"The language of truth is simple."

Seneca the Younger

1.1. What are we really talking about?

In the history of medicine there was such a clinical case.

« Until about the middle of the 19th century, puerperal fever raged in obstetric clinics in Europe. In some years, she claimed up to 30 percent or more of the lives of mothers who gave birth in these clinics. Women preferred to give birth on trains and on the streets, so as not to end up in the hospital, and when they went to bed, they said goodbye to their relatives as if they were going to the chopping block. It was believed that this disease is epidemic in nature, there were about 30 theories of its origin. It was associated with a change in the state of the atmosphere, and with soil changes, and with the location of clinics, and they tried to treat everyone, up to the use of a laxative. Autopsies always showed the same picture: death was due to blood poisoning.

F. Pachner cites the following figures: "... for 60 years in Prussia alone, 363,624 women in childbirth died from puerperal fever, i.e. more than during the same time from smallpox and cholera combined ... Mortality rate of 10% was considered quite normal, in other words, out of 100 women in labor, 10 died of puerperal fever ... Of all the diseases that were then subjected to statistical analysis, puerperal fever was accompanied by the highest mortality.

In 1847, a 29-year-old physician from Vienna, Ignaz Semmelweis, discovered the secret of puerperal fever. Comparing the data in two different clinics, he came to the conclusion that the cause of this disease is the negligence of doctors who examined pregnant women, delivered children and performed gynecological operations with non-sterile hands and in non-sterile conditions. Ignaz Semmelweis proposed washing hands not just with soap and water, but disinfecting them with chlorine water - this was the essence of the new method of preventing disease.

Semmelweis's teaching was not finally and universally accepted during his lifetime; he died in 1865, i.e. 18 years after its discovery, although it was extremely easy to verify its correctness in practice. Moreover, the discovery of Semmelweis caused a sharp wave of condemnation not only against his methods, but also against himself (all the luminaries of the medical world of Europe rebelled).

Semmelweis was a young specialist (by the time of his discovery, he managed to work as a doctor for about six months) and had not yet landed on the saving shore of any of the theories then available. Therefore, he did not need to adjust the facts to some pre-selected concept. It is much more difficult for an experienced specialist to make a revolutionary discovery than for a young, inexperienced one. There is no paradox in this: major discoveries require the abandonment of old theories. It is very difficult for a professional: the psychological inertia of experience is crushing. And a person passes by the opening, fenced off with an impenetrable "this does not happen" ...

The discovery of Semmelweis, in fact, was a sentence for obstetricians around the world who rejected him and continued to work with the old methods. It turned these doctors into killers, with their own hands - literally - bringing the infection. This is the main reason why it was sharply and unconditionally rejected in the beginning. The director of the clinic, Dr. Klein, forbade Semmelweis to publish statistics on the decrease in mortality due to the introduction of hand sterilization. Klein said that he would consider such a publication a denunciation. In fact, only for the discovery of Semmelweis was expelled from work (did not extend the formal contract), despite the fact that the mortality rate in the clinic fell sharply. He had to leave Vienna for Budapest, where he did not immediately and with difficulty got a job.

The naturalness of such an attitude is easy to understand if we imagine what impression Semmelweis's discovery made on doctors. When one of them, Gustav Michaelis, a well-known doctor from Kiel, who was informed about the technique, introduced mandatory sterilization of hands with chlorine water in his clinic in 1848 and became convinced that the mortality rate had really fallen, then, unable to withstand the shock, he committed suicide. In addition, Semmelweis, in the eyes of the world's professors, was too young and inexperienced to teach and, moreover, to demand something else. Finally, his discovery sharply contradicted most of the theories of the time.

At first, Semmelweis tried to inform doctors in the most delicate way - through private letters. He wrote to world-famous scientists - Virchow, Simpson. Compared to them, Semmelweis was a provincial doctor who did not even have experience. His letters had practically no effect on the world community of doctors, and everything remained the same: doctors did not disinfect their hands, patients died, and this was considered the norm.

By 1860, Semmelweis had written a book. But she was also ignored.

Only after that did he begin to write open letters to his most prominent opponents. One of them contained the following words: "... if we can somehow come to terms with the devastation produced by puerperal fever before 1847, for no one can be blamed for crimes committed unconsciously, then the situation with mortality from it after 1847 is quite different. 1864 marks 200 years since puerperal fever began to rage in obstetric clinics - it's time to finally put an end to this.Who is to blame for the fact that 15 years after the emergence of the theory of prevention of puerperal fever, women in labor continue to die? None other as a professor of obstetrics..."

The obstetrics professors Semmelweis approached were shocked by his tone. Semmelweis was declared a man "with an impossible character." He appealed to the conscience of scientists, but in response they fired "scientific" theories, clad in an armor of unwillingness to understand anything that would contradict their concepts. There was both falsification and juggling of facts. Some professors, introducing “Semmelweis sterility” in their clinics, did not officially recognize this, but attributed the decrease in mortality due to their own theories in their reports, for example, improved ventilation of the wards ... There were doctors who falsified statistical data. And when Semmelweis's theory began to gain recognition, naturally, there were scientists who challenged the priority of the discovery.

Semmelweis fought fiercely all his life, knowing full well that every day of delay in the implementation of his theory brings senseless sacrifices that might not have happened ... But his discovery was fully recognized only by the next generation of doctors, who did not have the blood of thousands of women who never became mothers. The non-recognition of Semmelweis by experienced doctors was self-justification, the method of hand disinfection could not be accepted by them in principle. It is characteristic, for example, that the Prague school of doctors, whose mortality rate was the highest in Europe, resisted the longest. Semmelweis's discovery was recognized there only 37 (!) years after it was made.

