fields created by elementary particles and the interactions of these electromagnetic fields, as well as the presence of gravitational fields created by the electromagnetic fields of elementary particles and the interactions of these gravitational fields. All other types of interactions that actually exist in nature must be reduced to two types of fundamental interactions: electromagnetic interactions and gravitational interactions.

The statement that it is reliably known that there are four types of fundamental interactions is a deception: what is desired is presented as reality. In nature there are NO quarks, gluons and their fabulous strong interaction, but in nature there are nuclear forces, and these are different concepts. The presence of the fabulous weak interaction in nature has also not been proven. As for the fabulous electromagnetic interaction and electroweak interaction, this is the result of mathematical manipulations of the laws of nature.

Main article: Virtual particles

In particle physics, gauge bosons are bosons that act as carriers of the fundamental interactions of nature. More precisely, elementary particles whose interactions are described by gauge theory influence each other through the exchange of gauge bosons, usually as virtual particles. (quote from world Wikipedia)

But the reality is completely different. Vector mesons, which are slipped to us as gauge bosons of fictitious interactions, are ordinary elementary particles with integer spin, and their existence in a fabulous virtual state is prohibited by the laws of nature. Each vector meson necessarily has its own antiparticle, therefore elementary particles with unit spin and zero electric charge, which do not have antiparticles that could be passed off as gluons, cannot exist in nature. Knowing this information, science storytellers can rewrite their “theories” by removing from them the mandatory requirement of the absence of an antiparticle, but this still will not save mathematical fairy tales from inevitable bankruptcy.

Regarding the two fundamental interactions that actually exist in nature:

• electromagnetic interaction
• gravitational interaction

They don’t need fairy tale carriers.

Main article: Physics Misconceptions: String Theory

In the early 1970s, a new direction appeared in quantum theory: “string theory,” which studies the dynamics of interaction not of point particles, but of one-dimensional extended objects (quantum strings). An attempt was made to combine the ideas of quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity on the basis of the primacy of quantum theory. It was expected that on its basis, a theory of quantum gravity would be built.

A few quotes from Wikipedia: String theory is based on the hypothesis that all elementary particles and their fundamental interactions arise as a result of oscillations and interactions of ultramicroscopic quantum strings on scales on the order of the Planck length of 10 -35 m. This approach, on the one hand, avoids such difficulties of quantum field theory, as renormalization, and on the other hand, leads to a deeper look at the structure of matter and space-time.

Despite the mathematical rigor and integrity of the theory, options for experimental confirmation of string theory have not yet been found. Having arisen to describe hadron physics, but not quite suitable for this, the theory found itself in a kind of experimental vacuum for describing all interactions.

One of the main problems when trying to describe the procedure for reducing string theories from dimension 26 or 10 to low-energy physics in dimension 4 is large quantities options for compactification of additional dimensions onto Calabi-Yau manifolds and orbifolds, which are probably special limiting cases of Calabi-Yau spaces. The large number of possible solutions since the late 1970s and early 1980s has created a problem known as the "landscape problem", whereby, some scientists question whether string theory deserves scientific status.

And now some clarifications:

• Electromagnetic fields of elementary particles do not arise as a result of vibrations of ultramicroscopic quantum strings, and their interactions are not a product of the interaction of these strings.
• The main difficulty of quantum “theory” lies in the absence in nature of carriers, interactions invented by it, and virtual particles ignoring the fundamental law of nature - the law of conservation of energy. As for renormalization, its necessity alone indicates the fallacy of such a “theory”. They took and rewrote the result of the laws of nature - and this is passed off as science.
• There is no hadron physics in nature, since there are no hadrons in nature. In nature there are NO quarks with gluons, but there are simply elementary particles, and there are only two fundamental interactions.
• A space with a dimension of 26 or 10 - why not 25 or 11. By manipulating the dimension of space, you can build as many “theories” as you like, but FANTASTIC ones. And the introduction of multidimensional objects in string theories is certainly from the world of mathematical FAIRY TALES.
• Physics also has questions regarding theories of relativity: the special theory of relativity (SRT) does not work inside elementary particles, and the gravitational field for the general theory of relativity (GTR) does not create anything except fabulous “black holes” “created” by this same field and thereby contradicting the principle of causality. - Elementary particles create a superposition of vector gravitational fields, and not some abstract mathematical gravitational field for general relativity.
• Well, there is no need to build a quantum “theory of gravity” - a SCIENTIFIC THEORY OF GRAVITY OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES, of which the matter of the Universe is composed, has been developed. And there are NO gravitons in nature.
• The tachyons predicted by string “theories”—particles moving at speeds exceeding the speed of light in a vacuum and contradicting the principle of causality—exist only in such “theories” and even in the imagination of their authors and supporters.
• The multidimensionality of the Universe predicted by string “theories” contradicts experimental data. Physics has established the existence of three spatial dimensions, and Albert Einstein added to them in the special theory of relativity (which does not work everywhere) a fourth imaginary dimension - time. All other dimensions of the Universe are a product of the imagination of some “theorists” who place their desires above the laws of nature.

Proponents of string theory, comparing it to the Standard Model of elementary particles and advocating for string theory, claim that the Standard Model has 19 free parameters to fit experimental data, while string theory does not.

They're missing something. When the Standard Model of elementary particles was still called the quark model, it only needed 3 quarks. But as it developed, the Standard Model needed to increase the number of quarks to 6 (down, up, strange, charmed, lovely, true), and each hypothetical quark was also given three colors (r, g, b) - we get 6 × 3 =18 hypothetical particles. It was also necessary to add 8 gluons to them. – The model has grown to fit new experimental data. But the introduction of colors in fairy quarks turned out to be not enough, and some have already started talking about the complex structure of quarks. Other proponents of the Standard Model claim that quarks are a form of field matter.

A similar fate awaits the “theory” of strings. At first, its supporters tell mathematical tales, passing them off as the highest achievement of science, and the majority of humanity stupidly believes it. The new mathematical quantum fairy tale, passing it off as the last word in physics, is already being taught to students who naively believe that they are receiving “genuine knowledge.” Behind a new fairy tale will begin to receive “scientific” titles and Nobel Prizes in “physics,” as was already the case with the mathematical fairy tale about the “Higgs Boson.” The new quantum fairy tale will develop, grow, and parameters will be required to fit new experimental data. And when this mathematical fairy tale also reaches a dead end and BANKRUPTCY, they will compose a new fairy tale. But all that happened was the replacement of the old bankrupt quantum mathematical fairy tale, which can no longer control people’s minds, with a new similar fairy tale. – One CHIMERA was replaced by another CHIMERA. Humanity has received the “science” it deserves. But PHYSICS has NO NEED for this literary creativity.

Every student who has studied geometry and mechanics knows that the number of dimensions of space is three. Einstein added time to these as the fourth imaginary dimension within the framework of the special theory of relativity. The space around us has NO other dimensions. As for the space of the general theory of relativity, it exists only in the virtual world of this theory, just as the virtual space of the special theory of relativity can be used where this theory WORKS.

Adults with “scientific” degrees discover space has 3-9 times more dimensions than it actually has, probably having completely forgotten what they were taught at school. It turns out that for nature, space has one dimension, and for supporters of string theory, it has another, much larger dimension. They are like gods, that they can create their own space for their “theoretical” constructions. Well, if they are NOT gods, then they are simply STORIES from science, saving Quantum pseudo-theory from inevitable bankruptcy. The desire to stay in “science” with all our might is understandable, but maybe it would be more honest and reasonable to say goodbye to this collection of mathematical TALES, and send it to the archive of the history of the development of physics, as a past MISCONCEPTION, and sit down at your desk with the students and relearn the New PHYSICS , which is very disgusting. Remember the fairy tale about the naked king, and how it ended for the king - does modern reality remind you of anything?

Let's summarize: behind the clever words and super-complicated mathematics of "string theory" is hidden a pseudoscientific mathematical FAIRY TALE, built on a false foundation.

