Michio (Michio) Kaku is an American scientist, a specialist in the field of theoretical physics. Known as an active popularizer of science, author of popular science books.

Michio was born on January 24, 1947 in San Jose, California. His ancestors were Japanese immigrants. His grandfather came to America to help with the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. Michio's father was born in California, but was educated in Japan and spoke some English. During World War II, both of his parents were sent to a Japanese military internment camp in California, where they met and where his brother was born.

Kaku attended Kibberley High School in Palo Alto in the early 1960s and was a captain on its chess team. At the National Science Fair in Albuquerque, New Mexico, he caught the attention of physicist Edward Teller, who took on Kaku as a protégé by awarding him a Hertz Foundation scholarship.

Kaku graduated summa cum laude from Harvard University with a bachelor's degree in 1968 and was first in his physics class. He then entered the Berkeley Radiation Laboratory, which is located at the University of California, where he received his Ph.D. in 1972 and began lecturing at Princeton University in 1973.

During the Vietnam War, Kaku completed basic training at Fort Benning, Georgia and infantry training at Fort Lewis, Washington. The war ended before he got to the front.

Marital status: married to Shizue Kaku, has two daughters. He currently lives with his family in New York.

Today, Dr. Michio Kaku teaches at New York City College, where he has worked for over 25 years.

Michio Kaku is an active popularizer of theoretical physics and modern concepts of the structure of the universe, the author of books, the purpose of which is, first of all, an attempt to convey complex scientific theories to any reader in an accessible language. Kaku often appears on radio and television, and also starred in many documentaries (for example, as a presenter on the Discovery Channel's How the Universe works and Sci Fi Science programs). Some of them have been translated into many languages ​​of the world. Kaku also holds conferences in New York.

Dr. Michio Kaku is a physicist at the City University of New York and a bestselling author who is a well-known popularizer of science. He is one of the creators of the string field theory and continues Entstein's attempts to unify the fundamental forces of nature.

short biography

Michio Kaku was born on January 24, 1947 in the North American city of San Jose, California. He has Japanese roots - his grandfather immigrated to the United States to participate in the aftermath of the devastating 1906 earthquake in San Francisco.

Science attracted Kaku from an early age, and while attending high school in Palo Alto, he became famous for building a particle accelerator in his parents' garage.

Michio eventually enrolled and graduated in 1968 as a top student in physics. From there he went to Berkeley, University of California, where he worked in the radiation laboratory and in 1972 received his Ph.D.

The following year, Kaku lectured at Princeton, but was soon drafted into the army. He was trained to serve in the infantry, but the Vietnam War ended before he completed his combat training course.

Current work

Michio Kaku is currently Professor of Theoretical Physics at the City College and Graduate School of the City University of New York, where he has been teaching for over 25 years.

Currently, he is engaged in the "theory of everything", seeking to unify all the fundamental forces: the weak and gravity and electromagnetism. Michio has served as a visiting professor at Advanced Studies and at New York University. Member of the American Physical Society.

Scientific activity

Since 1969, Michio Kaku has published extensively on string theory. In 1974, together with prof. K. Kikkavoy, he wrote the first work on the topic of string fields, which today is one of its important areas, capable of combining all five existing string theories in one equation.

In addition, he wrote one of the first papers on multiloop amplitudes and the first paper on their discrepancies. He was the first to describe supersymmetry breaking at high temperatures in the early universe, superconformal gravity, and was one of the pioneers in the study of the nonpolynomial closed string field theory. Many of the ideas he put forward have been developed in active areas of string research.

His current work is devoted to the difficult problem of unraveling the nature of M-theory and string theory, which, in his opinion, have not yet been reduced to their final form. Until the theory is completed, it is premature, he believes, to compare it with experimental data.

Popular science works

Kaku is the author of a number of postgraduate textbooks on quantum field theory and over 70 papers published in journals on supergravity, superstrings, supersymmetry, and hadronic physics. He is the author of the popular science books "Hyperspace", "Visions" and "Parallel Worlds". He co-wrote "Beyond Einstein" with Jennifer Thompson.

The book "Hyperspace" by Michio Kaku became a bestseller. It was recognized as one of the best non-fiction stories of the year by The New York Times and The Washington Post. The book tells about parallel universes, time warp and the tenth dimension.

Parallel Worlds was a finalist for the British Prize in the non-fiction category. The book touches upon the issues of the origin of the Universe, higher dimensions and the future of the cosmos.

Michio Kaku - visionary

One of his latest books (Physics of the Impossible) deals with stealth, teleportation, precognition, starships, antimatter engines, time travel, and much more - everything that is considered impossible today, but may become a reality in the future. In this work, the author ranks technologies according to when, in his opinion, they can become a reality. In March 2008, The Physics of the Impossible hit the New York Times bestseller list and stayed there for five weeks.

The book "Physics of the Future" by Michio Kaku was published in 2011. In it, the scientist writes about the impact science will have on the fate of mankind and our daily lives by 2100.

Social politics

Michio Kaku has publicly stated his concern about the problems caused by anthropogenic global warming, nuclear weapons, nuclear power and the general misuse of science. He criticized the creation of the Cassini-Huygens space probe for containing 33 kg of plutonium used as a thermoelectric generator. Informed the public about the possible consequences of fuel dispersion in the environment in the event of a breakdown and accident during maneuvering near the Earth. He was critical of NASA's risk assessment methodology. The probe was eventually launched and successfully completed its mission.

Kaku is a strong supporter of space exploration, believing that the fate of mankind lies in the stars, but criticizes some of NASA's cost-inefficient missions and methods.

Kaku Michio: Soul Physics

Dr. Kaku explains his anti-nuclear position by the fact that in his student years in California he listened to Pacifica radio. It was then that he decided to abandon his career as a developer of a new generation of nuclear weapons in collaboration with Teller and focus on research, teaching, writing books and working in the media. Kaku joined forces with Helen Caldicott and Jonathan Schell to create the Peace Council, a global movement against nuclear weapons that emerged in the 1980s during the administration of US President Ronald Reagan.

Kaku was a board member of the Peace Council and New York radio station WBAI-FM, where he was a long-time host of the Research program on science, war, peace and the environment.

Media personality

The American-Japanese physicist has appeared in many media and on many programs and networks. In particular, he participated in the television programs Good Morning America, The Larry King Show, 60 Minutes, CNN, ABC News, Fox News, History, Science, Discovery and others.

In 1999, Kaku was one of the scientists who was the subject of a feature-length film, Me and Isaac Newton, directed by Michael Apted and funded by Paul Allen. The film was released across the country, broadcast on national television and won several film awards.

In 2005, Kaku starred in the short documentary Obsessed & Scientific about the possibility of time travel and the people who dream about it. The tape was shown at the Montreal World Film Festival. Kaku also featured in the ABC documentary "UFOs: Seeing is Believing" in which he said he considered it highly unlikely that aliens would visit Earth, but urged us to be prepared to accept the possibility of civilizations that are millions of years ahead of us in technologies based on completely new physical phenomena. He also spoke about the future of space exploration and alien life on Discovery's Alien Planet program, among the many speakers on the show.

In February 2006, Kaku starred in a four-part BBC documentary that explored the mysterious nature of time. The first series was devoted to personal time and our perception and measurement of its flow. The second concerned the "deception" of time, the study of the possibilities of extending the life of organisms. The theme of geological time was devoted to the study of the age of the Earth and the Sun. The last series dealt with cosmological time, its beginning, and the events that took place at the time of the Big Bang.

In 2007, Kaku hosted the three-hour program 2057, which discussed the future of medicine, urban development and energy. In 2008, he starred in a documentary about the future of computers, medicine, and quantum physics.

Kaku has been featured in documentaries such as Vision of the Future (2008), Stephen Hawking: Master of the Universe (2008), Who's Afraid of a Big Black Hole? (2009-10), "Physics of the Impossible" (2009-10), "What happened before the Big Bang?" (2010), The Science of Games (2010), How the Universe Works (2010), Prophets of Science Fiction (2011), Through the Wormhole (2011), Dr. Hu's Science (2012), Hunt for Higgs" (2012), "Principle" (2014) and others.

Michio Kaku is popular in the media for his knowledge and approach to presenting complex scientific issues. Although his work is limited to theoretical physics, his talks touch on other areas as well. He spoke on topics such as wormholes and time travel. According to Kaku, terrorism is one of the main threats to the evolution of mankind from civilization type 0 to type I.