Excellent

Grade 5 out of 5 stars by Guest 04.11.2018 04:05

Just go crazy! I would like to know what kind of person this author is. It is felt that the person is smart, He painted everything clearly and in detail. I am sure that the author is mistaken on many points. For example, it cannot be physically possible for the Moon to revolve around the Earth, while the Earth itself would oscillate in response only along one line along the trajectory in orbit around the Sun. What are you, elementary mechanics! Wikipedia describes in detail how the Earth and the moon rotate around each other, the center of gravity is several thousand kilometers from the center of the Earth. Naturally, the Earth revolves around the center of mass. Physically, it cannot be otherwise. Even if the lunar matter was attracted to the Earth, and the matter of the Earth were not attracted to the moon, the rotation of the Moon and the Earth would still be around the Barrycenter. For example, in the center of the Earth, something that creates all the earth's gravity attracts the moon. In this case, the moon will pull this "something" for exactly the same amount, so it is even impossible to distinguish such an attraction from the classical attraction of everything. The tides would not occur, and the rotation around the barycenter would be all the same! Further, here someone close-minded writes, they say, the tides and the truth from the sun should be greater than from the moon, because. the gravitational field of the sun is greater than that of the moon (on earth). The field itself, uniform, will not cause tides !!! (Simplistically I write). For tides, the field must be gradient! From the sun the gradient is almost zero, from the moon it is noticeable. Because different parts of the earth at different distances from the moon are tides from this. And for the sun, these thousands of kilometers are a drop in the ocean, everything is almost uniform. So people, think. The world is very, very complex, determine correctly what can be simplified and what cannot, the author actually said - "people, all science is nonsense, the world was created by God (program) and that's it." From this point of view, you can generally explain and challenge anything you like - the program is like that, you see! I gave the book a high rating for its presentation, but here facts, truth and fairy tales are subtly mixed. So, that's some kind of fucker. People, it's not easy to understand the theory of relativity, but it's possible. I have seen many videos where they try to show that one hundred and one does not work - almost all of these videos are from stupid people, the arguments are one-sided and superficial. Well, why try to do something popular and accessible to everyone from such a most difficult law of nature for people to understand! You really need to go headlong into the study of the issue in order to understand all this at least a little! I checked the calculations on the gps satellites, everything converges! Relativistic time dilation on them is 7.2 ISS per day relative to the clock on the earth base! 232 ISS per day relative to a hypothetical fixed base relative to the sun! Because the earth flies in an orbit around the sun at 30 km/s. And now, attention, the lag of the satellite's clock relative to the sun is 239.2 ISS per day! And if we add 232 and 7.2 - we get the same 239.2! Everything fits perfectly! Further, the lag of the sundial relative to the stationary ones in the middle of our galaxy (after all, the sun flies around the black hole at about 200 km / s) by many milliseconds per day, and if we calculate the lag of the earth’s clock, the clock of the satellites, we can calculate separately with respect to what you want and directly with each other. compare these watches with another - everything also converges! You need to be able to add speeds correctly, I have been racking my brains for a month and I didn’t just stumble upon this material and here is the line of this comment due to the fact that I cannot remain silent on this topic, I want to understand this as it really is according to modern data and I can not thoroughly understand, slowly have to delve into. Few people understand this at all, the literature is minuscule, an intelligent "teacher" cannot be found.

Grade 4 out of 5 stars by Sergey 02.10.2018 21:00

I read the whole book. The book is very interesting. I advise you to read it to those who are interested in physics and the structure of the world.
But it is hard to read, maybe because there are not enough pictures explaining some experiments (for example, in sections 4 and 5).
The model, with my level of knowledge (technical university), in my opinion very well describes and clarifies some experiences and phenomena (for example, tides, etc.).
According to the law of universal gravitation, there should be solar and lunar ebbs and flows, and the solar tides are much larger, which does not fit into reality a little.
Once again I was convinced that physics is an experimental, experimental and interesting science. There is no point in wasting time memorizing physical laws; it is much better to observe them in action in experiments and experiments.
It is very bad when the results of these experiments are hushed up or adjusted to the accepted theoretical doctrines.
I hope that I will come across many more interesting materials on this topic.
Good luck and inspiration to all new physicists!!! To all orthodox enlightenment!!!

Grade 5 out of 5 stars by Bookchit 19.02.2018 20:47

The book and movies are very interesting.
And it is unlikely that among the representatives of official science (academicians, etc.) there will be those who can also publicly refute this point of view or confirm it (or at least comment on it), and it is clear why.
So that:

"... The physical world in which we live is not self-sufficient. Physical reality exists thanks to the over-physical reality. Thanks to the software of the physical world. Programs form particles of matter and programmatically set the options for interactions in which particles can participate. Gravity is generated not by masses, but by electromagnetic phenomena are not charges. Programs control matter. That is why physical laws operate in the world, and chaos and arbitrariness do not reign ... "

Grade 5 out of 5 stars from Anatoly 10/24/2017 17:36

Once again I was convinced that not everything is so simple in the world and the school does not provide all the necessary knowledge, and in general humanity is going somewhere wrong, the author would think who is leading humanity and who is playing that huge performance called life. I have long been accustomed to not trust anyone, BUT the author has a number of comments that raise questions about where the truth is. In any case, this creation is better than gums, house 2 and other flooding in the information field of the planet.

Grade 5 out of 5 stars by Prutogib on 20.09.2017 12:43

I don't even know what to say... It's just the schizophasia of a sick person suffering from conspiracy theories. He should call the doctors.

Grade 1 out of 5 stars by Ilya 05/28/2017 04:01

Grade 5 out of 5 stars by Andrey 08/06/2016 08:37

My knowledge is only enough to evaluate quantum mechanics, but I can say that I meet so much anti-scientific nonsense in one place for the first time.

Grade 1 out of 5 stars by Dmitry 06/08/2016 11:47

Scientific frychestvo pure water.

Grade 1 out of 5 stars from Denis 04/07/2016 02:07

Regarding the absence of gravity in asteroids - a blizzard, apparently, by 99%.
Regarding the deflection of the star's light by the corona of the sun, and not by gravity - probably.
Regarding the infidelity of the law of universal gravitation - a clinic, and the author (or authors)
they understand it well.
Gives the impression of a well-thought-out zombie message to the masses, or
, on the contrary, the deliberate discrediting of the opponents of SRT is a method of creating an image
according to the methodology of Pocheptsov's communication theory.

Grade 3 out of 5 stars by Vasek 14.02.2015 17:06

And I liked it. I bet 5
my knowledge is not even at the level of vocational schools anymore, I would like to know: so, is the radius of the gravitational field of the moon less than the calculated one? Yes, and 5 times less? Americans trampled the moon or not?
And most importantly, how much does our native Earth weigh?

