Abstract
In all cyclical
movements, including electromagnetic waves, it is about a process of
transformation of energy by many
time repetitions
the same cycle. Here we will show the three legal situations that determine
this transformation, namely: 1) Amount of the transformed energy E0
from one cycle. The energy E0
from one cycle will be a constant value as it is
a result of unchangeable initial conditions. At a
quantum
level E0=h – the Planck’s constant...depends on the constant structure of the field matter. 2) Total amount of the transformed energy E
from n performed cycle. The total energy E is equal to the constant energy from one cycle E0=h,
multiplied by the number n of the
cycles performed – E=h.n. 3) Speed
of transformation of the energy dE/dt or power of the process according to the dependence: N=dE/dt=h.(dn/dt) or N=h.f, where f=dn/dt is the process frequency (number
of oscillations per unit time). The compilation E=h.f, proposed by M. Plank, is a misunderstandin. This is evidenced
by its juxtaposition with the dependence E=h.n
for random radiation – for example with a frequency f=600.1012Hz, where n=600.1012
is the number of oscillations: According to today's formula E=h.f, for 1 sec. the emitted energy is
E1=h.f, for 2 sec. – E2=E1=h.f, for 3
sec. – E3=E1=h.f, etc. This result is obviously implausible. The correct conclusion follows from formula E=h.n, namely: Е1=h.х;n
;
Е2=2Е1=h.2n ; Е3=3Е1=h.3n etc.
(with
time, the number n of the
oscillations is doubled, tripled, etc.).
The standpoint of contemporary physics on the problem of the energy of
electromagnetic radiation is formed without clear outlined reasons - with conclusions more in line of the
assumptions than of the rational knowledge. Therefore
let's go back to the known, considered definitive, formulations.
Objectively
speaking, in the electromagnetic waves it is about a transformation of energy
from a potential into a kinetic form by many time repetitions
of one closed cycle. In this respect they are completely identical to the cyclical movements of the macro level – rotating, pendulous, reversing, waves. This kind of material manifestations forms a large family of
cyclical movements.
In
a
word, the electromagnetic waves in their
nature (according to their essential characteristics) appear an integral part of this family. Hence the conclusion: The
electromagnetic waves should be subordinate to all, inherent in cyclical
movements, regularities.
In
a concrete plan, the cyclical way
of transformation of the energy at quantum level (and any other) is determined
by the following three legal situations:
1)
Amount of the transformed energy E0
from one cycle. The energy E0
from one cycle will be a constant value as it is
a result of unchangeable initial conditions. In
this case, E0=h – the Planck’s constant...depends on the
constant structure of the field matter.
2) Total amount of the transformed energy E from
n performed cycle. The total amount
of the transformed energy E will be equal to the constant energy from
one cycle E0=h,
multiplied by the number n of the
cycles performed – E=h.n.
3) Speed of transformation of the energy dE/dt (the transformed energy per unit time) or process power N=dE/dt. The energy transformation speed will follow the dependence: N=dE/dt=h. (dn/dt) or N=h.f
where f=dn/dt is the process
frequency (number
of
oscillations per unit time).
As
can be seen, the formula for the total amount of energy E=h.f, 1 ,
proposed
by M. Plank, stands outside these norms. This means that it is not true.
It is
precisely of the error in it is due the fact that the dimension of the constant
h is obtained without physical
sense.
Let
us show that in numerical example of an electromagnetic wave with constant
frequency f=600 THz,
where n=600.1012
is the number of oscillations.
According to the
formula E=h.f of Plank, at
a duration of the radiation 1 second, the amount of transformed energy will be E1=h.f
. At 2 seconds
duration, the transformed energy will be E2=E1=h.f. At 3 seconds duration, the transformed energy will be Е3=Е1=h.f, etc. This result is
obviously implausible.
The correct conclusion follows from formula E=h.n,2 namely:
Е1=h.n
;
Е2=2Е1=h.2n ; Е3=3Е1=h.3n etc.
(with
time, the number n of the
oscillations is doubled, tripled, etc.).
For information,
the device „electric meter“, built on a cyclic process (disk rotation), works according to the formula: dE/dt=h*.(dn/dt) or (dE/dt).dt=h*.dn, respectively Е=N.t=h*.n [vat.sec] (h* –
the constant energy from one rotation of the disc...depends only on its size and material). Other examples: Oscillator "АК-47",
where h* is
the constant energy of a charge, n
is the number of charges in the cartridge and E=h*.n is the total amount of released energy, independently of the frequency f of the shooting (f=number
of shots/second). Oscillator „ICE“,
where
h* is the constant energy of one
rotation of the crankshaft depending only from the
unchangeable volume of the cylinder, n is the number of rotations performed and E=h*.n is the total amount of energy released, independently of the shaft rotation frequency f=number of revolutions/minute.
In general, in all cyclical processes, for the
amount of transformed energy is in force the same dependence E=h*.n
(at
quantum level E=h.n).
It is not
unnecessary to mention
and the scientific fact (which we
have repeatedly talked about) that the World is built on the Principle of opposite
(material-ideal
dualism). The same is also the Principle
of determination, because the one opposite determines by the other. Another way
of determination does not exist.
In this sense, from the macro to the micro structures of matter, everything is
qualitatively and quantitatively defined up to the boundary h. So the Principle of opposite is also
the Principle of cognoscibility
– from the macro to the micro structures of matter,
everything is recognizable because there is a possibility of all-round
determination. And when the theoretical thinking leads to indefiniteness
(as is the
case with the constant h of Planck...and others), this means that some confusion
is allowed that the concept needs a correction, not a search for new ghostly
explanations.
Reference
1. Джанколи. Д – Физика, част 2, стр. 501, М. 1989.
2. Николов А. – Към смяна на идеите във
философията и физиката, София 1999 стр. 307-309
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Александър Николов © 2010-2018 Всички права запазени (COPYRIGHT © 2010-2018)
Александър Николов © 2010-2018 Всички права запазени (COPYRIGHT © 2010-2018)
Няма коментари:
Публикуване на коментар