Criticism of the views of Michio Kaku
and pressing problems of physics

Oleg Akimov

Who doesn't know Michio Kaku?

Everyone knows Michio Kaku!

It's a shame not to know an outstanding showman from the world of science. He hosts several well-known television and radio programs, such as Sci Fi Science (Discovery), How the Universe works, etc. Every year, dozens of popular science films with his participation are released around the world.

Surely, you are familiar with this crafty look of a Japanese Buddhist scientist who is actively engaged in popularizing the latest achievements of modern science.

His fascinating stories about macro- and microcosm fascinate anyone who heard them for the first time, and then, throughout their lives, keep them in a state of sweet numbness, admiration and surprise. You are proud of the wise humanity and personally of your perspicacious mind, which has managed to understand the great mysteries of Nature.

Don't have a Kaku T-shirt?

Hurry up and get it for $12.5

Have you read Kaku's books?

Ay-yay-yay, what a shame!

Don't tell anyone about this. Hurry to the store, buy them and read immediately!

The book was translated from English into Russian and published in 2008 by the Sofia publishing house. The annotation to the Russian edition states that this book is an "intellectual bestseller" and is not intended for "entertaining reading". Kaku also wrote several other popular books that helped introduce superstring theory and other complex concepts involving extra dimensions of spacetime to the general public; let's call them:

• Hyperspace ( hyperspace)
• Introduction to Superstring Theory ( Introduction to Superstrings)
• Beyond Einstein's Scientific Thought ( Beyond Einstein)
• Physics of the Impossible ( Physics of the Impossible)
• Physics of the future ( Physics of the Future)

A few words about the author. Michio Kaku (sometimes his name is pronounced as Michio, originally spelled as ) was born in San Jose, California. Now for a quarter of a century he has been living in New York and teaching at City College. He is 65. Age, of course, takes its toll, so he travels around the world less and less. But it was once difficult to guess where on Earth to look for it: Kaku in the USA, Kaku in Japan, Australia, Europe. He also came to Russia; visited the scientific center "Skolkovo"; attended one of the meetings chaired by the then President Dmitry Medvedev.

But let's get back to our book "Parallel Worlds", which also has a second title "On the structure of the universe, higher dimensions and the future of the Cosmos." Particular attention should be paid to a small, almost obligatory for all books section "Acknowledgments". In it, Michio Kaku listed several dozen names of prominent scientists in the world, on whom he "largely" made responsible for the content of his book. We read: “I would like to thank the scientists who were so kind as to take the time to talk to me. Their comments, remarks, and ideas have greatly enriched this book and added more depth and clarity to it. Here are their names:

• Steven Weinberg, Nobel laureate, University of Texas
• Austin Murray Gell-Mann, Nobel laureate, Santa Fe Institute and California Institute of Technology
• Leon Lederman, Nobel Laureate, Illinois Institute of Technology
• Joseph Rotblat, Nobel laureate, St. Bartholomew's Hospital (retired)
• Walter Gilbert
• Henry Kendall(deceased), Nobel Laureate, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• Alan Gut (Gus), physicist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• Sir Martin Rhys, UK Astronomer Royal, University of Cambridge
• Freeman Dyson
• John Schwartz, physicist, California Institute of Technology
• Lisa Randall
• J. Richard Gott III, physicist, Princeton University
• Neil de Grasse Tyson, astronomer, Princeton University and Hayden Planetarium
• Paul Davis, physicist, University of Adelaide
• Ken Croswell
• Don Goldsmith, astronomer, University of California, Berkeley
• Brian Green, physicist, Columbia University
• Qumrun Wafa, physicist, Harvard University
• Stuart Samuel
• Carl Sagan(deceased), astronomer, Cornell University
• Daniel Greenberger
• W. P. Nair, physicist, City College of New York
• Robert P. Kirshner, astronomer, Harvard University
• Peter D. Ward, geologist, University of Washington
• John Barrow, astronomer, University of Sussex
• Marsha Bartushek, Science Journalist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• John Castie, physicist, Santa Fe Institute
• Timothy Ferris, science journalist
• Michael Lemonick, scientific columnist, Time magazine
• Fulvio Melia, astronomer, University of Arizona
• John Horgan, science journalist
• Richard Mueller, physicist, University of California, Berkeley
• Lawrence Krauss, physicist, Western Reserve University
• Ted Taylor, atomic bomb designer
• Philip Morrison, physicist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• Hans Moravec, roboticist, Carnegie Mellon University
• Rodney Brooks, Roboticist, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• Donna Shirley, astrophysicist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
• Dan Wertheimer, astronomer, [email protected], University of California, Berkeley
• Paul Hoffman, science journalist, Discover magazine
• Francis Everitt, physicist, Gravity Probe B, Stanford University
• Sidney Perkowitz, physicist, Emory University

And here are the names of scientists to whom I would like to express my gratitude for fruitful discussions on physical topics:

• T.D. Lee, Nobel Laureate, Columbia University
• Sheldon Glashow, Nobel Laureate, Harvard University
• (deceased), Nobel Laureate, California Institute of Technology
• Edward Witten Physicist, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton University
• Joseph Lykken Physicist, Fermi Laboratory
• David Gross, physicist, Kavli Institute, Santa Barbara
• Frank Wilczek, University of California, SantaBarbara
• Paul Townsend, physicist, University of Cambridge
• Peter van Nieuwenhuizen, physicist, State University of New York, Stony Brook
• Miguel Virasoro, physicist, University of Rome
• Bunji Sakita
• Ashok Des, physicist, University of Rochester
• Robert Marshak(deceased), physicist, City College of New York
• Frank Tipler, physicist, Tulane University
• Edward Tryon, physicist, Hunter College
• Mitchell Begelman, astronomer, University of Colorado

I would also like to thank Ken Croswell for his many comments on my book. And I also want to thank my editor, Roger Scholl who expertly edited two of my books. His firm hand has greatly improved these books, and his comments have always helped to clarify and deepen the content and presentation of my books. And finally, I would like to thank my agent, Stuart Krichevsky who has been promoting my books all these years."

This impressive list of scientific luminaries tells us that no frivolous or heretical ideas could leak into Kaku's book. The intellectual power of several dozen outstanding minds of the planet did not give the slightest chance to penetrate into the text intended for reading by millions of readers, some wrong or, even worse, harmful ideas. The main content of this book was repeatedly presented to the listeners of the author's public lectures, which were broadcast to a billion-strong audience of television viewers and Internet users. Any errors or inaccuracies are excluded. Officials from the US Department of Education, university professors and school teachers would not forgive him for them.

Well, let's take a closer look at what Kaku tells us.

His book is divided into three parts. In the first, the author talks about the inflationary theory of the expanding universe - "the most advanced theory of the Big Bang," he adds. The second deals with the emerging theory of the Multiverse. “In addition, it considers the possibility of the existence of wormhole portals, spatial and temporal whirlpools and the possible connection between them through additional dimensions. Superstring theory and M-theory were the first major advances since Einstein's seminal theory. These theories provide further evidence that our universe is just one of many. And finally, the third part tells about the Great Cooling and how scientists imagine the end of our Universe. I also have a serious, albeit hypothetical, conversation about how, in the distant future, trillions of years later, a highly advanced civilization could use the laws of physics to leave our universe and begin the process of rebirth in another, more hospitable universe, or return back to that time when the universe was warmer.

The author divided the history of cosmology into three periods. The first is associated with the names of Galileo and Newton. The second began with the discovery by Edwin Hubble of the phenomenon of the recession of stars and galaxies. It turned out that the spectra of most space objects are shifted to the red region, which, according to today's scientists, indicates that they are moving away from the Earth. In 1948, Georgy Gamow formulated the idea of ​​the Big Bang, and Fred Hoyle outlined the theory of the evolution of the Universe and spoke about the origin of chemical elements. Michio Kaku linked the third stage with the understanding that, as the universe expands, it becomes “colder and colder. If this process continues, we will face the prospect Big Cooling when the universe will plunge into darkness and cold, and all intelligent life will perish. “I am also having a serious, albeit hypothetical, conversation about how, in the distant future, trillions of years later, a highly advanced civilization could use the laws of physics to leave our universe and begin the process of rebirth in another, more hospitable universe, or return back to when the universe was warmer.