I was struck not by the book, but by the scope of fantasy with logical consequences from false premises. The author is a phenomenal erudite in many areas of physics and chemistry as well. How subtly he links the desired with reality through simplification. And all this not only through verbal-philosophical statements with the richest study (it is felt that he did not sleep at night), but also armed with school mathematics. I even had to review the results of Basov's laboratory experiments. Of course, there was no fantasy described by the author. All within the framework of Maxwell's equations. But, alas, this is no longer school mathematics. Maxwell's equations are written from direct and indisputable experiments and, by the way, SRT is simply stupidly a direct and only record of the results of simple and indisputable experiments. And, what is characteristic, if SRT would be incorrect, then Maxwell's equations would have a completely different form. It's just, stupidly, MATH. If it were not for SRT, for example, then the astronaut, without looking out of the ship, would immediately understand that he was not at rest, but was flying. Mathematical logic, in contrast to verbal logic with the episodic involvement of school mathematics, squeezes researchers into such a rigid framework of explanation to explain Experimental data, what turns out, unfortunately, is what official science gives.

The tragedy of many talented individuals who are trying to rethink or even edit the official physical picture of the world is that they base their constructions by no means on experimental realities. Talented loners read textbooks - naively believing that they state the facts. Not at all: the textbook ah sets out ready-made interpretations of the facts, adapted to the perception of the crowd. Moreover, these interpretations would look very strange in the light of the true experimental picture known to science. Therefore, the true experimental picture is deliberately distorted - the book contains a lot of evidence that the FACTS are partly hushed up, and partly distorted. And for what? For the sake of making the interpretations look plausible - being in agreement with the official theoretical doctrines. In the words of pundits, it turns out beautifully: we are looking for, they say, the truth, and the criterion of truth is practice. But in reality, the accepted theoretical doctrines turn out to be their criterion of truth. For if the facts do not fit into such a doctrine, then it is not the theory that is reshaped, but the facts. False theory is confirmed by false practice. But the pride of scientists does not suffer. We, they say, were on the right path, we are going, and we will go! This is not another "conspiracy theory". It's just that every scientist understands that if he "goes against the current", then he will risk his reputation, career, funding ... The successes of modern technologies have almost nothing to do with physical theories. In the past, we were well aware of the situation when buggy and crashing software sometimes managed to do something useful. It turns out that physical theories can compete with the products of the tough guys from Redmond. For example, Einstein slowed down physics with his creations for exactly a hundred years. And the atomic bomb was made not thanks to the theory of relativity, but in spite of it. But the problem is not only in Einstein personally with the epigones, who, following the master, began vying to impose their far-fetched "axioms" and "postulates" on reality, "welding" on this "scientific reputation" and "specific money". Everything is much more serious. Welcome to the real, that is, "digital" physical world!

The work belongs to the genre Science. On our site you can download for free the book "This "digital" physical world" in epub, fb2 format or read online. The rating of the book is 3.74 out of 5. Here, before reading, you can also refer to the reviews of readers who are already familiar with the book and find out their opinion. In the online store of our partner you can buy and read the book in paper form.

Sections 4 and 5 of the book are devoted to this topic. Section 4.1 largely repeats Section 1.4, which introduces the notion quantum pulsator. It is an elementary electric charge, an electron oscillating with a frequency f and energized E=hf, where h is Planck's constant. The Planck energy is equated to the "own energy of an elementary particle", i.e. to the "Einstein formula", resulting in the "Louis de Broglie formula": E=hf=mc². The frequency of quantum pulsations is equal to 1.24 · 10 20 Hz, if we take the electron mass equal to 9.11 · 10 -31 kg. The size of the pulsator is determined by the Compton wavelength: λ = h/mc, which is 0.024 Angstroms.

Despite the usual form of formulas, their interpretation according to Grishaev is very different from the usual one adopted in physics. Exhaustive explanations are given at the beginning of Section 1.4: “In order to create the simplest digital object,” writes Grishaev, “on the screen of a computer monitor, it is necessary, using a simple program, to make any pixel “blink” at a certain frequency, i.e. alternately stay in two states - in one of which the pixel is lit, and in the other it is not lit.

Similarly, the simplest object of the "digital" physical world we call quantum pulsator. It appears to us as something that alternately stays in two different states, which cyclically replace each other with a characteristic frequency - this process directly sets the corresponding program, which forms a quantum pulsator in the physical world.

What are the two states of a quantum pulsator? We can liken them logical unit and logic zero in digital devices based on binary logic. The quantum pulsator expresses itself, in its purest form, idea being in time: the cyclic change of two states in question is an indefinitely long movement in its simplest form, which by no means implies movement in space.

The quantum pulsator stays in existence while the chain of cyclic changes of its two states continues: tick-tock, tick-tock, etc. If a quantum pulsator "freezes" in the "tick" state, it falls out of existence. If he "freezes" in the state "so" - he also falls out of existence!

That the quantum pulsator is the simplest object physical peace, i.e. elementary particle of matter, means that matter is indivisible to infinity. The electron, being a quantum pulsator, does not consist of any quarks - which are the fantasies of theorists. A quantum pulsator undergoes a qualitative transition from physical level of reality program» (1.4).

So, according to Grishaev, a quantum pulsator is something extremely speculative, where “there is a qualitative transition from physical level of reality program". Thus he expresses idea time and at the same time is physical an object having spatial dimensions equal to the Compton wavelength.

Is this possible, the reader will ask. Perhaps, if we are dealing with a religious picture of the world. The software level, as we already know, is the domain of the Lord God. But in accordance with the view just stated, the Creator enters the real world and controls it through a quantum pulsator.

Divine miracles appear immediately after the concept of a charge sign is introduced. After all, electricity can be negative and positive. What is their difference? "Positive charges 'pulsate' in phase," writes Grishaeva, "and negative charges 'pulsate' in phase, but both pulsations are out of phase by 180° relative to each other" (4.1).

The author explains: “... By themselves, quantum pulsations at an electronic frequency - with a phase of a positive or negative charge - do not generate any interactions at a distance. These pulsations of a particle are only a label, an identifier, for a software package that controls free charged particles in such a way that we create illusion their interactions with each other. If the particle has a positive or negative charge identifier, then it is covered by the control of this software package. The algorithms for this control of free charges, in short, are as follows.

First, move in such a way [the Creator commands the charges] that the deviations from the equilibrium spatial distribution of charges are equalized, in which the average density of positive charges everywhere is equal to the average density of negative charges (although the value of this density may differ from place to place). Equalization of volumetric densities of opposite charges is a manifestation of the action of "electric forces".

