THE RETURN DISTANCE (NO GROWING OF ENTR0PY)

THE RETURN DISTANCE (NO GROWING OF ENTR0PY)

Since the epoch of Newton, Coulomb, etc. the fields of forces have got a fundamental importance ; nevertheless if it is considered the infinite time of existence of the Universe, in this time all the fields of the Universe would be exhausted because the bodies that produce them would not be able to continue producing the microatomic particles that form such fields, but this is not so, because the particles that produce such fields, when they are expelled, recede from such bodies at light velocity, move during millions of years and after that time they return to the place were they were emitted, to this process we call return distance in such way that the fields never get exhausted ; to these fields we call mechanized fields for to differentiate of the structured ones that were accepted since the Newton’s epoch, and in which there were not considered as of corpuscular nature. With the mechanized fields of mechanophysics these problems are solved. Mechanized fields are formed by ultramicroscopic particles emitted at light velocity by the bodies that form such fields in all directions, when these field particles reach another body they act in this one, making the body to acts in accordance with the kind of field is considered, and as there is reciprocity between causes and effects, the second body affects to the first one in a similar way. As can be appreciated the mechanized fields by far are more simple than the structured ones. The first step of structure of the mechanized field has been given.

In the infinite time of existence of the Universe all the bodies producer of mechanized fields would be exhausted of their field fluids they emit, unless we consider other property of such fluids that we call: return distance, this return distance can vary in considerable magnitudes of time and distance in accordance with many facts; when a cycle of return distance is effectuated the fluid that original was emitted return toward the emitter body and is “recuperated”. Not all the corpuscles or particles emitted by a body return to the place they were emitted, because are absorbed by other celestial bodies. This, and other celestial bodies also emit particles that are absorbed by the first mentioned body. The second step of the mechanized fields has been made, that is, of no exhausted fields and with this solution is obtained other solution of a problem that have been of preponderant importance since the Boltzmann’s epoch, that is, the growing of entropy. It has been considered that the energy moves always from a higher level toward a lower one. In some way this is a simple criterion that with the mechanophysics is seen in a more subtle way, in accordance with this all particles (entropy particles) of the Universe always had have a determined energy that remain in them in the infinite time in the past and in the future, this energy acts in such particles in accordance with many facts in any determined process and in accordance with one of the fore mentioned facts the particle lose energy, but in accordance with other not evident facts the particle win energy (law of conservation of energy) in such way that all the particles of the Universe have not lost nor win energy in the infinite time of their existence in the Universe; forward it is going to see a subtle case, in this (returning distance) there is not the problem given by the growing of entropy, because the energy (in form of mechanized fields) that is emitted away in all directions, because the returning effect return to the opposite way (maybe in millions years).

There is a fundamental difference between the structured fields and the mechanized ones. It is considered that the first ones have an innate existence and that a body is affected by them in proportion to the magnitude of the physical body properties. The mechanized fields can not have an existence if there not exist the interacting bodies, this means that this bodies are the producer of such fields, sc the theory of the mechanized fields is very much simplified. How many mechanized fields we can have? We can answer the fore question if we observe all kinds of radiation that can emits a body in different circumstances: a gravity field, an electromagnetic field,, a light field, etc. With the mechanized fields we return the acceptance of the Newton’s law of gravity attraction. That was considered was not true because they fail in the precession of the perihelion of Mercury and in the deflection of a light ray moving tangential and near of a heavy celestial body as the Sun? I am not in accordance with the fore trace because in it was not considered that the gravity velocity was incremented (aberrated) by the velocity of the affected or receptive bodies: (Mercury planet and the light corpuscles mentioned); the effect that produces the fore increment of receiving gravity velocity is proportional to the square of such increment. The structured fields depart from the amplitude of the Universe affecting to the interacting bodies: the mechanized fields depart from the interacting bodies affecting the space of the Universe in which they interact.

The problem of the red shift can be explained with a numerical example and at the same time will be given a logical explanation of what has been interpreted as the expansion of the Universe given by modern physics. It has been observed that while farther recede a celestial body, its light radiation (gamma,.....radio radiation) move toward the red frequency, this is considering the constancy of light velocity, about this model (expansion Universe) there are some contradictory points we are not going to mention because the lack of space. In mechanophysics are considered the light radiation formed by material corpuscles (corpuscular nature). A light ray is formed by a straight line of light corpuscles spaced one from each other at equidistant we call: corpuscular distance (wave length in the undulate theory of light). In our model of mechanophysics the frequency of radiation is given by the corpuscular distance, and for distant celestial bodies diminishes not because the corpuscular distance grows, but because the light velocity diminishes due to the action of the remanent gravity (as we will see forward) that acts at equal intervals of time we call: braking time in each corpuscle of the ray of light At the present time the advance of the technology permit us to measure the velocity of light affected by the mentioned braking effect, who does this must not be influenced with the idea that light velocity is a constant value..

With respect to the action of remanent gravity in the light radiation’s we can make more than one model with a structure criterion. Of them and with a fundamentalist criterion we will choose one on which is considered that the electrons that emit the light are not affected by gravity, only their “corresponding” proton in the nucleus of the atom. Each corpuscle of a ray of light emitted, has a quantity of remanent gravity (nugravity) enough to acts at each time of brake during all the returning distance trajectory in such a way that the ray of light emitted by the electron in a given point of space, return to the same point after millions years, as could be appreciated by the numerical example will be given forward. In other themes, forward will be seen that particles with inherent energy can multiply this effect, with multiple interchanges of this energy. Here the kinetic energy produced by the remanent gravity is double than the kinetic energy with which the light corpuscle was emitted; this in accordance with the entropy particles of mechanophysics that consider that all the particles of the Universe have a fixed energy that is not lost nor win in any process we consider In accordance with our model the corpuscles of light are integrated with the nugravity in the surface of the “corresponding” proton with the quantity of nugravity in each corpuscle, enough to act producing the braking effect during all the returning time, with a force can be determined with the law of Newton acting in a corpuscle placed in the surface of the proton, by the proton exclusively. If the rays of the light are produced by atomic particles that are in a heavy celestial body, the remanent gravity in each light corpuscle will grow, so is required to sum the remanent gravity of the proton (nugravity) plus the remanent gravity produced by the heavy celestial body (astrogravity) all these in such way that the return distance trajectory will be smaller than that produced by a body (in vacuum space) emitted with a velocity little bad smaller than that of escape velocity as would be in the case of a celestial body with a mass that approximates to that of a black hole.

An emitted corpuscle of light will return to the point it was emitted due to the return effect produced by the nugravity, the force produced by nugravity, in accordance with our model is:

Fp = G M m / r2 = 6.673 x 10-- 11 x 1.6725 x 10-- 27 x 1.47236 x 10-- 50 /(1.7142951 x 10-- 14)2 =
5.5915227 x 10-- 60 Kg m / Sec2
= 6.673 x 10-- 11 m3 / Kg Sec2. = constant of universal gravitation.
M = mass of proton (Kg)
m = mass of a corpuscle (Kg)
r = radius of the proton (m)
0.5 m c2 = 0.5 x 1.47236 x 10-- 50 (3 x 108)2 = 6.62562 x 10-- 34 joule = 1 quantum of energy

As the positive particle of the binary system is affected directly by the remanent gravity (nugravity), we suspect that the electrons are not affected directly by the gravity. The time required for the corpuscle affected by the remanent gravity to return due to the corresponding force F would be:
2 tp = 2 m c / Fp = 2 x 1.47236 x 10-- 50 x 3 x 108 / 5.5915227 x 10-- 60 = 1.57992 x 1018 Sec.
In accordance with the theories of expanding Universe, they consider that at a distance equal to:
4 x 1010 to 6 x 1010 light years there are galaxies that recede to a velocity equal to that of light
5 x 1010 x 31,557,600 = 1.57788 x 1018 Sec. = 2 tp
31,557,600 Sec. = 1 year.

About the return distance in a black hole it could be from a limited distance to practically zero distance, so the light corpuscles do not escape from it. In accordance with the concept of continuous action, if an electron emits (n) corpuscles (as those of light) they get light velocity with a kinetic energy equal to n h (n quantum) and the electron gets a kinetic energy equal to the fore one, but in the opposite way (action = reaction). In accordance with this and with mechanophysics explained the theory of the polygonal orbits of the orbital electrons around the nucleus of the atom. In each vertex of the polygonal orbit of an orbital electron are acting (n) light corpuscles that deflect the trajectory of the electron in order to follow its corresponding polygonal orbit. If no spectrums are seen of the acting light corpuscles;: How can be explained the action of them? If we consider that in each vertex of the polygonal orbit the return distance of the corpuscles is equal to the diameter of the electron, when they move from the interior face to the exterior one of the electron, they do not escape from this last face, but begin their return trajectory, from zero velocity to c velocity, toward the interior face of the electron and from here they escape toward the interior face of the positive particle (see binary systems, theme : Hydrogenated Model of Atom).

Monterrey, Mexico, August 12, 1996













HYDROGENIZED MODEL OF ATOM

In the fore theme of Return Distance was simplified in a great deal the concept of fields, because they were considered in their structure, not as something characteristic of all the space of the Universe, but only characteristic of a limited space of the mentioned Universe, corresponding to the interacting bodies (or particles), in such limited space.

Now that we are working in the electrotherapy have had all kind of problems, from that produced by impertinent persons, to technical ones, because this we developed a very much satisfactory model of electric current, but this was not enough, due some persons are too much skeptic. We are not skeptics, but too much exigent with our work, so we began to work trying to make a model of atom that fulfill a series of required conditions, with much more success than that we expected. In doing this I remember a good friend of mine, that since I began to work with mechanophysics, he was very much cooperative with me, encouraging and stimulating my work, all this in spite he was supporter of modern physics, I refer to Dr. Rodolfo Castillo Bahena, he was director and professor of the Physics Department in the Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey: his indications, commentaries, and critics were very much useful, I remember in one occasion he commented me that in order that the mechanophysics could be accepted, it would be necessary to give a model of atom with certain characteristics. Because then I had many ideas in my head, I considered this as a simple conversation, but now I consider it as a prophesy (now also have many ideas, but try to be more organized).

With the structure of the atoms it is possible to make a great simplification, and we believe that with this it is possible to make great progress in this field. Till now it has been considered the nucleus of an atom formed by a determined quantity of protons and neutrons, making a unitary structure, affecting in this way to all the orbital electrons, and viceversa. With this criterion have been given different models of nuclei affected with many complexities and deficiencies. Here will be given a model by far more simple that will simplify its investigation and understanding; in this model will be considered that each orbital electron is only affected in a direct way by its corresponding proton and neutron; to this structure we will call: binary system. The intervention of a binary system in the other ones of the atoms will be minimum in all the normal conditions and only could be appreciated in an evident way in phenomena of radioactivity or half life of atoms; in which is manifested the interference of a binary system with another one. With respect to the spectrums produced by the excited atoms, they could be explained by indirect or secondary interaction of a binary system with other ones.

The medullar point of a binary system is that the electron and the positive particle work in a synchronized way emitting jn an interior way their propeller fluids every time of vertex, but this is because other effects also are synchronized; a car can move because has a motor, but its movement is not arbitrary, but in accordance with a driver that controls it, next are going to see some facts that contribute in the control of the behavior of the binary systems. In order that a binary system is not affected by other (s) one and vice-versa, as was say, it will be considered that in a general way, either the electrons, as the protons of each binary system, have a determined side or face were their propeller fluids are emitted, in the corresponding side are received and absorbed the microcorpuscles of the electric fields that excite the atomic particles (their propeller fluids); the amplitude of this side permits a small tolerance given by a small solid angle, in such way that can exist variations (in the orbital electrons) in the spectral lines (s, p, d, f). If the atomic particles (electron or proton) receive the microcorpuscles of the electric field in a different side than the fore mentioned, the microcorpuscles are not absorbed, not exciting the atomic particle. Another property of the microcorpuscles of the electric fields, in our model of binary system is that they have a return distance equal to the distance that there is between the orbital electron and the nuclear proton (or positive particle), of the binary system. Continue with the required conditions, will be considered that the electric fields formed by emitted microcorpuscles, are not formed in an immediate way, but in a progressive one, from a null (maybe small) intensity to its maximum value; the variation of intensity of the electric fields emitted by the orbital electron and the positive particle coincide with the angular rotation or spin, that is manifested in each vertex of their polygonal orbits, here the intensity is null (or small) when the deflection start, and gets the maximum and final value when the deflection finish, When the charged (-) particle has turned an angle of 360o. In accordance with the binary system, as will be appreciated with the numerical example will be given later.. Let see a binary system formed with an orbital electron as negative particle, and a proton as a positive one. The orbital electron is excited in each vertex (with a deflection angle = ) of its orbit.