The author told us about all this in the "Introduction" to the book. Does it make sense for us to read it further and recommend it to students and schoolchildren? No, we answer. The author himself pointed out to us the main trouble of this science. “Historically,” he writes, “cosmologists have enjoyed a somewhat tarnished reputation. The stunning passion with which they expounded their grandiose theories about the origin of the universe was comparable to the equally stunning poverty of their data. No wonder the Nobel laureate Lev Landau sarcastically remarked that "cosmologists are often surprised, but never doubt." There is an old saying among natural scientists: "There are assumptions, then there are assumptions about assumptions, and even further there is cosmology."

Kaku continues: “When I was a physics student at Harvard in the late 1960s, I cherished the idea of ​​doing cosmology for some time - I was worried about the origin of the universe since childhood. However, acquaintance with this science showed her shameful primitiveness. It was not at all the kind of experimental science where one can test hypotheses with precise instruments, but rather a bunch of vague and highly unproven theories. Cosmologists have had heated discussions about whether the universe was created by a cosmic explosion or whether it has always been in a stable state. But they always had much more theories than data. So it is always: the less data, the hotter the controversy.

Throughout the history of cosmology, this lack of reliable data has led to violent wars between astronomers, sometimes dragging on for decades. In particular, at a certain scientific forum just before Allan Sandage of the Mount Wilson Observatory was due to give a talk on the age of the universe, the previous speaker announced sarcastically: "Everything you are about to hear is a lie." And Sandage himself, having heard that a group of rival scientists had achieved some success, growled: "This is all complete nonsense. War is war!"

Knowing this original sin of cosmologists, Michio Kaku, however, continues to uncritically retell them lies, as the "previous speaker" put it. Undoubtedly, cosmology is the most dangerous direction in modern astrophysics, which, unlike, for example, astrology, alchemy and palmistry, is not criticized by official science. Meanwhile, the harm that it does to the development of astrophysics and the education of young people is colossal. Swollen to an incredible size, this cancer creates the impression of almost the most important part of the living organism of science. In fact, cosmology is his fatal disease.

Cosmologists try to give their ugly creation the luster of respectable science. They talk all the time about superstrings and supercomputers working day and night to calculate their insanely complex mathematical models. So, for example, talking about the secrets of dark matter and energy, Michio Kaku enthusiastically writes: “If we take the latest theory of subatomic particles and try to calculate the value of their “dark energy”, we get a number that deviates from the norm by 10,120 (this is one, followed by 120 zeros). This discrepancy between theory and experiment is the greatest gap in the history of science. This is one of our insurmountable (at least for the time being) obstacles. Even with the best of our theories, we cannot calculate the value of the greatest source of energy in the entire universe. Of course, a whole bunch of Nobel Prizes await enterprising scientists who can uncover the mysteries of "dark energy" and "dark matter."

For any sane astrophysicist, "such a discrepancy between theory and experiment" would mean that no dark matter particles exist; the theory according to which they were introduced is erroneous. But no, the phantom in the form of a secret object of nature continues to live safely in modern cosmology. Looking at this nonsense, rationally thinking researchers can only shrug their shoulders. Arguing and proving something to our cosmologists is useless, as long as they are not able to reject the contradictory results that they have discovered themselves.

When we get acquainted with cosmological theories, we constantly stumble upon a low culture of scientific thinking among the most important generals of science in charge of expensive projects. For example, Charles L. Bennett, leader of the international team that took part in the processing and analysis of data from the WMAP satellite, stated: "We have laid the foundation for a unified, consistent theory of the cosmos." Michio Kaku, building on his "foundation," continues: fraction of a second mysterious anti-gravity force forced the universe to expand much faster than previously thought. The inflationary period was unimaginably explosive, with the universe expanding at a rate much faster than the speed of light. (This does not contradict Einstein's claim that "nothing" can travel faster than light as empty space expands [i.e. nothing]. As for material objects, they cannot jump over the light barrier).”

Every scientific theory must be self-sufficient. When you need to introduce a “mysterious anti-gravitational force” to explain the Big Bang, and “dark matter” to calculate the dynamics of spiral galaxies, it is easier to turn directly to the almighty Lord God, who will immediately solve all your problems. By the presence of these artificial props in the theory, you can easily assess the scientific abilities of its author: whether he is a professional researcher or whether he should be ranked among romantic dreamer poets who have chosen an unsuitable field for themselves.

It is not yet known why the spectra of some stars and galaxies show a redshift of lines. In particular, on the Sun, which is at rest relative to the earthly observer, inexplicable shifts to the red region of the chemical elements known to us are fixed. It is very likely that they are not caused by the Doppler effect. Consequently, the stars and galaxies are not really running away from us, our Universe is not expanding, and there was no Big Bang.

Relativists, on the other hand, have no doubt that the so-called background radiation is its consequence (hence the concept relic). Meanwhile, existence microwave background(another name for the same phenomenon) can be explained in a completely different way. This is a natural low-energy state of the world environment, the excitation of which manifests itself in the form of hot stars and galaxies. If a relativist justifies his concept with speculations like the one above - nothing can travel at superluminal speeds something no longer - then you need to run away from him as fast as you can. This scholastic in no time will bring you to delirium tremens.

A cosmologist can also be recognized by the naive childishness of his thinking. All his explanations concerning even the most complex processes occurring in the Universe, he sets out as if his book is intended for elementary school students. Read the following text written by Michio Kaku.

“To imagine the intensity of an inflationary period (or inflationary epoch), imagine a balloon with galaxies painted on its surface, which is rapidly inflated. The visible universe, filled with stars and galaxies, lies on the surface of the balloon, not inside it. Now put a microscopic dot on the ball. This point is the visible Universe, that is, everything that we can observe with our telescopes. (For comparison: if the visible universe were the size of a subatomic particle, then the entire universe would be much larger than the real visible universe that we observe.) In other words, the inflationary expansion was so intense that now there are entire regions of the universe outside our visible one, which will forever remain beyond our visibility.

The expansion of the Universe was so intense that when looking at the described ball from a close distance, it seems flat. This fact was experimentally verified by the WMAP satellite. Just as the Earth appears flat to us because we are very small compared to its radius, so the Universe appears flat to us only because it is curved on a much larger scale.

By assuming early inflationary expansion, many of the mysteries of the universe can be explained with little effort, such as the fact that it appears to be flat and uniform. Describing the inflationary theory, physicist Joel Primack said: "Of such excellent theories, not one has yet turned out to be erroneous."

This is because, we add to what Kaku wrote, that fabulous constructions cannot be verified. That's why "there are more than 50 theories [and all, of course, true!] about what caused the beginning and end of the expansion of the Universe, as a result of which our Universe arose."

“Since no one knows exactly why the expansion began, it is likely that a similar event may occur again - that is, that inflationary explosions may be repeated. This theory was proposed by the Russian physicist Andrei Linde of Stanford University.

It's too presumptuous to call Linde's fiction a "theory." It turns out that if "no one knows for sure", then let's compose whatever comes into our heads. The unbridled poetic imagination of the great dreamer Linde immediately turns on:

“And then a tiny patch of the universe can suddenly expand and 'bud', sprout a 'daughter' universe, from which, in turn, a new daughter universe can bud; while the process of "budding" continues uninterrupted.

Imagine that you are blowing soap bubbles. If you blow hard enough, you can see how some of them divide, forming new, "daughter" bubbles. Similarly, some universes can constantly give rise to other universes. According to this scenario, Big Bangs have been happening all the time, and are happening now. … This theory also suggests that our universe may someday bud off its own daughter universe. It is possible that our own universe came into existence by budding from an older, earlier universe.

Linde's teachings can be taught to elementary school students or even children in kindergarten - everything will be clear to everyone. If someone thinks that cosmology involves more mature thinking, he is deeply mistaken. Any housewife can master it perfectly - there will be no problems. Why is it not necessary to study somewhere to comprehend the wisdom of this teaching? If you delve deeply into the origins of the idea of ​​parallel worlds, it will not be difficult to find that it was heavily exploited by mystics and charlatans of the late 19th century, from where it was freely pumped into modern cosmology.

Its introduction into the bosom of official science occurred simultaneously with the promotion of the idea of ​​time travel. This story is well known. The English science fiction writer Herbert Wells, during student discussions in 1887, became acquainted with the amateurish idea of ​​time as the fourth coordinate of space. At that time it was fashionable to talk about multidimensional geometries. And in 1895 his book was published Time Machine, the success of which was stunning.