Secondly, move in such a way [the Creator orders the charges again] so that, if possible, the collective movements of the charges are compensated, i.e. to compensate for electric currents. Compensation of collective movements of charges is a manifestation of the action of "magnetic forces". The electromagnetic phenomena that occur according to these algorithms are energetically provided by the fact that a part of their own energy is converted into the kinetic energy of the particles” (1.4).

The orders of the Creator arise immediately after the author of the "New Physics" refused the principle of self-sufficiency of the physical world, which was mentioned at the very beginning of this critical review. Along with this refusal, supernatural forces appear in the form of a software package that implements the algorithm for controlling electric charges that Grishaev (he also acts as the Lord God) needs.

The picture of the world that arose before the author's eyes was so simple and understandable for him that he easily declared all other properties inherent in the electron to be non-existent. For example, it is known that an electron has a spin. No, says Grishaev, "electron spin is a joke of theoreticians" (the title of section 4.2). This characteristic of the elementary charge introduced by Pauli does not have an adequate spatial-mechanical image, therefore, it does not exist. The experiment of Stern and Gerlach was misinterpreted by the theorists Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck.

Another mistake arose when, in the experiment of Davisson and Germer, the electron was presented as a wave. This cannot be, Grishaev said, they misinterpreted the results: “Davisson and Germer did not find any 'wave properties' of electrons. Their results, apparently, are a special case of a phenomenon well known to specialists in low-voltage electron diffraction” (4.3). According to the author, the experimenters were confused by the additional electrons from the secondary emission, which gave a diffraction pattern, as if the incident electrons were represented by waves.

The proton, according to Grishaev, is as simple as the electron. “Let the quantum pulsations at the frequency f modulated with interrupt frequency B, (B). Let the duty cycle of interruptions be equal to 50%, i.e., on each interruption period, during its first half period, quantum pulsations occur at a frequency f, and during its second half period these pulsations are absent. Quantum pulsations modulated in this way, having a frequency f, are in existence only half the time. But at the same time, their energy is by no means halved, as it might seem at first glance. According to the unusual laws of the "digital" world, the energy of modulated quantum pulsations, as we believe, is reduced by an energy corresponding to the frequency of interruptions:

E mod = hf-hB» (4.6)

These laws are not only unusual, as the author wrote, but entirely taken from the ceiling. Grishaev does not know how to calculate energy spectra represented by an infinite chain of rectangular pulses. As already mentioned, the simplicity of the formulas and their corresponding primitive graphical interpretation, shown in Fig. 4.6 (hereinafter, the numbering of the figures corresponds to the book) does not at all guarantee their truth. Any explanation of any physical phenomena (in particular, the mass defect, the birth and annihilation of electron-positron pairs, etc.) using these artificial models of elementary particles will look arbitrary and erroneous.

“Unlike an electron and a positron, a proton has two frequencies of quantum pulsations: nucleon, which almost completely corresponds to the mass of the proton, and electronic, the presence of which means that the proton has an elementary electric charge - with a phase corresponding to a positive charge. The presence of two components in the spectrum of quantum pulsations of a proton means that it has two corresponding characteristic sizes. But at the same time, there are no subparticles in the proton: it cannot be said that it is a compound, for example, of a massive neutral core and a positron. As you can see, the union in the proton of two characteristic quantities - a mass almost 2000 times greater than that of an electron, and an elementary charge - is realized the simplest, according to the logic of the "digital" world, in a way: through the modulation of quantum pulsations. The positive charge here is not attached to a large neutral mass, but "sewn" into it through modulation" (4.6).

Just as the gravitational field of the Earth, the Sun and other celestial bodies were limited by the unitary principle, Grishaev limited the action of the electric field of the electron and proton in a similar way. For them, he introduced a special "algorithm that forms atomic proton-electron bonds." This principle "implies that a quantum pulsator can be associated, for some time interval, with only one partner." “Thus, a neutral atom consists of stationary proton-electron bonds,” the number of which is equal to the atomic number. These bonds are held together by the fact that protons are dynamically bound in the nucleus, and neutrons play an important role in the dynamic structure of the nucleus” (4.9). On fig. 4 shows the timing diagram of the hydrogen atom.

“Therefore,” explains Grishaev, “we do not share either the Rutherford approach, according to which atomic electrons revolve around the nucleus, or the quantum mechanical approach, according to which they are smeared over electron clouds. The forces that form atomic proton-electron bonds are not forces of attraction or repulsion: they are forces of retention at a certain distance. We believe that each atomic electron resides in an individual confinement region, in which the above-mentioned mechanism of binding interruptions acts on it. This confinement region apparently has a spherical shape and a size an order of magnitude smaller than the distance from the nucleus” (4.9).

It is possible, of course, not to accept the Bohr-Rutherford planetary model of the atom. Nevertheless, on its basis, it was possible to obtain a formula for the frequency emitted or absorbed by a hydrogen atom:

fmn = (E n – E m) / h = =

Where m < n.

Below is a diagram of the energy levels of electrons in a hydrogen atom, consistent with the formula written above (for more details on these things, see the sections Bohr model of the atom and Schrödinger equation).

.

How can energy spectra, for example, the Balmer series, be explained on the basis of the Grishaev model (Fig. 4.6)? Answer: no way! This cannot be done just because of its primitiveness, i.e. vaunted simplicity. However, we will continue to quote the author of the digital theory.

“A neutron, in our opinion,” writes Grishaev, “is precisely a compound, but such a compound, the composition of whose participants is forcibly renewed cyclically: the proton plus electron pair is replaced by the positron plus antiproton pair, and vice versa. Rice. 4.10 schematically shows the "tracks" of the resulting quantum pulsations, taking into account their phase relationships. The envelope of one of these tracks sets a positive electric charge, and the envelope of the other - a negative one. High-frequency filling, i.e. nucleon pulsations are transferred from one envelope to another - with a frequency half that of an electronic one. On those periods of the electron frequency, when nucleon pulsations are in the "positive track", the pair that makes up the neutron is a proton and an electron, and on those periods when nucleon pulsations are in the "negative track" - a positron and an antiproton" (4.9).

“Fig. 4.12 schematically illustrates the optimal phase relationships when the pulsations of the proton and the two neutrons with which it is associated are interrupted” (4.12).