The positive particle (proton) is excited in each vertex by a fields. Although the fields act fast in the vertices of the orbits, and with the same magnitude in the positive particles as in the negative particles, this does not mean that the positive particle get equal quantity of charge than the negative one, If the positive particle got its charge in one instant. In the binary system the orbital electron and the corresponding proton, always have their corresponding side of absorbing microcorpuscle of the electric fields in front one from each other, this because in this way are oriented the particles in the binary system. A binary system in the hydrogen atom is formed by one orbital electron and one nuclear proton; in a deuteron atom the binary system is formed by one orbital electron and one positive particle formed with one proton + one neutron; in the triton atom by one orbital electron and a positive particle; formed by one proton and two neutrons. From the point of view of the mass of the positive particle, there are three types of binary systems, as just have seen. From the point of view of the orbital electrons moving in any one of the 7 shells of the atom, obviously there are 7 types of binary systems. In the fore cases the negative particle (orbital electron) has the same mass. In the way can be supposed how is formed the positive particle can be imagined one sphere (the proton) two or three spheres are fusion, forming one bigger sphere,

In previous investigation works in mechanophysics, and based in some experimental data, and considering that all the elementary particles have the same density, we obtained that the radius of the electron is: re = 1.4 x 10-- 13 cm and of the proton: rp = 1.7 x 10-- 12 cm. About the nucleus of an atom, there are many objections, for instance, if we consider the nucleus of hydrogen atom as a proton or as a nushell (see forward), will be a great difference of density. In the value of: r7 = 1.1376 x 10-- 8 cm. = radius of the 7 orbit = radius of the atom, we can confide more because the Avogadro’s number, also in the mass of electron: me = 9.1091 x 10-- 28 gr. and the mass of proton: mp = 1.6725 x 10-- 24 gr., because the fields effects. Some one could object that can not confide in the binary systems, but if with two complete different ways can arrive to the same results, the fore objection is demerit.

We can continue without impediment, so for a heavy atom as gold: Au, for example: Z = 79; A = 197, we can imagine a structure formed by 79 binary systems, of them 39 have the positive particle formed with one proton + one neutron; and 39 formed with one proton + two neutrons. in the 7 shell (?) 2 with one proton: 39 x 3 + 39 x 2 + 2 x 1 = 197.

In accordance with the characteristics of a binary system, the orbital electron and the positive particle spin around the center of the nucleus of atom in a synchronized way, the orbital electron at a distance equal to the radius of the shell; the positive particle to the fore distance divided by 1836 / 4 = 459; . 459 me = m1+ / 4. The positive particle could be triple mass = 1 proton + 2 neutrons, double mass = 1proton + 1 neutron; single mass = 1 proton. Although we are ignorant of chemistry knowledge, also we believe in the future could be determined different chemical affinities in function of the mass of the positive particles of the binary systems of the seven shell . Both particles (+ -) describe their corresponding polygonal orbit of a similar shape, around the center of the nucleus, but of course of different radius of gyration, so that it is considered that the orbital electrons move in shells, the positive particles will move in çnushells (forming the nucleus of the atom). The size of the nushells, by far are smaller that their corresponding shells, also the size of the orbital electron compared with that of the positive particles, in the first or most interior nushell hardly is space for two moving positive particles, so it can be explained why in the first shell only can spin two orbital electrons. In Fig.(1), second orbit, with O is represented the center of the nucleus of the atom, that also is the center of gyration of the binary system; PN is the positive particle; E the orbital electron; rN the radius of gyration of the positive particle; Rn the radius of gyration of the negative particle (orbital electron)

When the orbital electron moves in the: n = 7 shell (most external shell);
Rn = R7 = 1.1376 x 10—8 cm = radius of the atom.
The radius of gyration of the positive particle:
rN = r7 = 4 Rn / 1,836 = 4 R7 / 1,836 = 4 x 1.1376 x 10—8 / 1,836 = 2.484 x 10—11 cm = radius of the nucleus (nushell)

For: n = 1 orbit :r1 = 2.484 x 10—11 / 7 = 3.5486 x 10-- 12 cm.(*about two radiuses of proton, (see Fig. 4)

The electron E moves in a polygonal orbit, for correlated reasons the proton PN moves in a
synchronized way in another polygonal orbit, smaller than that of E. For the orbital electron to deflect in a vertex of its orbit (7) it is required an energy to produce the velocity of deflection v_l_7 (see Fig.2)
v_ = 2 x 309 Sin 6o 43 = 69.1 Km./ Sec. (7a orbit); 6º.43 x 28 = 180o

The energy of deflection of the electron is: E7 = 0.5 me v2 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10-- 28 (6.91 x 106 )2 = 2.175 x 10-- 14 erg.

In a vertex of the 7 polygonal orbit is formed a field affecting the orbital electron of the binary system and other similar one affecting the positive particle (this in accordance with a model).

Considering the length of each side of the polygonal orbit: d = 2.55 x 10-- 9 cm, and also considering in Fig.(2) there is a proportion between velocities and distances, is obtained the deflection distance:
d_l_7 = 69.1 d / 308 = 69.1 x 2.55 x 10-- 9 / 308.6 = 5.73 x 10-- 10 cm.

Next is going to see a binary system corresponding to the 2 orbit. From Fig.(3), corresponding to two sides of the second orbit, is obtained the deflection velocity: v = 826.58 Km./ Sec. The deflected distance: d -= 1.96 x 10-- 9 cm. = 2.55 x 10-- 9 x 2 Sin 22o.5

The energy of deflection is:
E2 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10-- 28 (8.2658 x 107)2 = 3.112 x 10-- 12 erg.

In Fig.(4) is represented the orbit of a positive particle in the first nushell, from this can be deduced that in the first shell can move as much as two binary systems. Next are given some relations in which are harmonized geometrical and kinetic conditions.
v_l_n = 2 vn Sin(45o / n) . . . . ( c) Monterrey, México, September 10, 1996 .




















SUPERFLUID HELIUM 3

In a newspaper dated October 10, 1996, I read that 3 Americans: David Lee, Douglas Osheroff and Robert Richardson won the Nobel Prize of Physics 1996, because their discovery of the fluidity of helium 3, a progress in the low temperature physics that was realized at the beginning of the decade 1970 in the University of Cornell in New York. In accordance with the data of the news paper they discovered that the helium 3 can became superfluid at a temperature of 0o.002 K.

With respect to the report of the newspaper, I do not know if the names of the Nobel Prize winners are correct, what is wrong is datum of temperature, because the so called lambda temperature is 2o.2 K. In the lambda point the helium pass from the gaseous state to the liquid one, as seen with the helium 3. In He4 the two binary systems are equilibrated; for this reason the helium 4 evaporates toward the upper atmosphere in form of separated atoms, this is because the helium is lighter than the air. In the helium 3, the 2 binary systems are different. The helium in liquid state, because its viscosity, does not evaporate, and a multimolecule, because its relative great mass, behaves as a liquid; it does not evaporate, but as is lighter than air tries to climb up the wall of the recipient that contain it, this because its adhesive property characteristic of a liquid state is stronger than the tendency to evaporate toward the upper atmosphere.

In our theme: Model of Electric Current, was obtained the electric currents, that move along multimolecules, each one formed by a line of atoms, forming a chain with: n = 2,497,996 atoms / multimolecule. In a transversal section of a conductor, behind each atom of the section could be formed the multimolecules were the current’s electrons move from the lower potential toward the higher one of the conductor. In our case of current, in every one of the multimolecules is moving one current’s electron, as was specified in the mentioned theme; can be considered that not all the multimolecules required by the current in a given time are working at the same time with a moving electron of the current, but only one in (n) of the mentioned multimolecules, and we say this, because it is considered that for a multimolecule to work, it is required that the orbit of the current’s electron behaves as was specified with the spin velocity, the time of jump and of multimolecule given, etc. With this criterion, as could be appreciated, the most logical seems the maximum simplification. In an atom of helium 4 there are two binary systems formed each one with a negative particle with one orbital electron and a positive particle with one proton + one neutron; if both binary systems move in opposite sides, the helium 4 will have equal spin. Now it is going to see an atom of helium 3, in this case, one binary system is formed by a negative particle with one orbital electron and one positive particle with one proton + one neutron; and the other binary system is formed by a negative particle with one orbital electron, and one positive particle with one proton.

Every binary system spin in a synchronized way, for to attain this the orbit of the shell must be similar (equal number of sides and vertices) than the orbit of the nushell, the only difference will be the dimension of them; the dimension of the shell must be proportional to the velocity of the orbital electron and the dimension of the nushell must be proportional to the velocity of the positive particle. As the positive particle can be formed with three different masses, that is: one orbital proton (single mass); one orbital proton + one neutron (double mass), and one orbital proton + two neutrons (triple mass). When a sample of an element almost get 0o K temperature could be imagined that all the movement ceases to act, this could mean that the binary systems would stop moving, this, because at 0o K the atoms are destroyed, but this is not so, in contradiction with the theory that considers that heat is produced by the kinetic energy of the atomic particles. At practically 0o K temperature, the binary systems continue moving into the atoms as have been specified in the models and maybe because this have never reached a real 0o K temperature. In a binary system the negative particle or electron has the maximum energy that oppose to reach the 0o K temperature, as was say, but also the positive particle contribute to this.

The fore conclusions that have been given from a point of view of deduction by observation, can explain the difficulties for to obtain the mentioned temperature. To K be in accordance with the experimental results, it is going to be considered that the no null temperature effect is produced by the kinetic energy and the electric charge of the orbital electron and proton. The electric charge is equivalent to a kinetic energy and viceversa, the kinetic energy is equivalent to an electric charge; all this in accordance with the structured model we will give. As the neutrons have no electric charge, they do not contribute to produce the no null temperature effect.

No null temperature effect produced by the negative particle of a binary system in accordance with our model:
Ke = 4 x 0.5 me ve2 = 4 x 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10-- 31 (3.09 x 105)2 = 1.7395 x 10-- 19 joule.
Idem. for the positive particle v+ = 4 x 308570 / 1836 = 672.27 m / Sec.:
K+ = 0.5 m+ v+2 = 0.5 x 1.6725 x 10-- 27 (672.27)2 = 3.7794 x 10-- 22 joule ; so:
Ke = 459 K+

From the book: The Science and the Life of Albert Einstein, by Abraham Pais, are the following paragraphs:

In December 1924 Einstein wrote to Ehrenfest from a certain temperature on the molecules “condense” without attractive forces, that is, they accumulate at zero velocity. Until 1938, the Bose-Einstein condensation had the reputation of having only a purely imaginary character. This phase transition was not discovered until 1928 by Willem Hendrik Keesib. In 1938 Flitz London proposed interpreting the helium transition as a Bose-Einstein condensation. Experimentally, the transition point lies at: T = 2o 19 K. In accordance with their theory: T = 3o.1 K. It is generally believed, but not proved that the difference between this two values is due to the neglecting of intermolecular forces in the theoretical derivation.

The concept of temperature is related with that of movement, in such way that some physicists consider that at zero Kelvin temperature all kind of movement ceases to act; this definition is ambiguous, because at that temperature the orbital electrons move with their great velocity around the nuclei of the atoms. We can imagine a macroscopic body moving at great velocity in the outer space at temperature almost zero degree Kelvin. From the most elementary particles, as the light corpuscles, to the atoms or molecules, can move at great velocity at zero Kelvin temperature while they are not affected directly by other particles, or by themselves. In all these cases the particles have a potential energy that is manifested when there is an intersection with them and the medium in which they move, this interaction could be by absorption, reflection, collision, etc.

In the XIX century the physicists believed that all the laws of physics were known and that progress of the science will be obtained by more detailed knowledge; with the discovery of the atomic particles and with modern physics the fore concept had a radical change, in such a way that the physics’ world was considered too complex. Now with mechanophysics we are returning to the concepts that the physicists had of classic physics before modern physics born; nevertheless it is not prudent to be too optimist, because if it is seen with ampler criterion the fields in which physics acts or intervene, can be applied in chemistry, in biology, etc.