Poincaré and Lorentz thought about the nature of time. They also proposed a special procedure for measuring it with a beam of light, which was adopted by Einstein. Any competent physicist understands that the natural course of time cannot depend on the procedure for measuring it. But within the framework of the theory of relativity, which appeared in 1905, this essential point was missed. Then began speculation about the age of observers in different frames of reference.

The Cosmic Mind of Albert Einstein
laid the foundations of modern cosmology

Cosmologists proceed from false ideas about space and time that arose together with the special and general theories of relativity (SRT and GR). For this religious sect, Albert Einstein was and remains forever an idol. Any critically thinking and mathematically educated researcher, turning to the origins of relativism, will easily find a completely untenable methodology. No integral relativistic concept exists. Derivation and justification of the formula E=mc² has J. Thomson, Poincaré and others; everything else in SRT and GR is pure speculation.

This analysis on the Sceptic-Ratio website is given the lion's share of all criticism of modern physics: 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4a | 5 | 5a | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | . When analyzing the formal speculative reasoning of relativists, two fatal errors are first of all revealed:

1. Due to the measurement of lengths and periods of time introduced by Einstein - and even earlier, Poincaré - using a light beam, there is no real there is no reduction in the spatial dimensions of rapidly moving objects; clocks on the object are also not slowed down. Negative result Michelson-Morley experiment, after which SRT arose, was quite predictable and logical. For its interpretation, it was not necessary to invoke Lorentz's hypothesis of length contraction.

2. Light, as a form of electromagnetic radiation, does not interact with the gravitational field. not happening. The wide spread of deviations of rays from stars near the solar disk, according to the observations of the eclipse of 1919 and 1921, did not confirm general relativity. The deflection of rays occurs due to the ordinary refraction of light rays in the dense layers of the Sun's atmosphere, which extends over many millions of kilometers.

If we neglect refraction - and relativists do just that - then we have to admit that in the Earth's gravitational field, rays from stars deviate much more than from the Sun. The star that we see on the Earth's horizon has actually gone beyond the horizon at an angle equal to 35"24" long ago. According to general relativity, Einstein predicted, and Eddington supposedly confirmed a similar value of the beam deflection by only 1 "74. Can you trust the last value? No way!

Einstein once wrote "... The most beautiful and deepest feeling that we can experience is mysticism ...". However, he cannot be called a mystic, but Eddington can. He was an ardent supporter of Einstein's teachings and was never a conscientious scientist. After him, such measurements were not publicly carried out, and we can guess why.

Most likely, the data obtained by astronomers who were not interested in the success of general relativity were far from Einstein's predictions. It can be assumed that due to the large inhomogeneity of the solar atmosphere, which can be seen from the luminous crown during its eclipse, the deviations of the rays from the stars due to refraction fluctuate in a wide range of values. When today's relativists, speaking about the confirmation of general relativity by the magnitude of the deflection of rays near the Sun, each time point to doubtful results of a century ago, then any conscientious researcher has well-founded doubts.

Today's challenge is to create spatial-mechanical model of the world environment(ether), in which electromagnetic and gravitational fields propagate. In the Treatise on Light, Huygens wrote: “The cause of all natural phenomena is comprehended with the help of considerations of a mechanical nature, otherwise one has to give up any hope of ever understanding anything in physics.” In connection with the mechanical modeling of the ether, it is appropriate to recall another classic of constructive physics.

In the Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Maxwell argued simply and clearly from the standpoint of ordinary common sense, which is not available to modern relativistic cosmologists: “No matter how energy is transferred from one body to another, there must be a medium or substance in which energy is located, after she had left one body, but had not yet reached another. From this it immediately follows, Maxwell points out further, that the theory of electromagnetism, the theory of interaction, or any other theory, first of all, “rests on the concept of a medium in which the propagation of excitation takes place. If we accept this environment as a hypothesis, then I think it should take the most important place in our research. One should try to build a mental representation of its manifestations in all details. This has been my constant aim in this treatise."

Based on his models of the ether - albeit crude and inaccurate - Maxwell still managed to create a completely working and complete theory of electromagnetism. The theory of relativity and quantum mechanics are also considered to be full-fledged theories, in any case, they can be used to calculate something. But they were created using a completely different methodology, which no longer required the physicist to think in visual images. This kind of creativity was well described by R. Feynman in his Nobel lecture. He said: "... The best way to create a new theory is to guess equations without paying attention to physical models or physical explanation." Indeed, many useful rules were "guessed", which, however, led modern physics to a dead end.

In 1949, within the framework of quantum field theory, Feynman introduced the diagrams that now bear his name. The simplest diagram A presented here shows the interaction of a photon (a wavy line), an electron (arrow pointing towards the node), and a positron (arrow pointing away from the node). Interaction can go in three directions: electron + positron = photon, electron + photon = positron, positron + photon = electron. A more complex diagram B already has four interaction options. For node 1, we have: the initial electron absorbs the initial photon, while an intermediate electron is formed, which propagates from node 1 to node 2. Then it emits a final photon and turns into a final electron. The result of the process is the redistribution of energy and momentum between the electron and photon (the Compton effect). The second option: moving along the lines from right to left, which corresponds to the scattering of a photon by a positron. The third option: movement from the bottom up - the annihilation of an electron and a positron with their transformation into two photons. The fourth option: movement from top to bottom - the birth of an electron-positron pair in the collision of two photons.

Question: what do Feynman diagrams give in terms of understanding physics(those. nature, essence) interactions of a photon, electron and positron? Answer: nothing. At best, these graphic images (graphs) can serve as a compact hint for students taking an exam in quantum field theory. About the same mnemonic function is performed by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the Pauli exclusion principle, as well as Bohr's postulates and, of course, the postulates of Einstein's theory of relativity. These axiomatic propositions are based on experiment, but do not provide food for an inquisitive mind. Knowledge shaped in this way has nurtured a special caste of scientists, whom constructivist physicists called formalist-phenomenalists. In the most flourishing period in the development of the natural sciences, which occurred at the end of the 19th century, they declared a crisis. Thanks to them, physics lost a coherent and consistent picture of the world. The former natural scientist, who was a model of a scientist for all other sciences, died out like a mammoth, who was hunted down everywhere by an insatiable primitive man until he was completely destroyed.

Meanwhile, if we do not turn a blind eye to obvious things, then we must admit that without the ether one cannot take a step, especially in the “good old” observational astronomy. For example, the yearly aberration of the starry sky and the Doppler effect with respect to moving stars and galaxies certainly suggest a medium without which these two phenomena cannot exist. So, as a result of the movement of the Earth around the Sun, all the stars in the sky during the year move along an ellipse, the shape of which depends on the latitude of the point of observation. Stellar aberration is entirely determined by the only velocity of the Earth in orbit. SRT requires the difference between the orbital speed of the Earth and the speed of movement of each star separately. This is not. A deep understanding of this one fact will lead any meticulous researcher to the idea of ​​the existence of the world environment and the fallacy of SRT.

Doppler is remembered when they talk about the red shift of spectral lines, the scattering of stars and galaxies. The following sections are devoted to the Doppler effect:

The body moves in the world environment like point defects or dislocations in a crystal. They are transferred by successive disappearance of violation of the regularity of the lattice in one place and its appearance in another place. This transfer occurs due to local stresses in the crystal when the law of conservation of energy is fulfilled. Such movement of a defect, on the one hand, resembles a wave, and on the other, a particle. Once starting the movement, the defect does not stop and moves uniformly and rectilinearly by inertia.

In crystalline germanium, free electrons and holes can exist, forming identical hydrogen-like excitons, described by the Schrödinger equation. Similarly, in the crystal lattice of the world medium, which, like the lattice of germanium, apparently has a cubic structure, identical hydrogen atoms are formed everywhere from free electrons and protons. If Newton and all subsequent physicists had at one time before their eyes a model exciton, they would not puzzle over why the speed of the planets around the Sun does not weaken with time. The ether cannot resist the bodies, since the bodies themselves are a complex vortex formation.

The mass of an electron and a hole in a germanium crystal is the same, but in the free space of vacuum, the proton, obviously, is no longer a "hole" from under the electron, here we have a more complex formation associated with the "core" of the vacuum. The mass of a body and its internal energy, measured relative to the band gap, are closely related and subject to redistribution. The transverse nature of the propagation of electromagnetic waves indicates that we are dealing with dense packing, the rigidity of which is close to absolute.