In physics of the 20th century, many mathematical fairy tales appeared, and with them fairy-tale characters. Some of the fairy-tale characters of physics were invented earlier and eventually found their way into 20th century physics. As long as these characters were considered as hypotheses, everything remained within the framework of science. After all, His Majesty the experiment, which is the criterion of truth in physics, can choose only one from many hypotheses, and maybe not even one. Well, when they started churning out “theories” en masse (for example, about thirty theories of gravity alone have already been invented), presenting their beliefs as truth, the science called PHYSICS ended.

Let's consider some fairy-tale characters of particle physics of the 20th century in alphabetical order of the Russian language - the language of Lomonosov and Mendeleev.

• Accelerons are hypothetical subatomic particles that integrally link the newly discovered neutrino mass with the dark energy proposed to accelerate the expansion of the Universe.
  Theoretically, neutrinos are affected by new power, arising as a result of their interaction with the accelerons. Dark energy causes the Universe to try to split neutrinos. (quote from world Wikipedia). - But there is NO fabulous “dark” energy in nature and physics has NOT established the presence of an “expansion” of the Universe.
• Aksino- a hypothetical neutral elementary particle with spin 1/2, predicted by some theories of particle physics. - Physicists do NOT have evidence of its existence.
• Higgs boson- an imaginary particle, a quantum of an imaginary Higgs field, necessarily arising in the Standard Model due to the imaginary Higgs mechanism of imaginary spontaneous violation of imaginary electroweak symmetry. And they are trying to sell all this IMAGINATION to us, without evidence, under the guise of “achievement of science.” Under the guise of the supposedly discovered Higgs boson, they are slipping us a vector meson - this is a SCAM.
• Virtual particles- In quantum field theory, a virtual particle is understood as some abstract object that has the quantum numbers of one of the really existing elementary particles, for which the connection between energy and momentum does not hold. - This fictional object contradicts: the law of conservation of energy, the law of conservation of momentum, classical electrodynamics, field theory of elementary particles. Virtual particles are a mathematical FAIRY TALE.
• Gaigino- hypothetical particles predicted by the theory of gauge invariance and the theory of supersymmetry, fabulous superpartners of gauge bosons that do not exist in nature.
• Geon- electromagnetic or gravitational wave, which is held in a limited area by the gravitational attraction of the energy of its own field. - Another fairy tale about black holes, in relation to the microcosm.
• Gluons- fictional carriers of fictional strong interaction.
• Graviton and gravitino- fictional carriers of gravitational interaction within the framework of unproven statements of quantum theory. Graviton and gravitino contradict the theory of gravity of elementary particles.
• Dilaton- In theoretical physics, the dilaton is usually related to a theoretical scalar field - just as a photon is related to an electromagnetic field. Also in string theory, a dilaton is a particle of a scalar field ϕ - a scalar field that logically follows from the Klein-Gordon equation and always appears along with gravity. - Existence in nature has NOT been proven.
• Perfume- fictitious fields and the corresponding particles introduced into gauge field theories in order to reduce contributions from non-physical timelike and longitudinal states of gauge bosons. In non-Abelian gauge theories with physical applications such as quantum chromodynamics, spirits are needed to resolve inconsistencies in the application of perturbation theory. (A small piece from Wikipedia) - You can invent anything, but physicists do NOT have evidence of its existence.
• Isotopic spin- isotopic spin (isospin) is understood as a quantum number that determines the number of charge states of hadrons. - The field theory of elementary particles systematizes elementary particles not by the proximity of their rest masses - but by quantum numbers. It looks like isotopic spin, but it's NOT.
• Gauge bosons- these are bosons, which, within the framework of quantum theory, are attributed the ability to be carriers of fundamental interactions (mainly invented by quantum theory). - But the fundamental interactions that really exist in nature do NOT need any fairy-tale carriers.
• Quantum strings- in string theory, infinitely thin one-dimensional objects 10 −35 m long, the vibrations of which produce the entire variety of elementary particles. - Another mathematical fairy tale. Elementary particles of matter have a different structure.
• Quarks- hypothetical elementary particles in quantum chromodynamics, considered as a component of hadrons. Supposed to exist 6 different types quarks, to distinguish which the concept of “flavor” is introduced. Physics has not yet established the presence of quarks in nature - we are always fed fairy tales with supposedly observed traces of quarks.
• Leptoquarks- this is a group of hypothetical particles that transfer information between quarks and leptons of a certain generation, due to the exchange of which quarks and leptons can interact and transform into each other. Leptoquarks are a color triplet of gauge bosons carrying both leptonic and baryon charges. (quote from Wikipedia) - There is no limit to the riot of imagination in creating another pseudo “theory”.
• Magnetic monopole- a hypothetical elementary particle with a non-zero magnetic charge - a point source of a radial magnetic field. It is argued that a magnetic charge is a source of a static magnetic field in exactly the same way as an electric charge is a source of a static electric field. - It is NOT found in nature, and constant magnetic fields of elementary particles are created differently.
• Maximon (or plankeon)- a hypothetical particle whose mass is equal (perhaps, up to a dimensionless coefficient of the order of unity) to the Planck mass - presumably the maximum possible mass in the mass spectrum of elementary particles. - Physics does NOT have evidence of its existence in nature.
• Minimon- a hypothetical particle with the minimum possible mass (as opposed to the maximon), not equal to 0. - Such an elementary particle that actually exists in nature is the electron neutrino, and there is no need to make up fairy tales and pass them off as achievements of science.