As the objective of a mechanophysics is to find true facts with true and objective theories or laws, in all these papers have been proved that this is feasible and that it is not required to employ theories with false structure, as those of modern physics, for to find real facts. From the mentioned book of Abraham Pais is the following paragraph.

Physicists -good physicists- enjoy scientific speculations in private but tends to frown upon it when done in public. They are conservative revolutionaries resisting innovations as long as possible and at all intellectual cost, but embracing it when the evidence is incontrovertible. If they do not, physics tends to pass them by.

I would amplify the fore paragraph by saying: that ,more important than the conservative spirit, are the resulting facts obtained by the recognition of the new ideas. In our case is more important the life of the sick people (see electrotherapy) than the conservative spirit of modern physics.

It was say that at a temperature near 0o K a binary system of an atom can moves without incrementing such temperature; if the fore happens with the orbital electron of one atom, also could happens with a multimolecule. Till now have been considered the multimolecules for to explain the movement of the current´s electrons, later will be seen that the sound can move along them. From all say before it is not find any trouble for the electron of the multimolecule to move along this, without affecting the near 0o K temperature. It is well known that when the temperature diminishes, the gaseous substances try to became to a liquid state and the liquid substances try to became solid substances; the fore one only could be explained considering that the multimolecules of the substance try to unite one to each other, and for to do this, the nultimolecule electron of one multimolecule will jump to the adjacent multimolecule, and for to do this it is forceful to be produced an ionization effect. This means that if by one side, with the fore effect at the same time will be produce an increment of the temperature. The ionization of helium is 24.6 eV.
Energy of ionization: K = 24.6 x 1.6 x 10—19 = 3.936 x 10-- 18 joule / atom.

The fore energy is equivalent to a temperature, in accordance with Boltzmann´s law is:
T = 2K / 3k = 2 x 3.936 x 10-- 18 / 3 x 1.38 x 10—23 = 190,145o K.
Apparently the fore result is in contradiction with what is say in the theme: The Maximum Temperature Could Exist; that consider this temperature is equal to: T1 = 102,656º K. But there is not any contradiction, because: K = 2.1245 x 10—18 + 1.8105 x 10—18. Here the first value is employed in ionize one electron; and the second value is the opposition of the second electron to the ionization of the first one.

The fore mentioned ionization, affecting the ionized atom gives a great temperature, that afterward is distributed in all the atoms of the sample. The minimum part of the sample in which are produced all the fore mentioned effects is in a cube which volume is: nm3 (isometric distribution of atoms): nm = 2,497,996 atoms = number of atoms that has a multimolecule. In the fore volume there are as much multimolecules as: nm2 . Next it is going to be made some considerations: although almost all the mass of an atom correspond to the positive particles of the binary system; from the point of view of kinetic energy these particles, in the sample will produce the increment of heat; because the fore increment is produced by vibration, or collision, or impact with other particles, then, because action = reaction, in the formula: Ke = 459 K+ , will be consider a double mass of the positive particles of the binary systems of the atoms acting (getting ionized) in nm multimolecules, or: (459 x 2)0.5 = 9180.5 atoms acting in nm multimolecules.
T = 190,145 x 9180.5 / 2,497,996 = 2o.306 K

With the fore increment of temperature of the sample, the ionization effect ceases till the temperature diminishes the following value: (30 - 1) 2.306 / 30 = 2o.22 K
+ - 1 minimum variation of one atom for produce ionization or / and decrement of temperature.

Monterrey, México, October 15, 1996; March 28, 1998
















INTERPRETATION OF THE EXPERIMENT OF MICHELSON AND MORLEY WITH THE ABERRALOGY

The following papers were take from a book I made in 1972 of the investigation work of my father Estanislao R de Hoyos, in the aberralogy and in an objective physics, since before the second world war. Practically all the work is presented as he conceived it, except some commentaries and amplifications I made to actualize it in the mentioned year 1972 Before interpreting the results of this experiment, it is going to be given an explanation of such experiment. From the book: La Teoria de la Relatividad by Alfred Wulf, Tacubaya, México, 1924, is the following translation:

In Fig.(32), where details have been omitted to simplify the understanding, is shown the interferometer of the physicist of the University of Chicago, Michelson. It consist of two fixed arms, perpendicular one to each other, with the same length and with the mirrors E1 and E2 in their extremities. In the crossing of both arms there is a semitransparent mirror W, inclined an angle of 45o, that lets pass part of the light that proceeds from the luminous point L, and the other part of this light is reflected. So that there are obtained two rays that propagate perpendicularly one to each other toward the mirrors E1 and E2 were they are reflected, returning to W, from here they continue united as far as the telescope of observation T. As the Earth’s movement has different influence in both rays the light need different times, according with the classic theory, to move over the equal paths WE1 and WE2. Due to this, it is necessary to prove that the returning rays suffer in W the reciprocal effect known as interference The telescope T is to observe the interference stripes produced by both rays. All the instrument is installed so that it could be turned around, that is ,either the arm WE1 or the arm WE2 could be oriented in the direction of the Earth’s movement. If the instrument is turned around 90 o, so that WE2 be in the direction mentioned before, it could be expected that the same interference stripes appear as they looked in the direction WE1, having as only difference their movement to the opposite side, but being their displacement equal to those due to the position WE1. This instrument was perfected by Michelson by continuous reforms, until obtaining an instrument of precision with a usefulness without precedent till now; thanks to it, it is possible to obtain a precision of one hundredth of the effect calculated in advance, but as was explained before, the experiment has given negative results, because the instrument did not show the influence of the Earth’s movement....

The interpretation of this experiment by the aberralogy can be resumed to the following: Since the observer and the luminous fountain are in the same system (the Earth), both are affected by the same movements, velocities, magnitudes, etc., that the Earth imposes on both, in the same magnitude, so that the observer can not notice any movement of the Earth by observing the luminous focus, he needs to observe another body outside the system; although the problem is too clear, it is going to be subdivided in all the parts that are necessary to study them, with the aberralogy; this, beside a more complete proof, will show us that the experiment is only a combination of cases of aberralogy and not a different phenomenon, as it has been interpreted.

Suppose an observer expecting to appreciate the movement of the Earth with the Michelson & Morley’s experiment; when obtaining negative results, was not satisfied with this, and tried to find the “error” running over the trajectory of the light, observing space by space. Starting from the luminous point L, will arrive to W, from this point he will observe the light coming from L, in this case the body L is approaching with velocity v’, to the observer in W, simultaneously, the observer recedes from W with velocity: v = v’, because both velocities are equal to the velocity of the Earth, the formula which will give the aberrated time due to the movement of the Earth is:

tr = ta (1 - v / c) / (1 - v’ / c) = ta . . . . (2,3)

from here it is deduced that the movement of the Earth does not modify the time that the light expends to run over this space.

Now the observer has moved to E1, and from here he will see the light coming from W (in this case W will represent the luminous point); this case is exactly equal to the fore one (space LW) and the movement of the Earth will not affect the time that light spends to run over this other space, as it would be appreciated by any observer that would be displacing in the same system.

If the observer now returns to W, following the route as the ray of light mentioned did, he will see the light reflected from the mirror in E1 arriving to him as if E1 were the luminous point. The observer in W approaches with velocity v, and the luminous point (here E1 is equivalent to a luminous point) E1 recedes with velocity v’, the formula of the time aberrated by the movement of the Earth, will be:

tr = ta (1 + v / c) / (1 + v’ / c) = ta . . . . (1,4)
here: v = v’ = Earth’s velocity

Here the movement of the Earth does not affect the time that light expends to run over the trajectory. It just has been seen before, that the movement of the Earth does not affect the time expended by the light to run over the trajectory given before (trajectory parallel to the Earth’s movement)

Let us see now the case of a trajectory of the light perpendicular to the movement of the Earth. Now the observer moves to E2, and from here he sees the light ray coming from W, that in this case, W represents the luminous point. To be in accordance with the nomenclature of the formulas of time and frequency aberrated, we are going to express with O to the observer in E2, and with On the displaced observer in A, to the luminous point W, by F (see Fig. 33, 34).

As in this case, either the observer O as the luminous body F, move parallel to each other and with a velocity: v = v’ = Earth’s velocity. It is convenient to analyze the problem in two phases.

1) Supposing the observer is moving and the luminous body motionless.

2) Supposing the resultant of the first phase combined with the luminous body moving.

First phase: Observer moving, luminous body motionless. In this condition the observer will appreciate the luminous body in an aberrated time tp (preberrated) in accordance with the following formula:

tr c = [(tp c)2 + (tp v)2 - 2 tp2 c v Cos On]0.5 . . . . (6); tr = real time.

From the fore formula (6), is discovered the preberrated time: tp

tp2 = [ (tr c )2 / ( c2 + v2 - 2c v Cos On )] . . . . (6’)

This time that is aberrated (preberrated) for the first phase, that is, the resultant originated by the combination of the movements of the observer and the light; for the second phase will be the real time, and starting with this for the second phase we find the transberrated time due to the movement of the luminous body combined with the resultant of the first phase. In synthesis, the transberrated time of the second phase, is equivalent to the aberrated time of both phases’ system, due to the movement of the observer (first phase) plus the movement of the luminous body (second phase).
Applying the formula (8) of frequency, or time transberrated tt and taking in account the fore indications, it is obtained:
tr c = [ (tt c)2 + (tt v’)2 - 2 tt2 c v’ Cos n ]0.5 . . . . (8)

We are going to substitute these values in the fore formula (8), so as to be in accordance with the literal of formula (6’):
tt c = [(tr c)2 / (c2 – v2 - 2 c v´ Cos n]0.5 . . . . (8’)

Substituting formula (6’) in this, we have:
(c2 + v’2 - 2 c v’ Cos n) / (c2 + v2 - 2 c v Cos On) = 1





























FIRST LAW OF THE DOUBLE FLUID THEORY

If we study more widely the theory of the double fluid, we could see that the emitted-received fluid can have different velocities, so we refer ourselves to the interaction between atomic particles or between bodies perceived directly by our sensorial organs, etc., For the case of the gravity emitted-received fluid, we will consider it, equal to light velocity. If the body that emits the gravity fluid, is fixed, and the body that receives it, is moving, this could be appreciated as the fluid having light velocity plus the vectoriall sum of the velocity of the moving (and receiving) body; if the emitting body is moving and the receiving one is fixed; or if both bodies are moving, we can make identical considerations, all in accordance with the aberralogy.

As we have just seen, the aberralogy permits us to appreciate one type of emitted-received fluid that can have different velocities. This variation of velocities has a notable influence; based on the fact that the energy with which the emitted-received fluid is received, is proportional to the square of the reception velocity divided by ( c),as seen this by a series of observations of different phenomena, was deduced the following law, that is going to be called: First law of the double fluid theory, that says: The energy of the propeller fluid is proportional to the square of the velocity with which the emitted-received fluid is incremented. The limitation of this law could have by interference with other phenomenon, are not going to be mentioned here, due to the lack of space.

It is important to make clear that the wearing out of masses produced by the gravity fluids, is so insignificant that the changes (additions or reductions) are due mainly to other effects that are much bigger.

















-



DEFLECTION OF A RAY OF LIGHT IN A GRAVITATORY FIELD.

Before we study this problem I am going to reproduce some paragraphs of the book: “Electromagnetism & Relativity” by Edmund P. Ney, page 107.

Deflection of Light in the Gravitational Field of a Star.

In 1801 a German mathematician named Soldner, calculated the deflection of light in the gravitational field of the Sun. His result which we reproduce here leads to the prediction of a deflection of 0”.87 seconds of arc. Shortly after developing the general theory, Einstein calculated the deflection and got the same result. however, he later developed the theory and found that general relativity actually predicts a value twice as large, or 1”.75 of arc. The experiment was first performed in 1919, and the result reported was 1.”7 of arc. The experiment is difficult, and more recent experiments have not agreed with this theory as the 1919 experiment, This prediction of the theory can only be considered to be confirmed to an accuracy of perhaps 20 %. The procedure of the experiment, is to photograph a star field around the Sun during a total eclipse (so that the stars are visible). Six months later, when the same stars are visible at night, the star field is photographed again. The displacement of the apparent positions of the stars can be measured by comparing the two photographs.