In the first approximation, the world environment can be modeled by a dense packing of spheres. Then the matter would be considered as the result of complex vibrations of the spherical packing. If the vibrational energy is brought to the membrane, then there are Chladni figures. It is possible that individual atoms and infinite crystal lattices, reminiscent of the figures of Chladni, arise in the world environment when the source of vibrations is located inside the environment itself.

Figures of Chladni formed by granulated sugar
on the surface of a membrane vibrating at different frequencies.

In 1981, Gerd Binnig (G. Binnig) and Heinrich Rohrer (H. Rohrer) in the laboratory of IBM, located in Zurich, was built scanning tunneling microscope(STM), which allows you to see the atomic structure of surfaces, conductive materials. Here are STM images of the Si(111) silicon surface at three different bias voltages: a) Vs = +2.4 V, the so-called image of filled states, electrons tunnel from the tip into the sample; b) Vs = -2.4 V, image of empty states, electrons tunnel from the sample to the probe tip; c) Vs = +1.6 V, the image of the filled states obtained in the linear scale mode; arrows indicate corner holes. All explanations are given on the website. Scanning tunneling microscopy - a new method for studying the surface of solids

The most amazing thing is that with the help of STM it is possible to accurately deposit individual atoms of one metal (in this case, copper) on the surface of another metal (iron). These four images show the arrangement of copper atoms in the form of a hexagon, triangle, square and circle. These and the following STM photographs are taken from the website Gallery of STM images

These photos show the stages of construction.
circles of 48 copper atoms on the surface of iron

This "fence" of copper atoms already includes two circles. Blue "teeth" show high jumps in the electron density of copper atoms against the background of a lower electron density of iron atoms.

It is interesting to observe the excitations caused by ultrasound (see and ). When the wavelength is comparable to the distances between atoms, excitations arise that resemble quasiparticles, and the energy is quantized. In this case, the excitation wave front is far from an ideal spherical shape. Ultrasonic excitations propagate along certain energetically favorable directions (see the introductory section The nature of sound and ultrasound).

J. Thomson, Lorentz and many other physicists of the late 19th and early 20th century were of the opinion that the inertial mass is of an exclusively electromagnetic origin. Its growth along with the growth of speed (Kaufman's experiment) is explained by the resistance of the ether, when the electron has the so-called effective mass(cm.: Thomson: Matter and Ether).

At that time, vortex representations were in vogue, according to which a swirling medium has its own mass of rotation. This is revealed as follows. To make a vortex move in a stationary medium at a certain speed, it is required to apply a certain force proportional to the rotational moment. And this just means that the mass of the spinning top will be slightly larger than the unspun one.

Since the inertial mass in the experiments coincided in magnitude with the gravitational one, they began to believe that there is no other mass than the electromagnetic one. But why then does the electromagnetic field not affect the mass and does not interact with gravitational fields? This can be understood from the following quantitative calculation.

The force of repulsion of two electrons according to Coulomb's law is 10 42 times greater than the force of attraction, which is determined according to the universal law of gravity. This colossal difference explains why the electron freely reacts to the action of electric and magnetic fields - the spectral lines of electronic levels in the atom shift and split - but do not act on gravitational fields in any way. The spectra of chemical elements located on the surface of the Sun, i.e. in a powerful gravitational field, are no different from the spectra of elements located in interstellar space, where gravity is absent. The lines of the solar spectra only broaden due to the high temperature.

Thus, in the atomic microcosm there is no place for gravitational interactions; only electromagnetic forces dominate in it. The mass of a body from the macrocosm consists of a huge number of microscopic vortices of an electromagnetic nature of different directions - after all, electrons have orbital and spin moments, therefore, they have a tiny mass of rotation. However, we do not imagine how these rotations correlate spatially. The mass creates a centrally symmetric gravitational field of a completely different nature than the electromagnetic field. If there are no electric charges in this mass, then the body will not react to the electromagnetic field.

After the creation of the theory of relativity, the electromagnetic nature of the elementary mass, which the electron has, had to be forgotten. But within the framework of a unified field theory, Einstein and his followers up to the present day began to look for ways of artificially connecting two qualitatively different fields on a purely geometric basis of space-time without matter for 40 years and his followers up to the present day.

If before Einstein they considered the electromagnetic field to be primary (fundamental), and the gravitational field to be secondary (derivative), then today's relativists began to consider the gravitational field to be more fundamental than the electromagnetic one, since all elementary particles, they say, have mass, but not all of them have a charge . At the same time, they do not take into account the quantitative side of the matter, which was mentioned above. From it, however, it follows that the gravitational field of elementary particles will never give rise to an electromagnetic one, but the opposite is possible.

Based on a comparison of Coulomb's law and the law of universal gravitation, it is useful to introduce the concept gravitational charge (e g), which has the same dimension as the electric charge of an electron ( e):

e g = m e G½,

where me- electron mass, G - gravitational constant.
The ratio of these two charges is:

e/e g≈ 2 10 21 ,

which also indicates a negligibly small influence of the gravitational interaction in comparison with the electromagnetic one.

Einstein's statement that the speed of light and the speed of propagation of gravity is the same is doubtful. In SRT, such a conclusion is made not even on the basis of an analysis of the radical expression of the Lorentz transformations (it must be positive), but on the basis of the second postulate: nothing in nature can travel faster than light. In general relativity, the speed of gravity, or the speed of change in the geometric metric of space-time, is equated to the speed of light purely declaratively.

Initially, this equality stemmed from the empirical formula of Paul Gerber, obtained by him in 1898 for the anomalous motion of the perihelion of Mercury (this issue is discussed in the section Deviation of light rays near massive bodies). Einstein took it as a basis when in 1907 he began to create general relativity. In both theories of relativity, there are no experimental data on this subject, if we do not take into account Fomalont-Kopeikin experiment which is not highly trusted by experts.

For the first time about the so-called lagging potential thought Gauss in 1835, when he considered the electrical interaction of two charges, according to Coulomb's law. Then this concept was borrowed from him by Weber, who already relied on Ampère's experience on the interaction of two conductors with current. Helmholtz undertook to criticize Weber's formulas, in which, as he believed, the law of conservation of energy was violated. Further, Maxwell, Hertz, Clausius, Lorentz and other physicists dealt with the same problem. Many of them are Riemann, Ritz, Poincaré, Larmor, etc. - tried to extend the concept of retarded potential to the theory of gravitation. However, unlike the electromagnetic field, the gravitational field has never been consistent with the idea of ​​a finite propagation of the interaction of two or more masses.

Today, in the most popular in our country "Handbook of Physics for Engineers and University Students" B.M. Yavorsky and A.A. Detlaff can be read: “In classical Newtonian mechanics, the description of the interaction of bodies with the help of potential energy implies instant distribution of interactions. In a wonderful book by N.T. Rosever, The Perihelion of Mercury. From Le Verrier to Einstein (M, 1985) on page 181 it is reported that Newton's theory is not compatible with SRT, since it assumes instant propagation of gravitational action. Well, what about relativists?

First, Einstein accepted the dependence of the speed of light on the gravitational potential:

c = c o (1 + f/ c o²)

Einstein forged his GR in the fight against Abraham's theory, according to which there was a slightly different expression:

c = c o (1 + 2Ф/ c o ²) ½.

However, Mie and Nordstrom believed that the speed of light should be constant, as required by SRT. Einstein later agreed with them and changed his position (see). Abraham, however, did not accept SRT, although he continued to believe that the gravitational interaction propagates with a finite velocity, depending on the constant c o.

Thus, the relativists took the speed of light for the speed of propagation of gravitational forces; the classical law of universal gravitation suggests instant their distribution. If the speed of gravity were some ultimate, for example, would be equal to the speed of light, then the planets of the solar system would be affected by a force from the luminary with some time delay. Instruments would be able to fix this effect of the Sun on distant comets, especially those moving along highly elongated trajectories. Thus, the delay associated with the finiteness of light propagation is easily registered through the aberration effect. As a result, the calculations give one point at which the celestial body is currently located, and we direct the telescope to a completely different point, taking into account the speed of propagation of the light signal.

However, no one has yet observed the effect gravity aberrations, so the speed of propagation of gravity is never taken into account in astronomical calculations. It is simply not known to anyone, but it turned out to be very convenient to consider it infinitely large, since in practice no errors arise in this case. Astronomers and physicists have often thought about this unusual fact. So, based on the accuracy of finding empirical data, Laplace gave his estimate of the propagation velocity of gravity forces. It turned out to be seven orders of magnitude faster than the speed of light.