“When the duty cycle is shifted in one direction or another from the central value, there is a charge , due to the dominance of being in the being of a charge of one or another sign. The presented approach is schematically illustrated in Fig. 5.1.1, where for each period of interruptions connecting the proton and electron, the corresponding duty cycle is indicated, in percent "(5.1)

On fig. 5.4 shows one period of "thermal oscillations" in the valence bond.

The further content of the "new physics" is reduced to the binding of known physical phenomena to the program representation of the electron, proton and neutron. Plunging deeper and deeper into this strange science, the reader understands more and more how the author becomes a hostage to his own starting principles. Moreover, if the facts contradict the Creator's control algorithms, so much the worse for them, he believes.

Remember, Grishaev wrote: “if the facts do not fit into such an [official] doctrine, then it is not the theory that is redrawn, but the facts” (Add.). Now he himself is doing a similar execution on defenseless facts. His digital theory seems to him simple and consistent. And if the experiments contradict it, then, the author assures us, they were interpreted or carried out with violations.

Conclusion: be careful, dear reader, when someone claims that this or that concept is confirmed by experience or even practice.

The tragedy of many talented individuals who are trying to rethink or even edit the official physical picture of the world is that they base their constructions by no means on experimental realities. Talented loners read textbooks - naively believing that they state the facts. Not at all: the textbooks present ready-made interpretations of the facts, adapted to the perception of the crowd. Moreover, these interpretations would look very strange in the light of the true experimental picture known to science. Therefore, the true experimental picture is deliberately distorted - the book contains a lot of evidence that the FACTS are partly hushed up, and partly distorted. And for what? For the sake of making the interpretations look plausible - being in agreement with the official theoretical doctrines. In the words of pundits, it turns out beautifully: we are looking for, they say, the truth, and the criterion of truth is practice. But in reality, the accepted theoretical doctrines turn out to be their criterion of truth. For if the facts do not fit into such a doctrine, then it is not the theory that is reshaped, but the facts. False theory is confirmed by false practice. But the pride of scientists does not suffer. We, they say, were on the right path, we are going, and we will go!

This is not another "conspiracy theory". It’s just that every scientist understands that if he “goes against the tide”, then he will risk his reputation, career, funding ...

The successes of modern technologies have almost nothing to do with physical theories. In the past, we were well aware of the situation when buggy and crashing software sometimes managed to do something useful. It turns out that physical theories can compete with the products of the tough guys from Redmond. For example, Einstein slowed down physics with his creations for exactly a hundred years. And the atomic bomb was not made

thanks to

theory of relativity, and

her. But the problem is not only in Einstein personally with the epigones, who, following the master, began vying to impose their far-fetched “axioms” and “postulates” on reality, “making” “scientific reputation” and “specific grandmothers” on this. Everything is much more serious.

Welcome to the real, that is, "digital" physical world!

Section 1. MAIN CATEGORIES OF THE "DIGITAL" WORLD

1.1. What are we really talking about?

In the history of medicine there was such a clinical case.

Until about the middle of the 19th century, puerperal fever raged in obstetric clinics in Europe. In some years, she claimed up to 30 percent or more of the lives of mothers who gave birth in these clinics. Women preferred to give birth on trains and on the streets, so as not to end up in the hospital, and when they went to bed, they said goodbye to their relatives as if they were going to the chopping block. It was believed that this disease is epidemic in nature, there were about 30 theories of its origin. It was associated with a change in the state of the atmosphere, and with soil changes, and with the location of clinics, and they tried to treat everyone, up to the use of a laxative. Autopsies always showed the same picture: death was due to blood poisoning.

F. Pachner cites the following figures: "... for 60 years in Prussia alone, 363,624 women in childbirth died from puerperal fever, i.e. more than during the same time from smallpox and cholera combined ... Mortality rate of 10% was considered quite normal, in other words, out of 100 women in labor, 10 died of puerperal fever ... Of all the diseases that were then subjected to statistical analysis, puerperal fever was accompanied by the highest mortality.

In 1847, a 29-year-old physician from Vienna, Ignaz Semmelweis, discovered the secret of puerperal fever. Comparing the data in two different clinics, he came to the conclusion that the cause of this disease is the negligence of doctors who examined pregnant women, delivered children and performed gynecological operations with non-sterile hands and in non-sterile conditions. Ignaz Semmelweis proposed washing hands not just with soap and water, but disinfecting them with chlorine water - this was the essence of the new method of preventing disease.

Semmelweis's teaching was not finally and universally accepted during his lifetime; he died in 1865, i.e. 18 years after its discovery, although it was extremely easy to verify its correctness in practice. Moreover, the discovery of Semmelweis caused a sharp wave of condemnation not only against his methods, but also against himself (all the luminaries of the medical world of Europe rebelled).

1.2. Serial or parallel control of physical objects?

Today, even children know something about personal computers. Therefore, as a childish illustration of the proposed model of the physical world, we can draw the following analogy: a virtual reality world on a computer monitor and the software of this world, which is not on the monitor, but on a different level of reality - on the computer hard drive. Adhering to the concept of the self-sufficiency of the physical world is about the same as seriously claiming that the reasons for the blinking of pixels on the monitor (yes, how consistently they blink: pictures fascinate us!) Are in the pixels themselves, or at least somewhere in between – but in the same place, on the monitor screen. It is clear that, with such an absurd approach, in an attempt to explain the reasons for these marvelous pictures, one will inevitably have to produce illusory entities. Lies will breed new lies, and so on. Moreover, confirmation of this stream of lies would seem to be obvious - after all, pixels, whatever one may say, are blinking!

But, nevertheless, we have given this computer analogy for lack of a better one. It is very unsuccessful, since the software support for the existence of the physical world is carried out according to principles, the implementation of which in computers today is prohibitively inaccessible.

The fundamental difference here is as follows. The computer has a processor that, for each working cycle, performs logical operations with the contents of a very limited number of memory cells. This is called "sequential access mode" - the larger the task, the longer it takes to complete it. You can increase the clock frequency of the processor or increase the number of processors themselves - the principle of sequential access is the same as it was, and remains. The physical world is different. Imagine what would happen in it if the electrons were controlled in sequential access mode - and each electron, in order to change its state, would have to wait until all the other electrons were interrogated! The point is not that the electron could have waited if the "clock frequency of the processor" had been made fantastically high. The fact is that we see: myriads of electrons change their states simultaneously and independently of each other. This means that they are controlled according to the principle of "parallel access" - each individually, but all at once! This means that a standard control package is connected to each electron, in which all the provided options for the behavior of the electron are registered - and this package, without referring to the main "processor", controls the electron, immediately responding to the situations in which it finds itself!