Soldner’s derivation.
The transverse momentum P_l_, imparted to an object of mass m can be shown to be given at point P (see figure 68) by:
dP = G M m Cos d / c R
The total transversal momentum is:
P_ = dP = -G M m Cos  d / cR = 2 G M m / c R . . . . (42)
The angle :  = P_l / P = (2 G M m /c R) / m c = 2 G M / c2 R radians . . . . (43’)

Substitution in this formula for the case of the Sun, leads to the “classical” value:  = 0”.87 of arc. Note that although the mass of the photon cancels itself out in the derivation, the mass must be finite, i.e. m =/= 0, and this was not established in prerelativity physics. It could also be emphasized that Soldner’s value is only half the correct value given by the general theory.

The determination of the angle  by the relativity theory is not going to be effectuate here, because it is not necessary in this study. In the determination of the angle  by Soldner, he gave the gravity force an instantaneous action, but this is not the case, because the gravity has light velocity, and we have to take in account the aberralogy.

First we consider the light corpuscles moving from P to Q as in Fig.68. When the corpuscle that we take passes by point P with c velocity, it meets a gravity ray with practically the same velocity that moves in the OP direction, the velocity that meet both rays is equal to the vectorial sum of their velocities. In Fig. 69 we have represented by cx the velocity of the corpuscle of light, and by c the velocity of the gravity that meets the light ray (or the corpuscle of light), and by ca the velocity of reception of the emitted-received fluid by light corpuscle.

Distance OP = R / Cos 
Distance PP’ = dS = OP d / Cos  = R d / Cos2 

Gravity force on a corpuscle at point P, according with Newton’s law, is:
F = G M m / (R / Cos )2; here: m = mass of a light corpuscle; M = mass of the Sun.
The resultant of this gravity force perpendicular to trajectory PQT (but in the same plane PQO) is:
F_l_ = G M m Cos  / (R / Cos )2 = G M m Cos3  / R2 = perpendicular force

The momentum of the corpuscle in the point we are considering or any other point of the trajectory PQT is practically constant (= mcx) and in the same way of the trajectory. The momentum normally the trajectory is obtained multiplying the normal component of the gravity force by dt (time differential).

With both magnitudes we make the triangle of Fig. 70 and obtain the deviation angle d for the chosen point. The sum of all these angles d will give us the total angular deviation  , and because this angle is very small, we consider the normal in the trajectory equal to the normal of the straight line PQT, without appreciable error.

d = G M m Cos3  dt / m cx R2

We solve the problem by the principle of impulse and momentum.

dS = PP’ = (PO) d / Cos  = R d / Cos2  = cx dt
cx = velocity of the corpuscle
dt = differential of time = dS / cx = R d / cx Cos2 
dF = F dt = (G M m Cos3  / R2) (R d / cx Cos2 ) = G M m Cosd  / cxR
1) We are going to consider the corpuscle moving as indicated by the arrow. When the corpuscle is in P, the gravity fluid is moving from O to P with velocity c, equal to light velocity. The corpuscle moves with a velocity equal to cx in the direction PP’Q, so that this corpuscle receives the gravitatory ray with an aberrated velocity:
ca = (cx2 + c2 + 2 c cx Sen )0.5 (69)

In accordance with the first law of the double fluid theory of the aberralogy, the increment of energy that produce the radiation (of gravity) is proportional to the square of the increment of velocity with which is received such radiation. So we have that the increment of the action of gravity is equal to: ca / c. Here ca = incremented velocity of gravity (see fugyre 69). As velocity of gravity is equal to velocity of light c = cx; In accordance with the principle of impulse and momentum and considering the increment (ca / c), of the gravity force by aberration, and the first law of the double fluid theory, we have:
Ca2 / c2 = (cx2 +c2 + 2 cx c Sin )´/ c2 = 2 + 2 Sin

The total transversal momentum is:
P The total transversal momentum is:
P = dP = -G M m Cos  d / cR = 2 G M m / c R . . . . (42)
The angle :  = P / P = (2 G M m /c R) / m c = 2 G M / c2 R radians . . . . (43’)
The angle of deflection is: d= d P / P ; dP = dF P = mcx
P = dP P
 = P / P ; Considering the increment of the action of gravity:
 = P dt ca2 / c2 m c = (- G M m / c R) Cos  d (ca2 / c2 m c) =
(- G M / c2 R) (2 + 2 Sin ) Cos  d = 2 G M / c2 R Sin 
+ 2 G M / c2 R Sin2 / 2 = 4 G M / c2 R + 0 Radians =
4 x 6.673 x 10—11 x 1.983 x 1030 / [ (3 x108)2 7 x 108 ] = 8.4 x 10—6 Rad. =
206,265 x 8.4 x 10—6 = 1.¨73.
The experiment of the eclipse of the Sun is not very good, because the rays of light that pass near the Sun are affected by the refraction of its atmospnere.












DETERMINATION OF THE PRECESSION OF THE PERIHELIUM OF A SATELLITE WITH AN ELLIPTICAL ORBIT.

Suppose a satellite that moves in an orbit as the one shown in Fig. 71. In this figure, O is the attraction center, and corresponds to one of the foci of the ellipse. We are going to represent by the distance OP the radius, and it will change it magnitude in function of the angle .

r = a (1 - E2) / (1 + E Cos ) . . . . (44) dr = a (1 - E2) E Sin  d / (1 + E Cos )2 . . (45)
E = eccentricity

In the first place we are going to consider the satellite moving without any aberralogic effect; in this condition the velocity of the satellite could be obtained using the second Kepler’s law, which considers the radius covering equals areas in equal times. To fulfill this condition, the velocity of the satellite must be in a proportion inversely to the radius of the orbit. If (v) is the velocity, this velocity too, will be a function of the angle for the same reason we mentioned before. Considering the aberralogic effects, and giving gravity light velocity, then for a given time, the satellite will move from P to P’ (distance dS), with the velocity (v) specified, this velocity can be divided in two:

1) one radial: vr = v dr / [(r d)2 + (dr)2]0.5 . . . . (46);
2) one normal: v n = v r d / [ (r d)2 + (dr)2]0.5 . . . (47)

Now we are going to determine the velocity (just aberrated) with which the satellite receives the gravity rays. Fig. (71), show us in a bigger scale one piece of trajectory (Fig. 71´). the piece of trajectory that we are studying is the PP’, that has a differential magnitude of first order. To point P corresponds a radius PO, of which only appears one superior piece in the figure. To point P’ correspond a radius P’O. If we prolong the two pieces of radius showed in the figure they will meet at point O; the radius P’O is smaller than PO in a magnitude equal to CP’ (= d r), so that if we rotate the radius PO an angle d to the right, the point P will coincide with the C. If in our analysis we approximate to the differential of first order, the arc PC (= r d), is confounded with the straight line that joint both points and the angles in P and C can be considered right angles For our analysis it is not enough such approximation, as we will see below, so the trajectory PC will be an arc of circle, as indicated with the pointed line; here the angle in P and in C are really right angles because they are measured between the tangents of the trajectory PC (in the points P and C) and the radiuses. In this last case the angles have grown a quantity equal to d / 2 each one. The trajectory PP’ of the satellite, approximated to the differential of first order, also it could be confused with the straight line that join both points; for a better approximation we have to take in account the curvature in that differential piece of curve and make an identical analysis with the piece PC, the angle in P (triangle OPP’ in Fig. 71) will be increased in a quantity equal to d / 2 , for this second case this angle in P’ also will increase d / 2, for identical reasons. When the satellite arrives at the point P’, this has a trajectory that makes an angle in this point, with the straight line PP’ equal to d / 2. Due to the aberralogic effects, the gravity rays seem to come toward the satellite in the direction O’P’, so the angle of the trajectory of the satellite in that point, with the line P’O’ will be equal to an angle; PP’O + 0.5 d= 1.5 d

The projection of the velocity (in the point P’) of the satellite in the line P’O’ is:
(v)po = vr + 1.5 d v [(r d)2 + (dr)2]0.5 / r d . . . . (48’)
c = velocity of the gravity fluid; v = velocity of the satellite.

We can make the following proportion:
[ (r d)2 + (dr)2 ]0.5 : v :: : r : c ; {(r d)2 + (dr)2]0.5 = v r / c
if we substitute this value and equation (46) in the former equation, we obtain:
(v)po = v dr [(r d)2 + (dr)2]--0.5 + 1.5 v2 / c . . . . (48)

In accordance with the Kepler´s law:
v r = vm rm ; v = vm rm / r . . . . (52)

For the planet Mercury we have the following:
t = one year of Mercury (= 88 Earth’s days)
vm = 47.9 Kms./ Sec. = average translation velocity of Mercury.
rm = 57.86 x 106 Kms. = medium radius of the orbit of Mercury
E = eccentricity of the orbit = 0.206.
a = 58.4872 x 106 Kms. = mayor semiaxis of the elliptic orbit.
C = 2 E / (1 + E2) = 0.395228 . . . . (53)

In the fore paragraph have been defined the characteristics of an elliptic orbit of a planet, as Mercury. Of course these characteristics were obtained by observations and applying the Newton and Kepler´s laws, in which were consider the masses of the Sun, of the planet, the distances, velocities, momemtums or impulses, etc. In accordance with all the fore data was obtained the orbit of the planet Mercury with a great approximation; nevertheless, in 1859, by observations made by Le Verrier, he discovered that the planet Mercury had an acceleration of its perihelion of 43”.8 / century, with respect to the calculations made before with the Newton and Kepler´s laws. The fore discrepancy was interpreted then, due to the action of unknown masses... With the general theory of relativity, Einstein gave a more convincing interpretation, that my father did not accept: He considered that such discrepancy was due to some aberralogic effects, but not only geometrical ones, but energetic ones. The effect of a body or radiation moving at certain velocity is manifested not only in a geometrical way; but at the square of their velocity: This was the first law of the double fluid theory conceived by him, and that has not been recognized till now by the scientific world.

In the fore theme: Deflection of a Ray of Light in a Gravitatory Field was solved the problem mentioned by the tittle of the theme, considering all the physical properties of the interacting elements. Here, with the physical data, and the first law of the double fluid theory, was determine all the require data of the elliptic orbit of Mercury, so our problem will be limited to geometrical and mathematical solutions. In accordance with this we can obtain the time of orbit of the planet without considering the aberratories effects; and also can obtain the increment of the acceleration produced by the aberatories effects, in accordance with the first law of the double fluid theory..

From Figs.(71) can be obtained the following formulas:
dt = dS / v = [(r d)2 + (dr)2]0.5 (r / vm rm)
F dt ; F = (G M m  / r2) r d [(r d)2 + (dr)2]--0.5
F dt = (G M m  / r2) r d [(r d)2 + (dr)2]—0.5 [(r d)2 + (dr)2]0.5 (r / vm rm) =
G M m  d / (vm rm) = perpendicular impulse produced by the Sun in the planet in a time (dt).
Average impulse that has the planet Mercury: m vm rm = average radius of the orbit;
F_l_ = perpendicular force produced by the Sun on the planet.