He wrote: “... I found that universal gravitation is transmitted between celestial bodies at a speed that, if not infinite, then exceeds several million times the speed of light, and it is known that light from the Moon reaches the Earth in less than two seconds” [ Pierre Simon Laplace. "Exposition of the system of the world", 1796]. This is - bottom line for the speed of gravity, i.e. she can really be infinitely large. Nowadays, due to the increasing accuracy of astronomical observations, this lower limit has moved even further from the speed of light.

An American astronomer, Tom Van Flandern, published an article in 1998 under the eloquent title: "The Speed ​​of Gravity - What the Experiments Say". Studying the action of gravity based on the data of the double pulsar PSR 1913 + 16 and the pair of pulsars PSR 1534 + 12, the author names as the lower limit the value of the speed, which is 11 - 14 orders of magnitude higher than the speed of light. It can be expected that with increasing accuracy of astronomical measurements, the lower limit will move farther and farther away from the speed of light in the direction of increase.

Kepler's laws, the universal law of gravitation, subsequent refinements of the methods for calculating planetary orbits, proposed by Laplace, Poincaré and other mechanics, were not related to the refinement of the light constant. Why? Yes, because it is not included in the formulas of classical celestial mechanics. And this just means that the planetary interaction occurs as if instantly. The speed of light is included in Maxwell's equations and the wave equation associated with them, but it is not in the equations of celestial mechanics. If the light constant is introduced into the laws of mechanics, then this mechanics will be very different from the traditional one. With its help, it will no longer be possible to calculate the movement of the planets of the solar system. It says " as if instantaneously, because in nature nothing happens instantaneously. That is why it is necessary to find a way out of this paradoxical situation.

In connection with this problem, I recall long range principle. As you know, this is a physical idealization, in which, nevertheless, the universal law of gravity works flawlessly. In the real world dominates, of course, short range principle, i.e. for the propagation of any kind of interaction, including gravitational, a medium is needed, which, of course, requires time spent on the transfer of excitation. On the face contradiction, which can be bypassed in the case of a completely different idea of ​​the mechanism of the so-called "attraction" of massive bodies.

Look at the movement of the arms of spiral galaxies, which were studied by a group of researchers led by A.M. Friedman (see his article Prediction and discovery of new structures in spiral galaxies). Their speed around the center of the galaxy does not obey the laws of Kepler known to us. In this regard, relativists (in our country they are Ginzburg, Rubakov, etc.) began to talk about dark matter. This train of thought, of course, is false: the introduction of hidden parameters for any theory is a speculative step, frankly speaking, dark. Here you can use the mechanism cyclonic or vortex type, which, in particular, is described in the article by S.N. Artekhi and others. On the role of electromagnetic interactions in the dynamics of powerful atmospheric vortices .

What happens in a cyclone that originated, for example, in the earth's atmosphere? In it, the rotation of water vapor (clouds and thunderclouds) occurs not due to some massive central body, but due to the rotational moment dispersed throughout the volume, captured by the cyclone. The same mechanism operates in spiral galaxies. Individual stars and interstellar matter are similar to water condensate in atmospheric cyclones and anticyclones. The arms of galaxies are untwisted not due to the action of central-radial forces, but due to exclusively tangential forces acting tangentially to the trajectory of motion of material bodies. In other words, in spiral galaxies the rotation of massive bodies exists, but there are no gravitational forces in the Newtonian-Keplerian sense.

Atmospheric cyclone spin-up mechanism
and spiral galaxies are about the same.

The solar system is the same cyclone, only highly evolved, so that it has lost its usual form for us, but retained its rotational momentum. It turns out that the Sun exists, but it does not “attract” the planets in the sense that it is now commonly believed. (It is calculated that the Sun "attracts" the Earth with a force of 3.6 · 10 21 kg). According to the vortex model, the planets move in their orbits by inertia, maintaining the torque imparted to them initially, even during the formation of the solar system as a whole.

Outwardly clean - phenomenologically- planetary trajectories are described by Kepler's laws, which are unambiguously connected with the universal law of gravitation. However, he is not the reason why the planets are kept in orbit. The main thing here is the cumulative torque distributed over all the bodies of the solar system. In accordance with individual rotational moments, the mass of the planets and satellites also "condensed", so that in the end these masses comply with the law of gravity.

According to the latest ideas, gravitational interaction is carried out due to gravitons- virtual particles that are exchanged between the Sun and the Earth, the Earth and the Moon, etc. Moreover, gravitons must have a negative mass, otherwise the celestial bodies will experience repulsive forces, not attraction. The speed of forces of attraction here is understood as the speed of movement of gravitons in empty space. This quantum exchange mechanism, blindly borrowed from the theoretical developments of physicists working in the field of the atomic microcosm, remains largely artificial (gravitons are a complete analogue of exchange particles mesons).

The mechanism of air cyclones and water vortices is much more transparent for understanding, which, however, modern physicists do not favor. Therefore, since the time of Helmholtz and Lord Kelvin, we have not advanced very far in this area. So, we do not understand at all what happens to a cyclone when myriads of solid particles appear instead of air and water. See what is being done with the rings of Saturn, how confused their dynamics are (see: section, fig. 82 - 88); very complex resonances exist in the asteroid belt. These examples show us something intermediate between a spiral galaxy and a solar system. Artificial spacecraft also behave very strangely when left to their own devices. Their vibrations and rotations are completely unpredictable. And, nevertheless, they obey classical mechanics, which, strange as it may sound now, we still do not know well.

Before measuring "head-on" the speed of gravitational forces, it would not hurt to find out the mechanism of their action hidden from us. Apparently, the law of universal gravitation is a simple formal-phenomenological expression that satisfies only some phenomena of observational astronomy. It is now more or less clear that the forces of "attraction" are secondary or, better said, induced. They do not act on straight lines connecting, for example, the Sun and the Earth, the Earth and the Moon. Sun-Earth-Moon form a coupled resonant system, for which it is important history of its formation. Resonance phenomena or synchronisms are a special and very curious area of ​​classical mechanics (see section Discrete gravity and attractors). Thus, it would be a mistake to measure the speed of gravitational influence along a straight line connecting some test body on the periphery of the cyclone with the center of its rotation. Therefore, as a mathematical fiction, it will always give an infinitely large value.

A few words about the structure of matter. At the beginning of the 20th century, a stationary ( thomson model of the atom) and dynamic ( Bohr model of the atom) constructions of the elementary brick of the Universe. Both models have existed for a long time at a quasi-quantitative level. After the appearance Schrödinger equations began to calculate atomic models much more accurately. In this case, the numerical orientation went to the absorption and reflection spectra in the following way.

A model Hamiltonian was compiled, which represents the energy of interaction within an atomic system. It can be represented as a matrix. The eigenvalues ​​of this matrix correspond to the energies in the reflection and absorption spectra, and the eigenvectors correspond to the wave functions of electrons (i.e., psi-functions). If we calculate the simplest hydrogen atom, focusing on its spectrum, it will be immediately clear that its psi-functions (ie electrons) cannot be represented by some simple models. Electronic states (s, p, d, etc.) do not have uniaxial symmetry, as in a dipole, but multiaxial. As a result, the electron turned into a mathematical function, the geometric form of which remained largely undefined.

With the development of quantum physics, the energy of the interaction of an electron with the nucleus of an atom came to the fore. Began to distinguish tight coupling models and weak link models. The mathematical form of the psi-function depends on the environment in which the electron is located, i.e. from structural factor. Whether to consider an electron as a localized or delocalized object (there is a lot of controversy about this) depends to a large extent on this structural factor. If in the direct space of the crystal lattice an electron is a particle, then in the reciprocal space it is already a wave and vice versa. Outside of this structural factor, it is meaningless to talk about the localization of an electron - whether it is a point or a wave.

As early as the end of the 19th century, physicists were confident that we knew how to calculate a dynamical system like the solar system. However, the synchronisms discussed above reveal vast gaps in our knowledge of classical mechanics. It turned out that the dynamics of the solar system is no less complex than the dynamics of electrons in an atom. As in the atomic system, discrete values ​​are found in it, subject to harmonic proportions.

