m=E/c2: The Himalayan Blunder

John Kolyav By John Kolyav, 28th Sep 2012 | Follow this author | RSS Feed
Posted in Wikinut>Writing>Essays

It is true that mass-energy unification was one of the highest human intellectual achievements possible for a great genius a century back with insufficient data at hand. Science has grown much and it is high time to revise the most beautiful, economical equation that made our world sadder (and wiser?)

Perfection is a myth

Here is a witty statement of Mr. Brian L. Silver, the late professor of physical chemistry in Technion Israel Institute of Technology: ‘history shows that even greatest minds can construct theories that work well. But, they have one minor flaw, that, they are completely erroneous!’ (In ‘The Ascent of Science’ published by Oxford University Press)

This is a proverb: ‘every complicated problem has simple, easily understandable wrong answer!’

Einstein was a rare genius; no doubt. But, everything he has explained may not be the ultimate word. Here is a comparison. In one of the end game with Deep Blue, the machine that could analyze two million positions per second, Mr. Garry Kasparov had a chance for stale mate by perpetual check, playing Qe3 (1997; game 2). He could not notice it in time and he resigned! Does this mean that a few spectators who could detect it were better players than Kasparov? Not at all!

This is the case with Einstein’s E=mc2. It works well just as ‘spring theory’ worked for Boyle’s Law, and F = ma worked for forces until man had to face high velocity. There are enormous nuclear weapons and reactors. But, the equation was highly defective and that was why it couldn’t touch gravitation, the odd man out and he was compelled to predict the advent of different concept of SPACE. He was well aware that the equation was defective.

Intelligence Inertia

Why? What is the defect of E=mc2? Who are you to challenge him? Are you a nuclear scientist?

Sorry. I am a humble human being, one among billions. But, please be patient to hear me. This is my earnest request.

Einstein and Newton inspired me greatly. But my reverential awe towards the stalwarts does not blind me from philosophical reviewing. Why should you review? Will the politicians who exhort to construct nuclear weapons and the scientists, their slaves, do it?

m=E/c2 does not explain how a material particle is formed and how it can remain as such, without being disintegrated back into energy. That is, it does not incorporate the forces that endow a particle its material nature. Therefore, although the equation has many proofs including the human wrath and folly exploded in Japanese cities and Chernobyl, it has to be revised. It is not a simple work after all!

Pursuit of knowledge and team work

Until the riddle of a particle formation and its preservation in nature is explained mathematically, the world of physical science will remain highly imperfect.

No Higgs Boson can touch the cause of gravitation. Therefore, as Einstein revised Newton’s F = ma, someone should revise m=E/c2. A team work is required.

Why can’t you? Again sorry. I have no immediate answer.

I am well aware that this article will not be of much immediate use except a few clicks and a little addition of my income. But, this is published here just with the hope that it would inspire someone in future for a breakthrough.

Thanks for patiently reading.

Further reading: http://www.johnsonpj.com/articles.html

Tags

Ascent Of Science, Brian L Silver, Chernobyl, Chess, Deep Blue, Einstein, Energy, Israel, Kasparov, Mass, Newton, Oup, Relativity, Space

Meet the author

author avatar John Kolyav
Born in 1963, Postgraduated in 1986. Six novels and four poetry books published. Got three state- level awards for literary works. More details at www.johnsonpj.com

Share this page

moderator johnnydod moderated this page.
If you have any complaints about this content, please let us know

Comments

Add a comment
Username
Can't login?
Password