If we account for the small dimension of the angle d, practically the aberrated velocity of the received gravity ray by the satellite in the point P’, will be:
ca = c + (v  dr) [(r d)2 + (dr)2]--0.5 + 1.5 v2 / c . . . . (49)
ca / c = 1 + (v  dr / c)[(r d)2 + (dr)2]—0.5 + 1.5 v2 / c2
Considering the kinetic aberralogic effects we have
ca2 / c2 = 1 + (2 v  dr / c) [(r d)2 + (dr)2]—0.5 + (v  dr / c)2 [(r d)2 + (dr)2]—1 + 3 v2 / c2 +
3 (v3  dr / c3) [(r d)2 + (dr)2]—0.5 + 2.25 v4 / c4
The last two terms are very much small, affected by (1 / c3) and (1 / c4), so we can disregard them.
ca2 / c2 = 1 + (2 v  dr / c) [(r d)2 + (dr)2]—0.5 + (v  dr / c)2 [(r d)2 + (dr)2]—1 + 3 v2 / c2 . . . (50´)

In accordance with Kepler´s law, we have: v r = vm rm ; v = vm rm / r . . . . (52)
ca2 / c2 = 1 + (2 vm rm  / c) (dr / r) [ (r d)2 + (dr)2]—0.5 + (vm2 rm2  / c2) (dr / r)2 [(r d)2 + (dr)2]—1 + (3 vm2 rm2) / (r2 c2) . . . . (50)

dr / r = [a (1 – E2) E Sin. d (1 + E Cos.)—2] [a (1 – E2) (1 + E Cos.)—1]--1 =
E Sin. d (1+ E Cos.)—1

(r d)2 + (dr)2 = a2 (1 – E2)2 (1 + E Cos.)—2 [1 + E2 Sin.2 (1 + E Cos.)—2 ] (d)2 ;

1 + E2 Sin.2 (1 + E Cos.)—2 = [(1 + E Cos.)2 + E2 Sin.2)] (1 + E Cos.)—2 = (1 + 2 E Cos. + E2) (1 + E Cos.)—2

C = 2 E / (1 + E2)
(1 + 2 E Cos. + E2) (1 + E Cos.)—2 = (2 E / C + 2 E Cos.) ( 1 + E Cos.)—2 =
(2 E / C) ( 1 + C Cos.) (1 + E Cos.)—2

[(r d)2 + (dr)2]—0.5 = [a2 (1 + E2)2 (1 + E Cos.)--2]—0.5 [(2 E / C) (1 + C Cos.) ]—0.5 (! + E Cos.)--1]—0.5 (d)—1 = a—1 (1- E2)—1 (1 + E Cos.)2 (2 E / C)—0.5 (1 + C Cos.)--0.5 (d)—1

(dr / r) [(r d)2 + (dr)2]—0.5 = E Sin. (1 + E Cos.)—1 (d) a—1 (1 – E2)—1 (1 + E Cos.)2 (2 E / C)—0.5 (1 + C Cos.)—0.5 (d)—1
= A Sin. (1 + E Cos.) (1 + C Cos.)—0.5 . . . . (50A)

A = E a--1 (1 – E2)—1 (2 E / C)—0.5 =
0.206 x 5.84872 x 10—10 (1 –0.042436)—1 .x 0.206 x 2 / 0.395228)—0.5 = 0.206 / 5.7181135 x 10--10 = 3.60257 x 10—12 m--1

(dr / r)2 [(r d)2 + (dr)2]–1 = A2 Sin.2 (1 + E Cos.)2 (1 + C Cos.)—1 . . . . (50´A)

2 B = A (2 vm rm) = 3.60257 x 10—12 (2 x 4.79 x 104 x 5.786 x 1010 =
3.60257 x 10—12 x 5.542988 x 1015 = 19,969 m / Sec.

Substituting equations (50A) and (50´A) in equation (50)
ca2 / c2 = [ 1 + (2 B  / c) Sin. (1 + E Cos.) (1 + C Cos.)—0.5 + (B  / c)2 Sin.2 (1 + E Cos.)2 (1 + C Cos.)—1 + (3 vm2 rm2) / (r2 c2) ] d . . . .(51)

In accordance with the second aw of the double fluid theory (not well study yet) The fore formula (51) gives a satisfactory mathematical variation of the increment of the velocity of gravity in a planet. The first term (= 1) is proportional to the normal velocity of gravity without any aberration. The second tern gives the lineal aberration produced by the movement of the planet; by now we ccan not affirm that the gravity can affects the planet in a lineal way; it would be interesting study this effect; not only from a mathematical point of view. The third and fourth terms give the aberration gravity not only from a mathematical point of view, but from a physical one, that in accordance with the first law of the double fluid theory increment the effect of gravity in a proportion equal to the square of its velocity. In these last terms, beside the increment of velocity we have to consider the intensity of gravity; this in accordance with a second law of the double fluid theory (not well study yet); for instance, if the intensity is one, by this reason the effect will be proportional to one; if the intensity is two the corresponding effect would be equal to two… In the third term, it is affected by the coefficient (B  / c )2, in which: B = 19,969 / 2 m / Sec.; but really with the intensity of gravity produced by the Sun, the velocity of the planet is: vm = 4.79 x 104 m / Sec.; also the value vm is an average one in a lineal way; but is bigger considering a second powder one (v2).


Considering no aberrated effects, the first term (1) into the angular parenthesis will give the angle that produce the planet moving from the aphelion point (O) toward the perihelion point (P), and vice versa. Now considering aberrated effects, the second term into the parenthesis, affected by (1 / c) will give a delay of the perihelion when moves from the perihelion toward the aphelion, and when moves in the opposite direction will give an advance effect. Finally, the third and fourth terms into the angular parenthesis will give a definitive angular deviation of advance of second order..

Trajectory of the planet from the aphelion to the perihelion without considering aberratories effects:
d =  radians = 180o
From the perihelion to the aphelion: d = -- 180º

The trajectories considering the oscillate aberration of first order: :
(ca / c)2 d = (2 B  / c) [Sin. (1 + E Cos.) (1 + C Cos.0.5 d
(2 B  / c) Sin  (1 + 0.206 Cos.) (1 + 0.395228 Cos.)—0.5 d

In the integral tables is not found any formula as the fore one, for direct integration; but with the Newton´s binomial we obtain the following formula:
(1 + C Cos.)—0.5 = 1 – 0.5 C Cos. + 0.5 x 1.5 C2 Cos.2 / 2¡ - 0.5 x 1.5 x 2.5 C3 Cos.3 / 3¡ + . . . =

1 – 0.197614 Cos. + 0.0585769 Cos.2 – 0.0192927 Cos.3 + 0.00667189 Cos.4 – . . . .

When the planet moves from the perihelion toward the apjelion, or in the ipposite way, we have:
Sin  Cosn  d = -- [ Sin2  Cosn+1  / / (n + 1) = 0; there is no aberation effect. But when the planet moves from an intermediate point between the perihelion and the aphelion, to them is produced an ooscillate value.

But when the planet moves from the intermediate point:  = 0o, we have:
Sin2  Cosn  d  = -- Sin  Cos n+1  / (n + 1) = Cosn+1]
Cos.n Sin. d = -- Cos.n+1 / (n + 1)
Sin. d = -- Cos. = 1
Cos. Sin. d = -- Cos.2 / 2 = + 1/2
Cos.2 Sin. d = -- Cos.3 / 3 = +1/3
Cos.3 Sin. d = -- Cos.4 / 4 = +1/4 .
Cos.4 Sin. d = -- Cos.5 / 5 = + 1/5
Cos.5 Sin. d = -- Cos.6 / 6 = + 1/6
Cos.6 Sin. d = -- Cos.7 / 7 = + 1/7


+ 1 D = + Sin.(1 + 0.206 Cos.) d = 1+ 0.206 (1/2) = + 1.103

-0.197614 D = - 0.197614 Sin. (1 + 0-206 Cos.) Cos. d = - (0.197614 (1/2) - 0.197614 x 0.206 (1/ 3) = - 0.053092

+ 0.0585769 D = + 0.0585769 Sin  (1 + 0.206 Cos.) Cos.2 d = + 0.0585769 (1/3) + 0.0585769 x 0.206 (1/4) = + 0.0225423

-0.0192927 D = - 0.0192927  Sin  (1 + 0.206 Cos.) Cos.3 d = - 0.0192927 (1/4) – 0.0192927 x 0.206 (1/5) = - 0.0086817

+ 0.00667189 D = + 0.00667189 Sin  (1 + 0.206 Cos.) Cos.4 d = +0.00667189 (1/5) + 0.00667189 x 0.206 (1/6) = 0.00156344
 DL = 1.04504

Angular oscillatory aberration (first order):
2 = (2 B  / c) Sin. (1 + Cos.) (1 + C Cos.)—0.5 d = (2 B  / c )  D´ =
(19,969 3 x 108) 1.04504 = 2.185 x 10—7 radians = 45.”0 / half orbit

With the aberralogy my father proved that the theories of relativity are wrong. Before my father, the ideas of aberration were study in very elementary way, and only were seen them from geometrical point of view, as did Bradley, or Doppler in the study of the frequency of sound and other radiation; my father did this, studding not only geometrical aberrations, but he considered energetic variations; so he discovered the first law of the double fluid theory; in this way he was able to solve the deflection of a ray of light in a gravitatory field (see the fore problem with the same name).

Way he was able to solve the deflection of a ray of light in a gravitatory field (see the fore problemwith the same name).

In this theme the problems of aberration are seen in a more profound way. In the fore mentioned theme was only considered the aberration effects produced by direct variation of the radiation (gravity) that produce the aberration. In this way the aberration grows in a lineal proportion of the increment of such radiation, and diminish in a lineal proportion of the decrement of such radiation To this we call aberration of the first order. But there are other kind of aberrations, that are manifested only as positive ones. These other aberrations are manifested when exists a radiation that produce such aberration, it does not matter the radiations grow or diminish. In both cases the radiations produce an energy of aberration; in the first case such energy grows when the radiation grows; and diminish when the radiation diminishes, in the second case, also there is an energy, although it decreases. For the production of the aberration of second order it is only required there is a quantity of gravity that increment the deflection of the planet, so the second term of the equation (51), affected by /1 / c) can produce second order aberrations affected by (vm  / c)2; this beside the first order aberration affected by (2 B  / c)2; this beside the first order aberration affected by: (2 B  / c), that was given before. With the numerical problems will be seen forward will be understand better all this.

Next it is going to see the aberration (affected by 1 / c2) of second order. . In the third and fourth terms (affected by 1 / c2) the aberration is of second order. As was say before, the second order aberrations always are of advance, although the planet moves from the perihelion toward the aphelion; that is when the intensity of gravity diminishes..


First it is going to see the aberration of second order produced by the second term (affected by 1 / c) of the formula (51). The aberration of second order produced by the second term of equation (51) is considering that:  D´2 = 1.04504 is produced in 1 / 2 of orbit and in accordance with the second law of the double fluid theory:
2 =  D´2 x (vm  / 2 c)2 = 1.04504 x (47900  / 2 x 3 x 108) = 6.573 x 10—8 Rad.

Now we are going to solve the problem of aberration of advance, the third and fourth terms of equation (51) will give this effect. When the planet is moving from the perihelion toward the aphelion, always is affected by the gravity force; it does not matter the gravity diminishes. In a second order process always is produced advance effect, because always there is gravity, although it is reduced when the planet advances from the perihelion toward the aphelion;, this happens in the third and fourth terms that are affected by (1 / c2). Next it is going to see this problem.

Cosn  Sin.2 d = Sin. Cos,n+1 / (2 + n) + [ 1 / (2 + 1)] Cosnd =
0 + [1 / (2 + n)] Cosn d

Sin21 + 2 E Cos. + E2 Cos.2) (1 + C Cos.)--1 d =
Sen2 (1 + 2 x 0.206 Cos. + 0.2062 Cos2) (1 + 0.395828 Cos.)—1 d =
Sin2 (1 + 0.412 Cos. + 0.042435 Cos2) (1 + 0.395828 Cos.) –1 d

(1 + C Cos.)--1 = 1 – C Cos. + C2 Cos.2 - C3 Cos.3 + C4 Cos.4 - . . . . = 1 – 0.395228 Cos. + 0.156205 Cos.2 - 0.0617367 Cos.3 + 0.0244 Cos.4 - .... . .
Cosn  Sin.2 d = Sin. Cos,n+1 / (2 + n) = + [ 1 / (2 + 1)] Cosnd = 0 + [1 / (2 + n)] Cosn d


Sin.2 d =  = 1.5708
Cos. Sin.2 d = (1 / 3) Sin. = 0
Cos.2 Sin.2 d = (1 / 4)  = 0.3927
Cos.3 Sin.2 d = (2 / 15) Sin. = 0
Cos.4 Sin2 d = (3 / 48)  = =.0.19635
Cos.5 Sin.2 d = (8 / 105) Sin. = 0
Cos.6 Sin.2 d = (15 / 384)  = 0.1227

+ 1 D = + Sin.2 (1 + 0.412 Cos. + 0.042436 Cos.2) d =
1.571 + 0.412 x 0 + 0.042436 x 0.3927 = + 1.5877
- 0.395228 D = - 0.395228 Sin.2 (1 + 0.412 Cos. + 0.042436 Cos.2) Cos. d
- 0.395228 x 0 - 0.395228 X 0.412 x 0.3927 – 0.395228 x 0.042436 x 0 = - 0.0639

+ 0.156205 D = + 0.156205 Sin2 (1 + 0.412 Cos. + 0.042436 Cos2) Cos2 d = + 0.156205 x 0.3927 + 0.156205 x 0.412 x 0 + 0.156205 x 0.042436 x 0.19635 = + 0.0626