At the beginning of the 20th century, socio-psychological aspects were added to the purely theoretical difficulties of physics. Not only is the mathematics of unstable, evolving cyclones with numerous resonances very complex, and the experiments are expensive, but aero- and hydrodynamics are also boring. As a result, this area of ​​physics does not enjoy much attention among young people and the general public. In our country, they were successfully engaged in N.P. Kasterin , A.K. Timiryazev and A.S. leader, but their school was covered by relativists. Today they are the masters of life; academics and young people prefer to fantasize about the Big Bang and black holes, they do not want to engage in serious science. For them, physicists-speculators, is already close End of science; for us, constructivist physicists, astromechanics is just beginning.

There is a passage in Laplace's "Statement of the System of the World" that relativistic cosmologists associate with the appearance in physics of the concept black hole. “A luminous celestial body,” wrote the French scientist, “having a density equal to the density of the Earth, and a diameter two hundred and fifty times greater than the diameter of the Sun, due to the force of its attraction, does not allow light to reach us. Thus, it is possible that the largest luminous bodies of the Universe, precisely because of their size, remain invisible.

Back in 1783, the Englishman John Mitchell calculated the speed of light particles (at that time corpuscular concepts dominated), at which particles could not leave a cosmic body with mass M and radius R: , here G is the gravitational constant. This formula is obtained by equating the kinetic and potential energy of a light particle located on the surface of a body, so its mass does not appear in the formula. In this regard, relativists began to talk about the gravitational radius of the cosmic body r g = 2GM / c². If the compression of the mass of the cosmic body is such that its radius is less than the gravitational one (r

A black hole is usually depicted as two-dimensional.
It will not be visible in 3D space.

The German astronomer Karl Schwarzschild, investigating Einstein's gravitational equations under the condition r = r g , obtained a singularity.

With a decrease in the radius of the Sun, first to the size of a white dwarf (40 thousand km), and then to the size of a neutron star (30 km), as a result, our luminary will turn into a black hole.

After that, relativists began to convince their colleagues of the collapse of space-time around massive bodies and introduced their own specific terminology: “Schwarzschild sphere”, “event horizon”, “black hole”, which is obtained from a neutron star, which, in turn, once was a white dwarf.

A decrease in the radius of a star causes the rays of light to bend more and more. Finally, its radius becomes equal to the Schwarzschild radius, at which the rays completely return to the surface of the star. In this case, an outside observer will not see the star collapsed in this way.

If black holes themselves cannot be seen, how can they be detected? Relativists convince us that their presence is indicated by a number of indirect signs. First of all, when observing the starry sky, it is necessary to focus on those groups of stars that revolve around a certain center of gravity, in which there is nothing. Hence, it is assumed that black holes are located in the centers of galaxies.

In our galaxy, relativistic cosmologists say, there is certainly a black hole with a mass equal to approximately 2.5 million solar masses. Although black holes the size of an atom can form. In this case, their mass should be equal to 100 million tons. It is argued that these tiny holes can be formed in accelerators when nuclear particles collide. Their appearance is fraught with a global catastrophe, since a black hole the size of an atom can suck the Earth and the entire solar system into itself.

who depicted her for some reason two-dimensional
and forgot to draw the accretion disk.

Not only stars revolve around black holes, but also all nearby space objects, for example, gas, dust, asteroids and entire planets wandering in interstellar space. As a result, around the black hole is formed the so-called accretion disk resembling the ring of Saturn. Approach of matter particles to the hole occurs in a spiral with increasing acceleration. At some point, the rotating particles begin to emit a powerful stream of X-rays. It can be detected by instruments installed in observatories. In addition, another hole can fall into the gravitational field of one black hole. At the moment of their collision, a giant quantum of gravitational waves will be released, which can be registered using special sensors.

When two black holes collide, a quantum of energy corresponding to one percent of their total mass will be released in the form of gravitational waves.

According to the log message Nature, at the end of December 1998, at the beginning of January 1999, a group of astronomers, headed by Professor Paulo de Benardis from the University of Rome, conducted an experiment to clarify the existence of space curvature on a cosmic scale. The measurements concerned the cosmic microwave background and were carried out using a sensitive telescope raised by a balloon high above the Antarctic. The result was negative: our Universe has strictly Euclidean geometry. This means that the rays of light travel in straight lines, and the interior angles of the triangle add up to 180°. Theoretically, there could be elliptical(> 180°) and hyperbolic (Geometry and experience .

Arguments have already been given against the existence of space curvature - whether on the scale of the Universe or within the boundaries of massive bodies - but let's call them again:

• light, as electromagnetic radiation, does not interact with the gravitational field;
• the photon has no mass and therefore cannot really exist;
• the rays from the stars do not deviate in the vicinity of the Sun, and when observing an eclipse in 1919, Eddington was mistaken.

Thus, the spatio-temporal metric of the real world does not experience any compression, stretching or curvature. Therefore, there are no gravitational lenses, black holes and wormholes that arise due to the existence of a "curved" space-time topology. However, these arguments are not accepted by relativists; they continue to fantasize, relying on the basis of SRT and GR. The scope of today's speculation is comparable to the scale of the growth of scholasticism in the Middle Ages. “The reason for such a sudden turn,” writes Michio Kaku, “was the emergence of a new string theory and its latest version, M-theory, which not only promises to reveal the nature of the Multiverse, but also promises the opportunity to "see God's plan" firsthand, as Einstein once eloquently put it. …

Hundreds of international conferences have been devoted to this topic. Every university in the world either has a string theory group or is making desperate attempts to study it. Although the theory cannot be tested with our imperfect modern instruments, it has aroused the keenest interest of mathematicians, theoretical physicists, and even experimentalists who hope to test the periphery of the universe (of course, in the future) with thin detectors of gravitational waves of outer space and powerful particle accelerators. …

Cosmic Mind Michio Kaku

In this terminology, the laws of physics, carefully substantiated by thousands of years of experiments, are nothing more than the laws of harmony, which are valid for strings and membranes. The laws of chemistry are melodies that can be played on these strings. The entire Universe is a divine symphony for a "string orchestra"... The question arises: if the Universe is a symphony for a string orchestra, then who is its author?

In chapter 12, Michio Kaku answers this question: “Personally, from a purely scientific point of view, I believe that probably the strongest argument for the existence of Einstein's or Spinoza's God originates in theology. If string theory eventually finds its way as a theory of everything, then we will have to ask ourselves where the equations themselves come from. If the unified field theory is truly unique, as Einstein believed, then we have to ask where this uniqueness comes from. Physicists who believe in God believe that the universe is so beautiful and simple that its underlying laws cannot be random. Otherwise, the universe could be completely disordered or composed of lifeless electrons and neutrinos, incapable of creating any life, let alone intelligent.”

Michio Kaku draws a table of correspondences, in which he shyly put three symbols against the composer - ??! Somehow it is inconvenient for modern physicists to appeal to God, nevertheless, their worldview includes a supernatural being, with whose mind the Universe is so beautifully arranged.

However, a sad fate awaits our descendants and God will not help them. The anti-gravitational forces that caused the Big Bang will then lead to the Great Chill and “The universe will eventually perish from the cold. All intelligent life on the planet, freezing, will beat in excruciating agony, since the temperature of deep space is close to absolute zero, and at such a temperature even molecules barely "move". At some point, after trillions and trillions of years, the stars will stop emitting light, their nuclear reactor will go out, having used up all the fuel, and the Universe will plunge into eternal night.

Cosmic expansion will lead to the fact that only a cold dead Universe will remain, consisting of black dwarf stars, neutron stars and black holes. And in an even more distant future, even black holes will give up all their energy, leaving only a lifeless cold nebula of floating elementary particles. In such a faded cold Universe, intelligent life is physically impossible in principle. The iron laws of thermodynamics will stop any transmission of information in this icy environment, and all life will no doubt cease.”

Big Black Specialist
holes are considered

This apocalyptic picture can be avoided, Kaku believes, if humanity does not sit idly by, waiting for its demise. “Some physicists, drawing on the latest achievements of science, have built several plausible, albeit highly hypothetical, schemes that should confirm the reality of creating space portals or gates to another universe. Classroom boards in physics classrooms around the world are littered with abstract equations: physicists are calculating whether it is possible to use "exotic energy" and black holes to find a tunnel that leads to another universe. Can an advanced civilization, technologically ahead of ours by millions and billions of years, use the known laws of physics to move to another universe?”