Here, imagine: a sentry on duty. An alarming situation arises. The sentry grabs the receiver: “Comrade Captain, two ambals are coming towards me! What to do?" - and in response: “The line is busy ... Wait for an answer ...” Because the captain has a hundred of these slobs, and he explains to everyone what to do. Here it is, "sequential access". Too centralized management, turning into a disaster. And with “parallel access”, the sentry himself knows what to do: all conceivable scenarios were explained to him in advance. "Bah!" - and the alarm situation worked out. Would you say it's "stupid"? What is "automatic"? But that's what the physical world is about. Where did you see an electron reasoning whether to turn left or right while flying next to a magnet?

Of course, not only the behavior of electrons is controlled by individually connected software packages. Structure-forming algorithms, thanks to which atoms and nuclei exist, also work in parallel access mode. And even for each quantum of light, a separate channel of the navigator program is allocated, which calculates the "path" of this quantum.

1.3. Some principles of operation of the software of the physical world.

The security of the existence of the physical world with software is a sentence for many models and concepts of modern theoretical physics, since the functioning of the software occurs according to the principles, the consideration of which limits the flight of theoretical fantasies.

First of all, if the existence of the physical world is provided by software, then this existence is completely algorithmized. Any physical object is the embodiment of a clear set of algorithms. Therefore, an adequate theoretical model of this object is, of course, possible. But this model can only be based on correct knowledge of the appropriate set of algorithms. Moreover, an adequate model should be free from internal contradictions, since the corresponding set of algorithms is free from them - otherwise it would be inoperable. Similarly, adequate models of various physical objects should be free from contradictions among themselves.

Of course, until we have full knowledge of the entire set of algorithms that ensure the existence of the physical world, contradictions in our theoretical views on the physical world are inevitable. But a decrease in the number of these contradictions would testify to our progress towards the truth. In modern physics, on the contrary, the number of glaring contradictions only increases with time - which means that here there is an advance that is not at all towards the truth.

What are the basic principles of organizing software for the existence of the physical world? There are programs that are a set of numbered instruction-operators. The sequence of their execution is deterministic, starting with the "Start work" statement and ending with the "Finish work" statement. If such a program, when running, does not get stuck in a failing situation like a loop, then it will certainly get to the “end” and successfully stop. As you can see, it is impossible to build software on programs of this type that is able to function smoothly indefinitely. Therefore, the software of the physical world, as you can imagine, is built on the principles of event handlers, i.e. according to the following logic: if such and such preconditions are met, then do this. And if other preconditions are met - do what. And if neither one nor the other is observed, do nothing, keep everything as it is! Two important consequences follow from this.

First, it follows from the work on preconditions that

1.4. The concept of a quantum pulsator. Weight.

To create the simplest digital object on the screen of a computer monitor, you need, using a simple program, to make any pixel “blink” at a certain frequency, i.e. alternately stay in two states - in one of which the pixel is lit, and in the other it is not lit.

Similarly, we call the simplest object of the "digital" physical world a quantum pulsator. It appears to us as something that alternately stays in two different states, which cyclically replace each other with a characteristic frequency - this process is directly set by the corresponding program that forms the quantum pulsator in the physical world. What are the two states of a quantum pulsator? We can liken them to a logical one and a logical zero in digital devices based on binary logic. The quantum pulsator expresses, in its purest form, the idea of ​​being in time: the cyclical change of two states in question is an indefinitely long movement in its simplest form, which by no means implies movement in space.

The quantum pulsator stays in existence while the chain of cyclic changes of its two states continues: tick-tock, tick-tock, etc. If a quantum pulsator "freezes" in the tick state, it falls out of existence. If he “freezes” in the “so” state, he also falls out of existence!

The fact that a quantum pulsator is the simplest object in the physical world, i.e. elementary particle of matter, means that matter is indivisible to infinity. The electron, being a quantum pulsator, does not consist of any quarks - which are the fantasies of theorists. A qualitative transition takes place on the quantum pulsator: from the physical level of reality to the software one.

Like any form of motion, quantum pulsations have energy. However, a quantum pulsator is fundamentally different from a classical oscillator. Classical oscillations occur "according to a sinusoid", and their energy depends on two physical parameters - frequency and amplitude - the values ​​of which can change. For quantum pulsations, obviously, the amplitude cannot change - i.e. it cannot be a parameter on which the energy of quantum pulsations depends. The only parameter on which the energy depends

1.5. The unsuitability of the concept of relative velocities for describing the realities of the physical world.

“The speeds of movement of bodies are relative, and it is impossible to say unequivocally who moves relative to whom, because if body A moves relative to body B, then body B, in turn, moves relative to body A ...”

These conclusions, planted on us from the school bench, look flawless from a formal-logical point of view. But, from a physical point of view, they would fit only for an unreal world in which there are no accelerations. It was not for nothing that Einstein taught that SRT is valid only for frames of reference (FR) “moving relative to each other in a straight line and uniformly” [E1] – however, he did not indicate any such practical frame of reference. So far, no progress has been made on this issue. Isn't it funny that, for over a hundred years, a practical area of ​​applicability has not been specified for the basic theory of official physics?