- 0.0617367 D = - 0.0617367 Sin2 (1 + 0.412 Cos. + 0.042436 Cos2) Cos3 d = 0.0617367 x 0 – 0.0617367 x 0.412 x0.19635 – 0.0617367 x 0.042436 x 0.0 = - 0.0050
+ 0.0244 D = + 0.244 Sin2 (1 + 0.412 Cos. + 0.042436 Cos2) Cos4 d  
+ 0.0244 x 0.19635 + 0.0244 x 0.412 x 0.0 + 0.0244 x 0.042436 x 0.12272 = + 0.0049

 D = 1.59

In accordance with the numerical data given before we have the aberrated (of advance) angle 3´ in one Mercury half orbit, equal to: 3´ =  D (vm  / 2 c)2 =
1.59 (4.79 x 104  / (2 x3 x 108)2 = 1.00015 x 10--7 Rad. / half orbit
The radiation produced by the fourth term of equation (51) = 4” = 3 (vm / c)2 =
3 (4.79 x 104 / 3 x 108) = 7.648 x 10—8
In accordance with the second term of formula (51), we have:
2´ =  D2´(vm  / 2 c)2 = 1.04504 (4.79 x 104  / 2 x 3 x108)2 = 6.574 x 10--8
2´+ 3´+ 4´ = ´ = 6.574 x 10—8 + 1.00015 x 10—7 + 7.648 x 10—8 = 2.42 x 10—7 Rad. / half orbit

2.42 x 10—7 Rad./ half orbit. Since Mercury’s years are of 88 terrestrial days, in one terrestrial century the planet Mercury will rotate around the Sun: :365.25 x 100 / 88 = 415 revolutions. A radian has 206,264”, so the angular aberratory deviation of advance (precession of the perihelion) will be: 0.000000242 x 206,264 x 415 x 2 = 41”.7 / century. This value is practically equal to the real 43”.8, the observed one-

Cananea, Sonora, México, año 1945 Estanislao R. de Hoyos













UNIFFIED FIELDS.
In other themes we have talked of the electromagnetic corpuscles and the gravity microcorpuscles, of their masses and the property they have to get light velocity. Of course we ignore how they behave so; but by observation we have prove of such behavior; because all these, the best way to explain the theory is with a numerical example. For to study the physics in first place, it is necessary to study the structure of the atom; in some way we have done this. We have eliminated the concept of waves as fundamental ones in our physics; we only consider material particles. Other fundamental point of a good physics is the relation there is between all kinds of forces that act in nature; ; first we will see the action of the electromagnetic forces.
The atoms and the celestial bodies move during infinite time, as if there were no lost of energy in them, and this is due to the property of the corpuscles and the microcorpuscles; in all them only there is an interchange of movement; here we do not say that there is an interchange of energy. In my investigation work, by preference try to apply known concepts, rather than look for new ones. In our numerical example, for to simplify our explanations, we will consider the interaction between two particles (two binary systems) with one AMU = 1.6725 x 10-27 kg., spaced at the maximum distance could acts the Coulomb´s fields: L = 0.895 m.; see theme: Polygonal, Virtual and Couulomb´s Orbits. In the theme: 21 cm. Radiation of Interstellar Hydrogen, it is consider that the positive particle of H with mass of a proton can emits a particle with mass mL = 2.054 x 10—41 kg. as an excess matter, forming the 21 = 21 cm.. In the solution of our problem, will see this is correct if we consider a time of action equal than tj (time of jump). In our numerical example of the ionized particles, they can emit such excess mass in one action. But also can be emitted in a uniform way during every time of vertex there are in the time of jump. Here we are giving the final results by advance, as will be seen in a theoretical way in our numerical examples.
In other themes related with the so called fields of forces, we have consider them as induced fields. The induced gravity fields are formed by microcorpuscles, so all bodies are transparent to them. It has supposed that a particle or body emits ultramicroscopic particles forming such fields, that when reach other particles or bodies, these are affected in such way that produce external propeller fluids that make them to approach or recede (in accordance with their sign) one particle or body from the other one. The emitter particle produces the inducive fluids, when this fluid reaches the affected or receiving particle; this one produces a reaction, making it to approach to the first one (or recede, in accordance with their sign), as will be explained forward. Here we have say that in the atomic magnitude the particles can get different velocities with respect to their adjacent particles. If it is consider to these effects as energy, then can say that the induced fields have a small energy compared with the energy is produced in the particles they reach, in which are produced an incremented force or effect that affects the particle that receives it with a bigger force of impulse. In the ltramicroscopic physics the impulse of the atomic particles is produced by induced frequency. A frequency is determined by the corpuscular separation.. The direction of the effects are defined by the direction of induced fluids, or by any reqquired movement of the affected particles. In an induced field, the corpuscular (or microcvorpuscular) raddiations get spaced in a plane, in a lineal proportion to the inverse of their distance in a plae; same thing in a perpendicular plane. The fore mentioned spaces are produced in a perpendicular plane to the radiationds, nd can be consider as ormal or perpedicular separations; the value of (u) gives this corpuscular separation in a perpendicular plane to the radiations. . . .
--------------------------
In this theme will be study the Coulomb´s and the gravity fields, whose formulas are as follow: Coulomb´s field: fc = K qa qb / L2 newton; qa and qb are equal to the interacting charges; L is equal to the distance between the two acting bodies. Coulomb´s field, interacting particles: ma = mb = 1.6725 x 10—27 kg., radius of the particles: r7 = 1.13763 x 10—10 m. and/or: r7 = 10--10 m ; and others. . . . Mass of a corpuscle: mc = 1.47236 x 19—50 kg.; mass of a microcorpuscle: mg = 7.811 x 10—58 Kg..
----------------------------
Next with a numerical example will determine the structure of the interaction of two charged particles: ma = mb , with charges ia,b = 1.6 x 10--19 coulomb, ad spaced a distance L = 0.895 m. In accordance with the Coulomb´s law, there is a force between them, equal to: fc = K qa qb / L2 = 9 x 109 (1.6 x 10--19)2 / 0.8952 = 2.8763 x 10--28 joule.
In the practice a charged particle is formed by many positive particles, or ionized atoms (or binary systems); and by many negative particles, that also can consider in our numerical problem as an atom or regatve binary system; in wich the propeller particle remain fixed and not comparted with the positive particle . . .A free electron makes an adjacent binary system to acts as was say; with this crterioium, and for to simplify our explanations will consider a simple binary systen as a positive particle; and other simple binary system as a negative particle
Any particles, ma and mb , that here form a simple binary system formed by an aton as positive particle, and an electron as the negative one (as if were a negative particle. . .) produce, even internal or external way If it is consider that this ionized, and/or fixed mass form an induced field, we suppose it distributed it in a uniform way in the surface in the shell of a binary system. . .
In accordance with the experience we can consider that the field produced by a particle, affects to the other paticle in accordance with: u = (r / L)2 = space effect; in this problem we can have: r = radius of a binary system = 1.13673 x 10--10 m; or aniy other value (?), as r = 10--10 m. . . . The first term of equation of (u), always correspond to the radius of an atom or an binary system; because if we consider a body formed with many atoms their charges do not act as a unitry one; but each, or any charge of an atom of the bosdy, acts with other, or any carge of the other body. To simplify in practical problems, it is consider the sume of all the charges of the body as a unitary one.; here will not do this. Will consider the action of ab or any binary system of a charged oby actin on an r any binary systen ot the other charged body. The interaction of all binary system is similar : taking in acount this, and for to simpliphy , in all these numerical examples wil wok considering the charges actin in the seven shells.
u = ( 10--10 / 0.895)2 = 1.2484 x 10--20. = space effe In each vertex of a binary system is manifested the enrgy of one or any charge that will acts with other, or any charge of other binary system of the other charged binary system : f^1 = 0.5 me v2 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10--31 x 691002 =2.1747 x 10--21 joule / tv7 = 135,632 x 2.1747 x 10--21 = 2.9495 x 0--16 joule / tj = 2.9495 x 10--16 / 1.12 x 10--11 = 2.6336 x 10--5 joules / Sec. fa = fb = f^ here: nj = 135,632; tj = 1.12 x 10--11 Sec, The fore energy produced by a, charged binary system of body ma, is equal to other, or any charged bynary system of particle mb. A charge qaa induces frequency to a charge qb (and vice-versa); given by; u = (r / L)2 = (10--10 / 0.895)2 = 1.2484 x 10--20 . Before continue with the numerical process, will be explained in a concise way how is formed a frequency uduced field; when the induced frequency is formed in charge qa, during a time (to), it affects the binary system qb in its 28 vertices, forming a plane of a cyrcle of a innduced field in a time to; and a volumetric sphere in a time tj. Action of charge qa on qb in a time of vertex tv7: fa,b = f^ u = 2.6336 x 10--5 x 1.2484 x 10--20 Energy produced in one vertex of binary system, with charge qb by the fore action: fc´ = fa,b fb = (2.6336 x 10--5)2 1.2484 x 10--20 = 8.6816 x 10--30  fc´ = fc / fc´ = 2.8773 x 10--28 / 8.6816 x 10--30 = 33.1 fc´ = 28 action in the shell, that produce the Coulombs fiield + 5.1 action in the nushell, and in the liberated energy 2,054 x 10--41 Kg. , that do not affect the induced field. When I began this theme I thougt that all the distance effect (u) was produced in every one corpuscle of a rdiation of the induced field; thar is, as n (u); but this is not so, such total effect is produced in all the radiation, considering as a unitary particle, that is, tha every corpuscle gets a distance effect equal to (u / n). formed by (n) corpuscles. --------------------------
Before was given a model explaining how works the Coulomb´s fields; for to have a better idea would be convenient to make aother practical numerical example, considering the interaction of two charges: qa = 1.5 x 10—5 coulombs; qb = 6 x 10—6 coulombs; they are spaced at a distance: L = 0.05 m. Folowing a similar process than the fore theme, can be obtained the following values In accordance with the Coulomb´s law, they are affected by a force: fc = K (qa qb) / L2 = 9 x 109 x 1.5 x 10—5 x 6 x 1—6 / 0.052 = 324 newtons. f^1 = = 2.6336 x 10--5 joules / Sec.; (see fore theme) ; u = (10--10 / 0.05)2 = 4 x 10--18
na = qa / i1 = (1.5 x 10--5 / 1.6 x 10--19) = 9.375 x 1013 f^a = f^1 na = =2.6336 x 10--5 x 9.375 x 1013
nb = qb /i1 = (6 x 10-6 / 1.6 x 10--19) = 3.75 x 1013 f^b´ = f^1 nb nb = 2.6336 x 10--5 x 3.75 x 1013
fc´ = f^a f^b u = (2.6336 x 10--5)2 (9.375 x 1013 x 3.75 x 1013) 4 x 10--18 = 9..7516 fc´ = 324 / 9.7516 = 33.2
---------------------------
The gravity force is too feeable with respect to the electromagnetic ones; because this, we related this with the liberated force of 2.054 x 10--41 Kg. / tj (see theme: 21 cm. Radiation of Interstellar Hydrogen ) . With the following data will obtain a gravity model of two particles: ma = mb = 1.673 x 10--27 Kg.; acting in outer space, at a distance: L = 0.895 m. TheNewton´s formula will give: fg = G m2 / L2 = 6.673 x 10--11 (1.673 x 10--27)2 / 0.8952 = 2.3317 x 10--64 newton . The fore value is too feable; and ought to be produced by a minumum eflect, as the liberation matter: mq = 2.054 x 10--41 Kg. / tj. The mentioned liberation matter affect the movement of the elexctron of the binary system, as was seen in a fre theme each particle ma, mb produces a quantity of matter equal to: mq = ma,b = 2.054 x 10--41 Kg./ tj = 2.054 x 10--41 /1.12 x 10--11 = 1.8339 x 10-30 Kg./ Sec. Quantity of corpuscles, equal to microcorpuscles, are enitted by a binary sytem particle / Sec ng = ma,b / mc = 1.8339 x 10--30 / 1.47236 x 10--50 =1.2466 x 1020 corpuscles and/or microcorpuscles./ Sec u = (10--10/ 0.895)2 = 1.2484 x 10--20 Mass of microcorpuscles emitted by a particle / Sec mg´ = ng mg = 1.2466 x 1020 x 7.811 x 10--58 = 9.7290 x 10--37 Kg./ Sec. Energy produced by the emitted matter: fa´ = mg´ 0.5 c2 = 9.7290 x 10--37 x 0.5 (3 x 108)2 = 4.3780 x 10--20 joule / Sec. All bodies are transparent to gravity microcorpuscles. If between two bodies that are mutually attracted by gravity, is intersected a third one; this absorbs its corresponding microcorpuscles, and the excess ones continue actig between the two mentioned bodies before . fab´ = (fa´)2 u = ( 4.3780 x 10--20)2 x 1.2484 x 10--20 = 2.3928 x 10--61  1/fc´ = 2.3928x 10--61 / 2.3316 x 10--614 = 1888
With the fore values are obtained energies too big for gravity; with this, our model of gravity does not affect to the electrons (shell), but only the positive particles of the nuchell; so the values obtained for the shell, have an energy bigger than those of the nushell, as follow: velocity vn / v+ = (4 / 1836) ve; masses m+ / me = 1836; fatigue: fn / fs = ( vn / vs)2 (m+ / me) = (4 /1836)2 1836 = 16 / 1836 = 1 / 114.75 = nushell action of gravity = nag By other side, in our numerical exampe was consider that the action between the two particles is only produced by one direction, and it need to be afectad in al their circunference; due to this is reduced its effect by (p) in each acting particle, so we have: 1 / (p)2 = 1 /9.8 = rotation action of gravity = rag . . fab´ (nag) (rag) = fg = (1 / 114.75 ) = fc = = 2.393 x 10--61 (1 / 114.75) / 10 = 2.3316 x 10--64
------------------------

