Some Errors of Classical Physics: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
restore accented characters lost to the encoding bug (verified names/words only; URLs untouched) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| title = Some Errors of Classical Physics | | title = Some Errors of Classical Physics | ||
| author = [[Paul Wesley]] | | author = [[Paul Wesley]] | ||
| keywords = Classical Physics, Maxwell's Equations, Special Relativity, absolute space, Big Bang | |||
| published = 2007 | | published = 2007 | ||
| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]] | | journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]] | ||
| volume = | | volume = 4 | ||
| number = | | number = 1 | ||
| pages = 133-135 | | pages = 133-135 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 11: | Line 12: | ||
==Abstract== | ==Abstract== | ||
Empirical fact continues to be largely ignored in textbooks. Misrepresentations cover several centuries of physics: The readers are made to believe that Roemer's observations of c were not based on the vector addition law c ? v in absolute space; that Einstein's postulate of the Planck frequency for a single photon is true; that Faraday's induction works; that Maxwell's equations provide all answers in electrodynamics; that ?special relativity' is valid; that the wave-particle problem is Nature's fault; that | Empirical fact continues to be largely ignored in textbooks. Misrepresentations cover several centuries of physics: The readers are made to believe that Roemer's observations of c were not based on the vector addition law c ? v in absolute space; that Einstein's postulate of the Planck frequency for a single photon is true; that Faraday's induction works; that Maxwell's equations provide all answers in electrodynamics; that ?special relativity' is valid; that the wave-particle problem is Nature's fault; that Schrödinger's ?wave packets' collapsing correspond to observation; that the ?big bang' explains the history of the universe. Paul Wesley has demonstrated the above (and many more) long-standing errors and given solutions in his books. The text handed out at the Storrs conference is his last scientific message, written in hospital about four weeks before his death. Addressing to the misuse of ?belief' in science, Paul Wesley's use of the term ?religious' should not be misunderstood. This was to be our joint contribution to the 2007 conference; we could not complete the text any more. I feel that presenting Paul's ideas without any alterations under his name is a matter of honor. | ||
This paper was conveyed by Peter Marquardt for the deceased J. Paul Wesley. | This paper was conveyed by Peter Marquardt for the deceased J. Paul Wesley. | ||
| Line 17: | Line 18: | ||
[[Category:Scientific Paper|errors classical physics]] | [[Category:Scientific Paper|errors classical physics]] | ||
[[Category:Relativity]] | [[Category:Relativity|errors classical physics]] | ||
Latest revision as of 09:17, 22 July 2026
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Some Errors of Classical Physics |
| Author(s) | Paul Wesley |
| Keywords | Classical Physics, Maxwell's Equations, Special Relativity, absolute space, Big Bang |
| Published | 2007 |
| Journal | Proceedings of the NPA |
| Volume | 4 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 133-135 |
Abstract
Empirical fact continues to be largely ignored in textbooks. Misrepresentations cover several centuries of physics: The readers are made to believe that Roemer's observations of c were not based on the vector addition law c ? v in absolute space; that Einstein's postulate of the Planck frequency for a single photon is true; that Faraday's induction works; that Maxwell's equations provide all answers in electrodynamics; that ?special relativity' is valid; that the wave-particle problem is Nature's fault; that Schrödinger's ?wave packets' collapsing correspond to observation; that the ?big bang' explains the history of the universe. Paul Wesley has demonstrated the above (and many more) long-standing errors and given solutions in his books. The text handed out at the Storrs conference is his last scientific message, written in hospital about four weeks before his death. Addressing to the misuse of ?belief' in science, Paul Wesley's use of the term ?religious' should not be misunderstood. This was to be our joint contribution to the 2007 conference; we could not complete the text any more. I feel that presenting Paul's ideas without any alterations under his name is a matter of honor.
This paper was conveyed by Peter Marquardt for the deceased J. Paul Wesley.