And the reason for this anecdotal situation is very simple: in the real world, due to physical interactions, the acceleration of bodies is inevitable. And then, defying formal logic, the movement acquires an unambiguous character: the Earth revolves around the Sun, a pebble falls to the Earth, and so on. For example, the unambiguity of kinematics when a pebble falls on the Earth - that is, the non-physical situation in which the Earth falls on a pebble - is confirmed on the basis of the law of conservation of energy. Indeed, if during the collision of a pebble with the Earth, the impact velocity is

That kinetic energy, which can be converted into other forms, is then half the product of the square of the velocity

on the mass of a pebble, but certainly not on the mass of the Earth. This means that it was the pebble that gained this speed, i.e. the named case is adequately described in the CO associated with the Earth. But such a turn of affairs did not suit the relativists. In order to save the concept of relative velocities, they agreed that, for the named case, the CO associated with a pebble is supposedly no worse than that associated with the Earth. True, in the CO associated with a pebble, the Earth moves with acceleration

and picking up speed

Moreover, if we remember that real energy transformations must occur unambiguously (

By the way, the uniqueness of the increments of the kinetic energy of the test body, in accordance with the increments of its “true” speed, would be very problematic if the body would be attracted to several other bodies at once and, accordingly, would acquire free fall acceleration to several attracting centers at once - like that requires the law of gravity. For example, if an asteroid were gravitating toward both the Sun and the planets, then what is the "true" speed of the asteroid, the increments of which determine the increments of its kinetic energy? The question is not trivial. And, in order not to suffer with it, it is much easier to delimit the areas of action of the gravitation of the Sun and planets in space - so that the test body, wherever it is, always gravitates only to one attracting center. To do this, it is necessary to ensure that the areas of influence of the gravitation of the planets do not intersect with each other, and that in each area of ​​planetary gravitation the solar gravitation is "turned off". With such an organization of gravity, i.e. according to the principle of its unitary action (

Section 2. ORGANIZATION OF GRAVITY IN THE "DIGITAL" WORLD

2.1. Do you believe that gravity is generated by the masses?

The law of universal gravitation, as Newton formulated it, was purely postulate. Based on observations of the movement of celestial bodies and the fall of small bodies to Earth, it was declared that any two masses in the Universe are attracted to each other with a force equal to

gravitational constant,

masses attracting each other,

distance between them. Few people know: from accelerations of free fall to large cosmic bodies - to the Sun and planets - only products of the gravitational constant are determined

on the masses of these bodies, but these masses themselves are by no means determined. If the accepted value

If it were, say, twice as large, and the accepted masses of the Sun and planets would be half as much (or vice versa), then this would not affect the results of a theoretical analysis of the motion of bodies in the Solar System. That is, the accepted values ​​of the masses of the Sun and planets are dictated by the accepted value of the gravitational constant. And whether these accepted values ​​of the masses coincide with their true values, corresponding to the amount of matter in the Sun and the planets, is still unknown to science.

Why did Newton stick the product of masses into the formula (2.1.1)? - it's on his conscience. But it became like this: more mass - stronger attraction to it, less mass - weaker attraction to it, no mass at all - no attraction to it at all ... So, what generates this attraction? Of course, by mass - it's purely mathematically clear!

But physically, it was not at all clear. What causes the mutual attraction of massive bodies - Newton did not explain. All he said about this is that massive bodies act on each other at a distance through some intermediary. But to indulge in arguments about the nature of this intermediary would be to resort to hypotheses - and hypotheses, as Newton believed, he "did not invent."

2.2. How Cavendish and his followers got "attraction" between laboratory blanks.

It is believed that the first experiment that proved the existence of gravitational attraction between laboratory blanks is the famous Cavendish experiment (1798). It would seem that in view of the exceptional importance of this experience, its technical and methodological details should be easily accessible. Learn, they say, students - how to make fundamental experiments! But it was not there. Students are fed an obscenely adapted version. Say, Cavendish used torsion balances: this is a horizontal rocker with weights at the ends, suspended at its center on a thin elastic string. It can rotate in a horizontal plane, twisting the elastic suspension. Cavendish allegedly brought a pair of blanks closer to the weights of the yoke - from opposite sides - and the yoke turned at a small angle, at which the moment of forces of the gravitational attraction of the weights to the blanks was balanced by the elastic reaction of the suspension to twisting. That's it guys! Have you learned? Well done! Everyone gets five points! And don't bother with the details!

But it's weird, damn it! Even in specialized publications, like [C1], the details of the Cavendish experiment are not presented! It is fortunate that we managed to get to them in the book on the history of physics [Г1], where the translation of the original source, the work of Cavendish himself, is given. This is some wonderful dream. The technique used by Cavendish clearly shows that there was no smell of the gravitational attraction of the blanks!

See: Cavendish torsion balance is a highly sensitive system that performs long-period and high-Q free oscillations. They are difficult to calm down. Therefore, the idea of ​​the experiment was as follows: after moving the blanks from the far "non-attractive" position to the near "attractive" position, the rocker should continue its oscillations - turning so that the average positions of the weights approached the blanks.

And how did this idea materialize? Yes, I had to puff! Starting position: the rocker oscillates, and the blanks are in a distant, "non-attractive" position. If it is expected that, as a result of their movement to a near position, the rocker will turn to a new average position of oscillation, then when should the blanks be moved so that this adjustment of the rocker appears in its purest form? Of course, when the rocker passes the current middle position and moves towards the expected additional rotation. That is exactly what was done. And - oh, a miracle! - the rocker began to turn. It would seem - wait until a new average position is revealed, and the trick is in the bag! An no. Here is what Cavendish wrote:

There is reason to believe that the "secret of success" of Cavendish was associated with microvibrations, under the influence of which the parameters of the torsion balance changed, so that the balance changed its behavior. This change is as follows. Let, when the rocker passes through the middle position, microvibrations begin - for example, at the bracket to which the rocker suspension is attached. The experience of using vibrations in the technique [B1] shows that under the action of microvibrations, the effective stiffness of the suspension should decrease: the string, as it were, softens. And, therefore, the rocker will deviate from the average position by a significantly larger amount than with a free deviation without microvibrations. Moreover, if this increased deviation does not exceed a certain critical value, then another interesting effect will be possible. Namely, if the microvibrations stop before the rocker reaches its maximum deflection, then free oscillations will resume with the same amplitude, but with a shifted average position. Moreover, this effect will be reversible: by a new suitable addition of microvibrations, it will be possible to return the oscillations of the rocker to their previous average position. Thus, the behavior of the Cavendish torsion balance could well be due to just the appropriate addition of microvibrations to the torsional vibrations of the beam.