Gravity force between two particles acting in outer space at a distance: L = 0.895 m; ma = 1.5684 x 10--13 Kg,; mb = 6.2737 x 10-- 14 Kg Applying the Nweton formula we have: fg = 6.673 x 10--11 x 1.5684 x 10--13 x 6.2737 x 10-14 / 0.8952 = 8.1970 x 10--37 newton
If we want to have a relation between charges and masses; we can consider that in a particle with mss could be an active, or inactive chage: i = 1.6 x 10--19 coulomb, as will be seen in the following numerical example; in this will act two charges: qa = 1.5 x 10--5, and qb = 6 x 10--6
na = 1.5 x 10--5 / 1.6 x 10--19 = 9.375 x 1013 unitary charges
Matter liberated by charge qa: mga: na = 2.054 x 10--41 mga = 9.375 x 1013x 2.054 x 10--41 = 1.9256 x 10--27 Kg. /tv7 = 19256 x 10--27 / 1.12 x 1 0--11 = 1.7193 x 10--16 Kg. / Sec
mgb: nb = 3.75 x 1013 2.054 x 10--41 = 7.7025 x 10--28 Kg. / tv7 = 7.7025 x 10--28 / 1.12 x 10--11 = 6.8772 x 10--17 Kg. / Sec
Quantity of corpuscles, equal to microcorpuscles, are enitted by the charged particle s / Sec
na = mag / mc = 1.7193 x 10--16 / 1.47236 x 10--50 =1.1677 x 1034
nb = mbg / mc = 6.8772 x 10--17 / 1.47236 x 10--50 = 4.6709 x 1033 corpuscles and/or microcorpuscles./ Sec u = (10--10/ 0.895)2 = 1.2484 x 10--20 Mass of microcorpuscles emitted by particle ma / Sec mga´ = nga mg = 1.1677 x 1034 x 7.811 x 10--58 = 9.1209 x 10--24 Kg./ Sec. Mass of microcorpuscles emitted by particle mb / Sec
mgb´ = ng mg = 4.6709 x 1033 x 7.811 x 10--58 = 3.6484 x 10--324 Kg./ Sec.
Energy produced by the particle ma: fa,´ = mga´ 0.5 c2 = 9.1209 x 10--24 x 0.5 c2 = 4.1044 x 10--7 joule / Sec.
Energy produced by the particle mb:
fb´ = mgb´ 0.5 c2 = 3.6484 x 10--24 x 0.5 c2 = 1.6418 x 10--7
fab´ = (fa´ fb´ ) u = 4.1044 x 10--7 x 1.6418 x 10--7 x 1.2484 x 10-20 = 8.4125 x 10--34
(nag rag) = 8.4125 x 10--34 (1 / 114.75) (1 / 9.8 ) = 7.4807x10--37 <≈ 8.1970 x 10--37
In the case of this problem of gravity force; when we begn tostudy it, was thought that all the distance effect was take by any radiation, as a unitry particle. This is correct, but the corpuscles of the radiation contribute to increment the action of the distnace effect; as will be appreciate in the following proportion: Dun = 8.1970 x 10--37/ 7.4807x10--37 = 1.09575

______________________


Particle: ma = 1.673 x 10--27 Kg. affected by the Earth gravity
fa = g ma = 9.81 x 1.673 x 10--27 = 1.6412 x 10--26 nweton / Sec.
The partiocle ma liberates:
mq = 2054 x 10--41 Kg./ tj = 2054 x 10--41 ./ 1.12 x 10--11 = 1.8339 x 10--30 Kg. Sec.
Quantity of corpuscles and/or microcrpuscles / Sec. emitted:
ng = mq / mc = 1.8339 x 10--30 / 1.47236 x 10--50 = 1.2456 x 1020 corpuscles / Sec.
Mass of microcorpscles / Sec:
mga = ng mg = 1.2456 x 1020 x 7.811 x 10--58 = 9.7294 x 10--38 Kg. / Sec
Energy of gravity attraction of the microcorpuscles of the particle ma:
fga´ = mga 0.5 c2 = 9.7294 x 10--38 x 0.5 c2 = 4.3732 x 10--21 joule / Sec.

The mass of the Earth: M = 5.975 x 1024 Kgs. = 5.975 x 124 / 1.673 x 10--27 = 3.5714 x 1051 AMU.; As each AMU as the ma particle, liberates an energy equal to: fga´ joules / Sec; the Earth will liberate:
fgM = fga´ M = 4.3732 x 10--21 x 3.5714 x 1051 = 1.5616 x 1031 joules / Sec.
The gravity radiation emitted by Earth is proportional to the internal radiation produced in each vertex of the seven shel.
f7 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10--31 x 691002 = 2.1747 x 10--21joule / tv7 = 135,632 x 2.1747 x 10--21 = 2.9496 x 10--16 joules / tj = 2.9496 x 10--16 / 1.12 x 10--11=2.6336 x 10--5 joues / Sec
Next is given the unitary distance effect, that in the case of a big mass, as Earth, will vary. . . .
The unitary space effect is:
u1 = (10--10 / 6.375 x 106)2 = 2.4606 x 10--34

Tthe induced frequency affecting ma were obtained directly from the AMUs of the Earth; without considering these produce first the induced frequency in Earth. Here is consider the action of two bodies: the Earth and particle ma, spaced a distance eq ual to R = 6.375 x 106 m. (body ma is in the surface of Earth) Here will take in accont all these, with a simple and very much approximate method. that will give the value of ma gravity attraction.

The moment of inertia of a body, vary in the same proportion than its induced frequency; so, considering a solid sphere; with enough approximation can obtain an inertial moment, with respect to a plane that divide sphere in two eual parts, as could be appreciwted forward:



In the fore Fig,(1) is represented a lateral view of Earth; in the center of the circle, with a horizontal line,is indicated a plane that divide the Earth in two equal parts. Up, with two lines spaced a distance dR, is indicated a slice, with the following conditions: thick dR; area A  (R Cos )2; volume dV = A dR =  R2 Cos2a dR; dI = dV (Sin2  R2) = R5 Sin2  Cos2 a dR R Cos a da = dR;
dI = I =R5 Sin2  Cos2  d Sin2  Cos2  d  Sin3  Cos2  d / 4 + = (1/4) Sin2 d
Sin2  d =  / 2 - Siin (2) / 4
Sin2 Cos2 d = [ /2 - Sin(2)/4 = /4 + /4 = /2 = 1.57 = Io = proportional value of its own induced frequency of Earth. The proportiona value of the direct induced frequency of Eartg with respect to particle ma is: V R2 / ( 4  R3 / 3) R2 /  R5 = 4 / 3 = 1.333 = Ia IS = Io + Ia = 1.57 + 1.33 = 2.9

The term p/2 is proportional to the induced frequency of Earth with respect to the plane of its equator. The volume of Earth is: V = 4 p R3 / 3; the induced frequencxy with respect to body ma is proportiona to:  R5 (4/3). The total moment of inertia is : I = p R5 (p/2 + 4/3) =  R5(1.57 + 1.33) = 2.9  R5

In other themes has been consider the unitary space effect (u1) as the decrement of interaction there is between two particles due to their distance. In this problem of direct interaction of Earth over a particle ma, we have:
u1 = (10--10 /6.375 x 106)2 = 2.4606 x 10--34:
r7 = 10--10 m = radius of a 7 orbit binary system; R = 6.375 x 106 = radius of Earth

Here: 1.57 is proportional to the direct induced frequency of Earth with respecto to particle ma; 1.33 is proportional to the induced frequency of Earth with respect to its plane that divide Earth in two equal parts. Considering a unitary space effect (u1), will try to find the direct induced frequency of Earth over ma particle:
fgM = fgM´ fga´ u1 = 1.5616 x 1031 x 4.3732 x 10--21 x 2.4606 x 10--34 = 1.6804 x 10--23

The fre value is far from the real one; it is for one corpuscle or microcorpuscle; and the radiation that produces the fore particles, f^n, is formed by many corpuscles or microcorpuscles; because this, in first place must transform f^n, to the equivalent microcorpuscles (ng); and multiply u1 by ng; this gives a bigger numerical (u); by other side, as we are working with micrococorpuscles of gravity, we have to reduce the effect of (u) to these smaller particles. In few words, can avoid the fore double process if we multiply u1 by f^n,´ and consider that (u) can affect several radiations (Du, see frward)i n one action.

Considering that the space effect (u) can work accepting all the microcorpuscles of a radiation simultaneously:
f^7 fgM = 2.6336 x 10--5 x 1.6804 x 10--23 = 4.4255 x 10--28
Relation between the fore induced freuency with respect to the total induced frequency of Earth over ma particle:
4.4255 x 10--28 Dg = fa = 1.6412 x 10--26; Dg = 37.09; Dg could be 37 rasiations acting at an intensity 37.09 / 37, bigger than its nrmal one
37.09 (Io / IS ) = 37.09 x 1.57 / 2.9 = 20.08 = Du
Indirect induced frequency given at particle ma by Earth
FaM = fa (Io / IS) = 1.6412 x 10--26 x 1.57 / 2.9 = 8.8851 x 10--27
Final space effect (u)
u = u1 f^7 Du = 2.4506 x 10--34 x 2.6336 x 10--5 x 20.08 = 1.3012 x 10--37
Indirect induced frequency given at particle ma by Earth
fag = FgM fga u = 1.5616 x 1031 x 4.3732 x 10--21 x 1.3012 x 10--37 = 8.8861 x 10--27
Induced frequency of Earth:
fog = fag Ia / Io = 8.8861 x 10--27 x 1.33 / 1.57 = 7.5277 x 10--27
Total induced frequency:
fa = 8.8861 x 10--27 x 2.9 / 1.57 = 1.5414 x 10--26 ≈ 1.5412 x 10--26
Monterrey, México, January 2004; January 2006: March, 2007 Manuel de Hoyos Robles

Como en 1965, en que empezaba con mis trabajos de investigación, concebí mi modelo de áromo con orbitas poligaeles, me acuerdo muy bien que el Dr. Rodolfo Castillo Bahena, que era director del departamento de física del ITESM me comentó que el que descubriera un buen modelo de átomo, de inmediato se iba a ganar el premio Nobel; no hubo comentario sobre esto, pero tanto el como yo comprendimos lo que quiso decir: resultaba inconcebible que un novato como era yo, concibiera algo que no pudieron las mayores eminencias; el problema es que por lo general estos buscan las soluciones mas difíciles. Dentro de su discreción y prudencia, se que tengo el apoyo de mis ideas de algunos catedráticos del ITESM. Hay quien me juzga agresivo; yo nada mas digo las verdades; ¿que no soy modesto ?; con la gente decente si lo soy; a las cucarachas y moscas, darles insecticidas Los modelos de la física microscópica de mi padre y mios,, están basados en el modelo de átomos con órbitas poligonales. Cabe mencionar que el trabajo de todos los investigadores científicos merece todo nuestro respeto, considerando lss condiciones en que se desarrollaron. Cuando Ptolomeo trató de explicar el comportamiento del Universo de acuerdo con las observaciones aparentes, tuvo un reconocimiento por mucho tiempo. Cuando las personas mas preparadas, equivocadamente supusieron conocer las leyes de Dios, supusieron que estas supuestas no podían estar equivocadas, por dicho motivo. Cuando Einstein, en su época y con sus ideas subjetivas, consideró que estaba dando la explicación del Universo; en cierto sentido fue muy útil a la ciencia de entonces, y recibió muchos reconocimientos. En mis temas estoy dando otra explicación científica de la física, igual a como lo hizo mi padre al comprobar que las teorías de la relatividad estaban equivocadas: Con todo respeto quiero decir que hemos invalidando el principal prestigio científico de Einstein; pues con mis temas de campos unificados que menciono estoy dando una solución, que en sus últimos 30 años no la pudo obtener Einstein. Esto lo digo como una indicación, que de cualquier manera, en el futuro alguien tendrá que hacerlo. Alguien podrá pensar que en el futuro, el trabajo científico de mi padre y mío terminará como el de las personas que aquí mencioné; no es creible, porque al igual que Galileo y Newton, en el fondo no estamos dando nuestras "brillantes" ideas, sino las que nos dicta, estrictamente nuestra profunda observación de la la naturaleza.. Si nos equivocamos cuando menos ya tenemos a quien echarle la culpa. . . .Recalcando: mi padre y yo somos los creadores de la física microscópica; como Galileo y Newton, lo fueron de la macroscópica. Como investigador científico he descubierto mucho mas de lo que pensé en un principio; aparte de loslogros cientificos que han colocado a mi padre y a mi a niveles de Galileo y Newtn; también me he dado cuenta de lo invéciles. , egoistas, desagradecidos que son muchos físicos y científicos.