The most dangerous tendency for modern physics is to combine it with one form or another of religiosity. There are pages on the Skeptic-Ratio website that show physical systems with God at the head, for example, Physics of God Bozhidar Palyushev and New physics Andrey Grishaev. However, most theories dispense with the Almighty, which is why they do not become less fabulous. Advice to young seekers of truth: do not strive for fundamentalism either; try to create models of specific physical processes, and then, perhaps, if the solutions to particular problems are more or less correct, a large-scale and integral picture of the reality around us will form in your head.

No general and universal system of the world, the so-called Theories of Everything, does not exist. The world is so diverse and inexhaustible that any attempt to describe it entirely from a unified standpoint, based on a certain set of basic principles, will inevitably fail. All the newfangled talk about the end of science stems from the limited knowledge of those who talk about it. In the collection of articles of generality and universality, behind which, however, loomed two more "remarkable" properties - simplicity and originality(in the sense of wit). In fact, all four of the "virtues" listed here are illusory. An ignorant in the sciences, a blatant philistine inconsistency and absurdity took for originality; behind simplicity usually hidden primitiveness and sketchiness explanations; a generality and versatility was achieved through abstract and meaningless philosophizing about everything in the world.

There is an opinion that NASA is purposefully funding the release of hundreds of books and films about dark matter, black holes and the Big Bang in order to confuse competing scientific centers, and at the same time make some extra money on those naive dreamers who enthusiastically read and watch enchanting stupidity about device of the universe. Whether this is actually the case is not known, but given the history of the emergence of the NASA military propaganda machine, this point of view cannot be ruled out.

At the turn of the century, information began to spread around the world about the extremely rapid disappearance of glaciers. Mount Kilimanjaro has taken the lead in this disinformation campaign. On December 20, 2002, the NASA Earth Observatory published two photographs from 1993 and 2000 that went around the world under the heading "The Melting Snows of Kilimanjaro". But on March 25, 2005, under the influence of the most severe criticism of opponents of the theory of global warming, the title under which these two pictures were published was changed to "Snow and Ice of Kilimanjaro." The fact is that the photo of 1993 was taken after snow fell on the top of Kibo, and in the photo of 2000 only glaciers are visible. However, speculation on the "snow" of Kilimanjaro, the ice of the Arctic and other photographs taken by NASA did not end in 2005.

It is difficult to overcome the feeling of mistrust associated with the deception of the world community, which this organization went to when discussing the problem of global warming (see subsection Photo manipulation of Kilimanjaro). If NASA is capable of violating the unwritten code of scientific ethics in the realm of experimental climatology, then it won't feel much qualms about maintaining cute naive fictions about the curvature of space, black holes, and the Big Bang.

Not so long ago, on December 26, 2011, NASA's Terra satellite (Terra EOS AM-1) photographed a giant underwater whirlpool off the coast of South Africa. Is this photo credible? Obviously not. In any case, there is a very high probability that we are dealing with another fake of a venerable organization.

Another example, also related to NASA photography. A snapshot of a huge whirlpool that allegedly arose in the southern part of the Atlantic Ocean was accompanied by an apocalyptic message of the following content: South Atlantic and to the emergence of a severe drought in Africa and southern South America in February 2012 ... A few days ago, the UN warned of a food crisis in Africa. This drought could cause food shortages and higher food prices around the world in 2012.”

A space photograph of a giant vortex and its enlarged version went around all the world's media. However, the international scientific community for some reason did not react to this sensational information. It is also strange that the origin of the vortex, its forward movement in the waters of the Atlantic Ocean and, finally, its final disintegration was not recorded by any other spacecraft, and there are now tens of thousands of them. Thus, we are kept in complete ignorance of the physics of this natural phenomenon. The press reports give a completely unsatisfactory explanation: "pumping water from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic." And before this "pumping" was not? The photo of the whirlpool dates back to late December 2011, and it appeared in the media at the end of February 2012, when nothing could be verified. The question is, why wait two months?

It seems that, as in the case of the "Kyoto Protocol" - the adviser to the President of the Russian Federation Andrei Illarionov was energetically exposing it in our country - here we are faced with a scientific falsification thrown into the mass consciousness in order to obtain illegal economic benefits. The scientific inconsistency of global warming through the fault of supposedly man, and, moreover, the existence of a giant whirlpool in the ocean, which supposedly portends drought over vast territories, is easy for a specialist to detect. It is much more difficult to prove the fact of a scam to millions of ordinary people who wholeheartedly believe in official, especially American sources of information. In this regard, it is likely that such an influential scientific and economic organization as NASA, too, uses the romantic cosmologist Michio Kaku for financial profit. In any case, it will not be out of place for our reader to show at least a small amount of skepticism when he sees amazing pictures, films and videos of unusual content.

Michio (Michio) Kaku(Michio Kaku) is a Japanese-American scientist, theoretical physicist, futurologist, and author of popular science books.

Born January 24, 1947 in San Jose, California. His ancestors were Japanese immigrants. Michio's father is a native of California, but was educated in Japan and was fluent in Japanese and English. During World War II, he was sent to a California military internment camp for the Japanese, where he met his future wife and where his elder brother Michio was born.

In the early 1960s, Kaku built a particle accelerator in his garage as a high school student at Cubberley High School in Palo Alto. At a national science fair in Albuquerque, New Mexico, his project attracted the attention of physicist Edward Teller, who earned Kaku a Hertz Foundation scholarship.

Michio Kaku graduated with honors from Harvard University in 1968; he was the best in physics in his graduation. He then went to work at the Radiation Laboratory at the University of California at Berkeley, where he received his Ph.D. During the Vietnam War, he was drafted into the army, underwent basic training at Fort Benning, Georgia, and advanced training as an infantryman at Fort Lewis, Washington, but never got to the front.

He is married to Shizue Kaku and has two daughters. He currently lives with his family in New York, where he has been teaching at City College (the main and oldest college of the City University of New York) for more than 25 years.

Michio Kaku is an active popularizer of science, in particular, theoretical physics and modern concepts of the structure of the universe. In his books, he tries to convey complex scientific theories to every reader, presenting them in an accessible language. One of his bestsellers is based on the documentary Non-Science Fiction. Physics of the Impossible (Sci Fi Science: Physics of the Impossible). Each of the 12 episodes of the film is devoted to a discussion of the scientific basis of a particular fantastic idea and the reality of its implementation in the future and includes interviews with the world's leading scientists working on prototypes of these technologies, with science fiction fans, fragments from science fiction films.

Kaku often appears on radio and television, advises screenwriters and science fiction writers. He also enjoys astronomy and has curated many documentaries about the universe. According to the scientist's own statement, he analyzes time throughout his conscious life in science.

Fantastic in the work of Michio Kaku

Although Michio Kaku's creative work does not include fiction, his non-fiction books are closely related to science fiction. In his books, Kaku analyzes various "inventions" of science fiction writers, considers from the point of view of modern science the possibility of implementing such fantastic ideas and concepts as teleportation, time travel, telekinesis, invisibility, parallel universes and many others, without which one cannot imagine, for example , star trek or Star Wars. The book "Physics of the Impossible" is devoted to the scientific substantiation of fictional technologies. The book "Physics of the Future" gives a much wider panorama of the near future; it talks about technologies that now seem fantastic, but may bear fruit in a hundred years and determine the future fate of mankind.

Michio Kaku - about the author

Michio has written nine non-fiction books, two of which, Visions and Hyperspace, have become bestsellers and have been translated into several languages. Michio Kaku often appears on radio and television programs, and is filmed in documentaries.

Kaku is one of the few serious scientists who appeals to the widest audience: he popularizes his scientific views, gives comments on large-scale scientific events and phenomena, and can explain in simple terms the most complex problems of theoretical physics and the universe.

Michio Kaku - books for free:

Instinct tells us that our world is three-dimensional. Based on this idea, scientific hypotheses have been built for centuries. According to the eminent physicist Michio Kaku, this is the same prejudice as the belief of the ancient Egyptians that the Earth was flat ...

Who better than physicists to talk about what the world will be like in 2100? How computers will be controlled by one effort of will, how a person will be able to move objects with the power of thought, how we will connect to the world information ...

Until quite recently, it was difficult for us to even imagine today's world of familiar things...

What bold predictions of science fiction writers and filmmakers about the future have a chance to come true before our eyes...

Michio Kaku tries to answer this question...,