2.3. What does the shape of the geoid tell us?

If the Earth were a uniform ball, then, according to the law of universal gravitation, the gravitational force acting on a test body near the Earth's surface would depend only on the distance to its center. But the Earth is an oblate ellipsoid, having a so-called "equatorial bulge". The equatorial radius of the Earth is approximately 6378.2 km, and the polar one is 6356.8 km [A1]. Due to the mere fact that the equatorial radius of the Earth is greater than the polar one, the gravitational force at the equator should be somewhat less than at the pole. Moreover, it is believed that the shape of the geoid is hydrodynamically balanced, i.e. that the equatorial bulge was not formed without the help of centrifugal forces due to the Earth's own rotation. If we find the increment Δ

equatorial radius from the condition that the resulting decrease in gravitational acceleration at the equator is equal to the centrifugal acceleration at the equator, then for Δ

we get the value of 11 km [D3]. Note that if the globe turns into an oblate ellipsoid while maintaining its volume, then, in accordance with the formula for the volume of an ellipsoid, an increase in the equatorial radius by 11 km will cause a decrease in the polar radius by the same 11 km. The final difference will be 22 km, i.e. value close to the actual value. This means that the model of the hydrodynamically equilibrium shape of the geoid is very similar to the truth.

And now let's pay attention to the fact that in the calculations we did not take into account the gravitational effect of matter located in the volume of the equatorial bulge - this action, if it took place, would not be the same in gravimetric measurements at the equator and at the pole. In gravimetric measurements at the pole, the effect of the entire equatorial bulge would be an order of magnitude smaller than the effect of a small characteristic part of the equatorial bulge adjacent to the measurement point at the equator. Therefore, due to the presence of the equatorial bulge, the force of gravity at the equator would be additionally increased compared to the force of gravity at the pole - and, therefore, the equilibrium increase in the equatorial radius Δ

Thus, if the equatorial bulge had an attractive effect, then the hydrodynamically equilibrium shape of the geoid would differ markedly from the actual one. But these noticeable differences are not observed. From this we conclude: hundreds of trillions of tons of matter in the equatorial bulge of the Earth do not have an attractive effect.

This striking, “lying on the surface” conclusion has not yet been challenged by anyone. Unless ballistics, who calculate the movement of artificial Earth satellites, assured us that they take into account, in their calculations, the gravitational effect of the equatorial bulge. Well, what can you do. We know that when optimizing many parameters, this is exactly what they do: they take into account non-existent effects. Everything is fine!

2.4. Deafening results of gravimetric measurements.

The surface masses of the Earth are distributed inhomogeneously. There are powerful mountain ranges there, with a rock density of about three tons per cubic meter. There are oceans in which the density of water is only a ton per cubic meter - even at a depth of 11 kilometers. There are valleys that lie below sea level - in which the density of matter is equal to the density of air. According to the logic of the law of universal gravitation, these inhomogeneities in the distribution of masses must act on gravimetric instruments.

The simplest gravimetric tool is a plumb line - having calmed down, it is oriented along the local vertical. Since ancient times, attempts have been made to detect plumb deviations due to the attraction, for example, of powerful mountain ranges. Only the role of a plumb line here was played, of course, not by a simple weight on a string - for how can one know where and how much it is deflected? And we used the method of comparing the geodetic coordinates of the measurement point (obtained, for example, using triangulation) and its own coordinates obtained from astronomical observations. Only in the second of these methods is reference to the local vertical, which is implemented, for example, using a mercury horizon at the telescope. Thus, by the difference in the coordinates of the point obtained by the above two methods, one can judge the deviation of the local vertical.

So, the resulting deviations in most cases turned out to be much less than those expected due to the action of mountain ranges. Many textbooks on gravimetry (see, for example, [Ts1,Sh1]) mention measurements made by the British south of the Himalayas in the middle of the 19th century. Record deviations were expected there, because from the north there was the most powerful mountain range of the Earth, and from the south - the Indian Ocean. But the detected deviations turned out to be almost zero. A similar behavior of the plumb line is also found near the sea coastline - contrary to the expectation that the land, which is denser than sea water, will attract the plumb line more strongly. To explain such miracles, scientists have adopted the hypothesis of isostasy. According to this hypothesis, the action of surface mass inhomogeneities is compensated by the action of inhomogeneities of the opposite sign located at a certain depth. That is, under the surface dense rocks there should be loose ones, and vice versa. Moreover, these upper and lower inhomogeneities should, by joint efforts, nullify the action on the plumb everywhere - as if there were no inhomogeneities at all.

You know, when the readers of our articles reached the places about isostasy, they, not believing the possibility of such babble in modern science, rushed, for example, to Wikipedia - and made sure that everything was true. And - as they put it - "patstulas fell from laughter." Well, indeed: the deeper the ocean, the more powerful the dense compensating deposits under its bottom. And the higher the mountains, the more loose foundation they show off. And, everything is a tyutelka in a tyutelka! Even the kids are funny! But children do not yet know that the concept of isostasy directly contradicts the realities of the dynamics of the earth's crust [M1] - otherwise they would laugh even louder.

Note that the plumb line deviations indicate the horizontal components of the local gravity vector. Its vertical component is determined using gravimeters. The same miracles work with gravimeters as with plumb lines. But there are a lot of measurements with gravimeters. Therefore, in order not to make people laugh, experts have piled up terminological and methodological jungle, through which it is difficult for the uninitiated to wade through.

2.5. Where is the attractive action of the small bodies of the solar system?

In the solar system, the sun, the planets, and the moon clearly have their own gravity; and also, judging by the presence of an atmosphere, Titan. As for the other satellites of the planets, we find the following.

Firstly, even in the cases of the largest satellites (including Titan), the dynamic reaction of their planets was not detected - which, in accordance with the law of universal gravitation, must revolve around the center of mass common with the satellite.

Secondly, the presence of atmospheres in them would testify to the gravitation of planetary satellites. But, with the exception of Titan, no clear signs of atmospheres have been found in any of them.

Thirdly, none of the six dozen known satellites of the planets today has a single satellite of its own. In the light of probability theory, this state of affairs looks rather strange.

Fourthly, the so-called. dynamic determinations of the masses of satellites, based on the axiom that the satellites of one planet will certainly perturb each other's motion. If in reality the satellites do not attract each other, then the dynamic determinations of their masses are attempts to solve an ill-posed problem. And the signs of this are indeed evident: the results of applying this technique are vague and ambiguous. Here are the comments on de Sitter's determination of the masses of the four large satellites of Jupiter, based on the periodic solution he obtained:

The actual orbits of the satellites do not correspond exactly to the periodic solution, but can be obtained from the periodic solution by varying the coordinates and velocity components...

…the difficulty is the slow convergence of the analytical expansion in powers of mass

» [M2]. However, the values ​​of the masses, "

» [D1]. The "most probable" values ​​of satellite masses chosen here - from a set of non-repeating values ​​- can hardly serve as