• Neutralino is one of the hypothetical particles predicted by theories involving supersymmetry. - Those are just “theories” from the world of mathematical fairy tales, like supersymmetry.
• Parton- a point-like component of hadrons, manifested in experiments on deeply inelastic scattering of hadrons on leptons and other hadrons. - In physics, this is called the antinodes of standing waves of the alternating electromagnetic field of elementary particles. Their number coincides with the number of fairy quarks in the hadron.
• Planck particle is a hypothetical elementary particle defined as a black hole whose Compton wavelength coincides with the Schwarzschild radius. - The theory of gravity of elementary particles has shown the scientific inconsistency of mathematical fairy tales about “black holes,” especially in the microcosm.
• Preons- these are hypothetical fundamental particles, which allegedly make up the fundamental particles of the Standard Model (quarks with leptons). - But there are NO quarks in nature, and leptons (which do not fit into the quark model, and for this reason are recognized as elementary along with quarks) do NOT require fairy-tale bricks.
• Saxion- another fabulous “super partner”. - The spectrum of elementary particles is determined by a set of quantum numbers, determined simultaneously by quantum mechanics and classical electrodynamics, in which there is no place for any “superpartners”.
• Weak interaction- one of the hypothetical fundamental interactions postulated by quantum theory. It is assumed that the weak interaction is much weaker than the strong and electromagnetic interactions, but much stronger than the gravitational interaction. In the 80s of the 20th century, it was argued that the weak and electromagnetic interactions are different manifestations of the electroweak interaction. - Physics still does not have evidence of the existence of the Weak Interaction in nature. And the fact that vector mesons that actually exist in nature are being palmed off to us as carriers of the fictitious weak interaction is a SCAM.
• Strong interaction- Fictional interaction of fictional quarks within the framework of unproven statements of the Standard Model. In nature, there is not strong interaction, but nuclear forces, and these are different concepts.
• Sterile neutrinos- another TALE. In nature, there are types of neutrinos in exact accordance with the spectrum of elementary particles.
• Weirdness- By strangeness S we mean the quantum number of elementary particles, introduced to describe their certain properties. Strangeness was introduced to explain the fact that some elementary particles are always born in pairs, and also to explain the anomalously long lifetime of some elementary particles. - The field theory of elementary particles does not find such a quantum number for elementary particles - they simply do not need it.
• Sphermions- a hypothetical spin-0 superpartner particle (or sparticle) of its associated fermion. Sfermions are bosons (scalar bosons) and have the same quantum numbers. They may be a product of the decay of the fabulous Higgs boson. - The spectrum of elementary particles is completely determined by a set of quantum numbers. These quantum numbers are possessed by the alternating electromagnetic fields of elementary particles, and independent sets of quantum numbers exist only in mathematical fairy tales.
• Techniquarks are the hypothetical fundamental particles that supposedly make up the Higgs boson. - But in nature there is not a Higgs boson, but an ordinary vector meson, which they are trying to blow into us as a Higgs boson.
• Friedmon- a hypothetical particle, the external mass and dimensions of which are small, but the internal dimensions and mass can exceed the external ones many times due to the effects of space curvature in the general theory of relativity. - Gravitational fields of the general theory of relativity are NOT created by elementary particles.
• Chameleon- a hypothetical elementary particle, a scalar boson with nonlinear self-action, which makes the effective mass of the particle dependent on the environment. Such a particle can have a small mass in intergalactic space and a large mass in experiments on Earth. Chameleon is a possible carrier of dark energy and an integral part of dark matter, a possible reason for the acceleration of the expansion of the Universe. (quote from Wikipedia) - The rest mass of an elementary particle depends on external electromagnetic fields, and the rest is complete FAIRY TALES.
• Higgsino- the fabulous superpartner of the fabulous Higgs boson.
• Chargino- in particle physics, a hypothetical particle that refers to the eigenstate of a charged superpartner, that is, an electrically charged fermion (with spin 1/2), recently predicted by supersymmetry. It is a linear combination of the charged wine and higgsino. (quote from Wikipedia) - You can invent anything that comes to mind, but there is ZERO evidence.
• Parity- the property of a physical quantity to retain its sign (or change to the opposite) under certain discrete transformations. Parity is most important in quantum physics, where it is one of the main characteristics of the wave function. Accordingly, the concept of parity is transferred to the particle (atom, nucleus) that is characterized by this wave function. Quote from Wikipedia) - But the quantum “theory” was a lie, and wave (quantum) mechanics is responsible only for part of what happens inside elementary particles, so some of its statements require additional confirmation outside the framework of quantum mechanics.
• Electromagnetic interaction- a fictitious interaction within the framework of mathematical manipulations of quantum "theory", in an attempt to create quantum electrodynamics. - In fact, in nature there are interactions of electromagnetic fields of elementary particles, described by Classical electrodynamics - SCIENCE.
• Electroweak interaction- In quantum theory, the electroweak force is a general description of two of the four supposed fundamental forces: the electromagnetic force and the weak force postulated by quantum theory. - In nature there is neither weak interaction nor electromagnetic interaction, but there are electromagnetic fields and their interactions, described by Classical electrodynamics.
• Electroweak bosons- fictitious carriers of the fictitious electroweak interaction, in the quality of which they are trying to inject us with some vector mesons with a unit spin.

Do you see what a rich imagination those who engage in science have? but in nature this is NOT the case. In the twentieth century, great hopes were placed on Quantum Theory and the Standard Model; they were considered almost the highest achievement of science - but as it turned out, nature works differently, and from now on there is a place for these fairy-tale characters in the archive of the history of the development of physics, in the section called “Misconceptions” in physics", along with a charming company of caloric and electric fluid.

Proponents of quantum theory are confident that scattering experiments show traces of quarks in the proton. - But this is one of the possible explanations and not the only one

Let's take the number of hypothetical quarks in a hadron (as stated by quantum theory) and divide it by two - we get the main quantum number (L) of elementary particles in field theory. Isn't it interesting, but this is not a coincidence. The point is this: as a result of the rotation of an alternating electromagnetic field inside elementary particles, standing waves will be observed in it (this is described in wave theories). And in standing waves there are areas with maximum intensity (called antinodes), but there are also points where the intensity is always zero (called nodes). So, if we consider a standing wave from the point of view of mass density, then it can be mathematically divided into several equal parts (equal to the number of antinodes) - which turns out to be equal to the number of hypothetical quarks in hadrons.

This naturally follows another explanation of the experiments: in scattering experiments, standing waves of an alternating electromagnetic field are observed inside elementary particles. This is precisely what explains the impossibility of dividing them into separate sections - the electromagnetic field is continuous and does not crumble into fragments or separate parts, but is transformed according to the laws of nature. Splitting the electromagnetic field into parts is possible only in mathematics, and not in nature.

The most interesting elementary particle for physics at present is the electron neutrino.

Physics has established:

• connection of electron neutrino with redshift,
• the connection between the electron neutrino and the cosmic background microwave radiation, historically mistakenly called the cosmic microwave background radiation,
• the contribution of electron neutrinos to earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tectonic activity and heat flow emanating from the interior of the Earth,
• the contribution of the electron neutrino to the dark matter of the Universe, erroneously called dark matter.

What other secrets does this lightest elementary particle with a non-zero rest mass hide - time will tell.

I did not consider all the theories and theoretical constructions concerning elementary particles. Left unexamined:

• some scientific theories (Wave theory of the structure of elementary particles), which are best viewed on the authors’ websites,
• theoretical constructions that do not correspond to the nature of quantum theory (superstring theory, M-theory, etc.) that have led physics into a quantum dead end with their mathematical TALES,
• pseudoscientific dummies imitating science (such as the Theory of Infinite Nesting of Matter), hiding poor physics behind abstract ideas, clever words and often complex mathematics.

The “scientific” fertility of some authors of mathematical fairy tales and dummies is very high, and spending time analyzing their literary work, which is presented as scientific, is MEANINGLESS. And generally speaking, publication in a publication that makes money from science is not proof that this is a SCIENTIFIC WORK. Those who have money for it publish - capitalism in action. It’s sad to realize that television channels with the Science and Discovery prefixes stubbornly repeat memorized mathematical tales, despite the fact that physics of the 21st century has proven their inconsistency.

The field theory of elementary particles has no fundamental differences with the wave theories of elementary particles, since it can be considered as a further development of the wave direction in physics. If at one time the wave direction had had the strength to resist the establishment of a monopoly on truth by quantum theory and the Standard Model of elementary particles - Now in physics textbooks something completely different would be written.

In the 20th century, great hopes were placed on the “quantum theory” and the “Standard Model of Elementary Particles”, the latter was declared almost the highest achievement of science, which was finally discovered by all the elementary particles found in the Standard Model. But as it turned out, nature is structured differently than these collections of mathematical fairy tales claimed. Quarks and gluons were never found either in nature, or in accelerators, or at any energy - and without these building blocks The standard model of elementary particles is just a FAIRY TALE. Also, carriers of interactions postulated by quantum theory were not found in nature, and the number of fundamental interactions turned out to be much smaller - burying the quantum “theory”. Well, the fairy tale about virtual particles, invented to fill the absence in nature of fabulous carriers of fabulous interactions of quantum “theory,” has now also collapsed. The law of conservation of energy, so disliked by quantum “theory” and its “Standard” model of elementary particles, operated in nature before the advent of these collections of mathematical fairy tales, and continues to operate after their inevitable demise.

The 21st century arrived and physics changed. Now the Field Theory of elementary particles describes the microcosm based on the fields that actually exist in nature, remaining within the framework of the laws operating in nature - as it should be in science. It became one of the biggest discoveries New physics - physics of the 21st century and the largest discovery of theoretical physics of the early 21st century, was the successful completion of part of the work on the creation of Field Theory, which lasted more than 100 years, leading to the construction Scientific picture Microworld. As it turned out, The microworld is a world of dipole electromagnetic fields, the existence of which physics of the 20th century did not suspect. Added to this was the theory of gravity of elementary particles, which established the electromagnetic nature of gravity and buried a bunch of mathematical fairy tales of the 20th century (“theories” of gravity, “super-gravity”, the tale of the “Higgs boson”), including the tale of “Black holes”.

Research into electron neutrinos has found:

• the main natural source of energy from earthquakes, volcanic activity, tectonic activity, geothermal activity, heat flow emanating from the bowels of the Earth,
• natural sources of the so-called “relict radiation”,
• another natural redshift mechanism,
• buried the mathematical fairy tale about the Big Bang.

A long-overdue revolution has begun in physics. The world of mathematical fairy tales, presented as the highest achievement of science, is collapsing. There are many more exciting and interesting things waiting for us in Microworld. Physics is the science of nature, which gets its name from the ancient Greek word “φύσις” (fusis), which means “nature”.