Monterrey México; Septiembre del 2009 Manuel de Hoyos Robles










LA FÍSICA DEL SIGLO XXI

En mas de 5000 millones de habitantes de la Tierra, yo no valgo nada; todo lo que diga no va a ser a título personal. Voy a defender todo lo bueno que Dios me permitió que lograra en mas de 40 años de investigación. Para abreviar me concretaré únicamente a las ideas mas fundamentales de la física, sin mencionar los muchos beneficios que esto aporte. Voy a cumplir 85 años y muy pronto me voy a morir, y aunque mi deseo de tener un reconocimiento no se cumpla no me iré con amargura, al contrario agradeciéndole a Dios y a mis padres el privilegio de darme la vida; a Dios los beneficios que obtuve con mi investigación aunque en vida no me los agradecan.. Aquí voy a aclarar algunas cosas: Reconozco lo bueno de la física moderna y de su principal creador, Einstein, y si voy a hablar de sus defectos, únicamente va a ser para corregirlos...

En otros escritos ya había dicho que mi trabajo de investigación lo inicié porque en el año de 1945 mi padre comprobó que las teorías de la relatividad estaban equivocadas y nadie le hizo caso; por lo cual en 1965, en que había logrado alcanzar un patrimonio para mi familia, decidí divulgar las ideas de mi padre, para que se les diera un justo reconocimiento. Para esto me familiaricé mas con sus ideas y las de Einstein, y al hacerlo me fui dando cuenta que la física moderna adolecía de las mismas deficiencias; de manera que sin pretenderlo, ya no solo me concreté al trabajo de mi padre, sino al de toda la física; por lo cual considero haber logrado mucho mas de lo que pretendía en un principio; o sea modificar a toda la física moderna. En 1945, la posibilidad de lograr divulgar su trabajo era mucho mas difícil que cuando yo empecé mi investigación; sin embargo también yo he tropezado con muchas dificultades; pues todavía existe un espíritu muy marcado anti-galileico. Muchos que han leído mi trabajo forzosamente tienen que haber entendido que en ellos existen muchos aspectos novedosos, porque explican muchos fenómenos físicos de una manera muy diferente a la física moderna. Esto es así porque yo he considerado lo que es mas correcto; sin embargo nunca he dejado de considerar la posibilidad de que las ideas de otros pueden ser mejor que las mías en alguna ocasión. Así ya no se trataría de que mis ideas se consideren mejores, sino de que se reconocieran, como una alternativa susceptible de mejorarse y de que se acepten, porque implican mucho trabajo y esfuerzo; hay un gran cariño a la humanidad en nuestro trabajo y es muy injusto que no se reconozca.

Aunque en los 40 años que he dedicado a esta investigación de la física, no han sido de una manera continua, pero si con muchos lapsos de trabajo intenso y prolongado; por lo cual considero muy injusto que en este tiempo tan largo nadie haya tenido la atención de tomarme en cuenta para nada. En el siglos XX y XXI, esto es peor que la actitud que se tomó con Galileo en su época. No es correcto obligar a nadie a que piense como uno quisiera; pero si alguien con muchos esfuerzos y tiempo logra descubrir algo que pueda ser útil (y aunque no lo sea), merece que se le de un reconocimiento o aprobación, aunque no se acepten sus ideas; en ningún caso hay una justificación de esta actitud. Siempre he querido que mis ideas sean motivo de armonía y convencimiento; pero la cosa no es así; en octubre del 2005 me enteré de que se adjudicó el premio Nobel de física a tres personas que piratearon una de mis ideas. Esto es motivo para que se rompa la armonía, muy a pesar mío; por eso yo quiero que se me de un reconocimiento oficial a mi trabajo y así poder eliminar todos los comentarios que estoy haciendo y que en cierto sentido parecen agresivos; esto en bien de todos; para que en el futuro la historia de la física contemporánea se caracterice por su progreso científico, moral y respetuoso de todas las ideas de todos los investigadores. Estando enterado de que el premio Nobel de física 2005 fue un fraude y una piratería, me hice acreedor a una disculpa, y no a que el premio 2006 fuera adjudicado a dos personas que supuestamente contribuyeron a reafirmar la validez de la teoría del universo en expansión; esto fue una burla; pero ya no estoy dispuesto a tolerar mas burlas..

Pensando en que ya muy pronto se tiene que reconocer nuestro trabajo de investigación , ya no como una alternativa, sino como una sustitución; todos mis deseos son que esta transición sea lo mas armoniosamente posible; viendo todo lo bueno y progresista que heredamos de la física moderna y que sus conocimientos han sido muy valiosos para producir esta transición, y que esta se desarrolle con un espíritu positivo, como debería ser su antecesora. Una de las características del progreso es ir eliminando errores, pero no debemos de considerar a estos como perjudiciales, sino al contrario, como algo útil, como una experiencia que nos permita evitarlos en el futuro y aumentar nuestros conocimientos y bienes... Aquí voy a hablar como nacieron y se desarrollaron la física moderna y la mecanofísica. En las dos hay muy justificadas razones para esto, y si yo estoy considerando que esta última ha sido mas acertada; también puedo considerar que las ideas nuevas vayan desplazando a las anteriores, menos perfeccionadas.

A principio del siglo XX, al observarse que las teorías físicas existentes diferían en magnitudes diferenciales de las observaciones; los físicos se preocuparon por modificar las leyes existentes de la física; se supuso que dichas discrepancias se podían eliminar considerando el comportamiento de las partículas y cuerpos macroscópicos, y también considerando la acción ondulatoria de muchos fenómenos; todo esto de acuerdo con las teorías físicas vigentes en ese entonces, y que tanto éxito habían tenido. Supuestamente el físico que mas se preocupó por estas modificaciones fue Einstein.. Para tener un punto de referencia, en el cual basar todas sus teorías, consideró que la luz era una constante universal, que sirvió de base para sus teorías de la relatividad; pero desde aquí empezó mal, porque la luz tiene menor velocidad cuando se mueve en un medio refringente. Otro problema que se le presentó al considerar a la luz como constante universal fue la de no poder explicar algunos fenómenos físicos como el experimento de Michelson y Morley; así que se vio obligado a considerar que el tiempo no era un valor absoluto e invariable para todos los sistemas, sino que era variable en función de la velocidad del cuerpo afectado; por ejemplo se decrementaba inversamente a la velocidad con que se movía el observador, hasta reducirse a cero cuando esta velocidad alcanzaba a la de la luz. Si el aceptó que el universo se estaba expandiendo de acuerdo con la teoría del big bang y que las galaxias lejanas se estaban alejando de nosotros a la velocidad de la luz, o sea que nosotros nos estamos retirando a dicha velocidad de las galaxias; entonces el tiempo no debería de transcurrir para nosotros; además que el consideraba que la máxima velocidad que puede existir es la de la luz; esto quiere e decir que las estrellas lejanas ya no se podían mover, pues al no haber tiempo tampoco puede haber velocidad.. Otro desacierto de Einstein fue el considerar que las radiaciones electromagnéticas y gravitatorias eran producidas por ondas; esta falla existe desde que se impuso la teoría ondulatoria de la luz, sobre la corpuscular.. Una onda se propaga de una manera volumétrica a partir del medio que la produce; es decir que su energía se distribuye en superficies esféricas; sin embargo para adaptarla a un fenómeno que se manifiesta linealmente, como un rayo de luz, a dichas ondas se les ha atribuido propiedades que no pueden corresponderle. En el siglo XIX se consideró que las ondas de luz se movían a través del éter; en el siglo XX se llegó al colmo de que las ondas se podían mover en el vacío y se inventó que estas podían ser longitudinales y transversales, esto con la idea de poder explicar la polaridad de la luz. De acuerdo con todo lo dicho la energía de una onda disminuye proporcionalmente al cubo de la distancia en que actúa. Si Einstein estaba de acuerdo con las leyes de Newton y Coulomb, y con la teoría ondulatoria, para explicar estas se estaba contradiciendo. .
-
Cuando Maxwell consideró como se producían los campos de fuerzas electromagnéticas, supuso que estos los podían producir partículas elementales, como un electrón, o un protón. Si consideramos que el electrón o el protón tienen únicamente una cara en que pueden emitir fluidos (ver mas adelante), no podemos estar de acuerdo con la idea de Maxwell; únicamente podemos considerar que en una partícula con muchas cargas, cada una emite un fluido en diferentes direcciones, formando un campo de inducción (no de fuerzas)..

De una manera muy breve voy a hablar del inconveniente de los modelos de radiaciones por medio de ondas, que tanto se emplean en la física moderna. Si queremos ser objetivos se debe de entender que una radiación se emite por un flujo en línea recta ; por ejemplo un rayo de luz. Una onda se propaga en forma esférica; o sea que la energía de esta se va distribuyendo en esta forma. Si consideramos un plano que ”corte” al campo ondulatorio entre el punto emisor y el receptor; en este aparecerán las ondas en forma de círculos concéntricos; lógicamente parte proporcional de la energía ondulatoria se transmitirá uniformemente en dichos círculos, y no toda la de las esferas, como pretenden los que consideran que existen ondas longitudinales y transversales (que en realidad no existen...). Y todavía aquí no termina tanta abstracción; si se considera que toda la radiación se concentra en la dirección de una línea recta que une al cuerpo emisor con el receptor, y si aquí volvemos a considerar un plano coincidente con la línea recta y normal al plano de órbitas circulares, aquí en este otro plano se proyectará una línea ondulatoria regular, con sus valles y crestas uniformes, uniendo al cuerpo emisor y receptor, y en el que se le ha considerado que se emite toda la energía esférica. Omitiendo todo lo absurdo desde el punto de vista objetivo de esto, y de que las ondas no se pueden propagar en el vacío, Heisenberg obtuvo su principio de incertidumbre, basándose en la amplitud de las crestas y valles de la línea ondulatoria para evitar definir un punto de acción.. El considerar concentrada toda la radiación en dicha línea ondulada uniforme, resulta igualmente inaceptable para cualquier modelo de radiación ondulatoria; máxime si a esto le agregamos que las ondas no se pueden transmitir en el vacío.
-En las observaciones astronómicas; en ciertas radiaciones, etc. se vio que dan valores mayores en distancias, velocidades, energías, etc., que las dadas por las teorías existentes antes de las de la física moderna. Einstein supuso, con su teoría general de la relatividad que esto era debido a que el espacio era curvo. No se necesitó hacer esta complicación, simplemente considerando la primera ley de la teoría del doble fluido, las radiaciones electromagnéticas, gravitatorias, etc., al incrementar su velocidad, sus incrementos energéticos aumentaban al cuadrado, no únicamente de una manera lineal, como consideran los efectos aberratorios dados por Bradley, y Doppler; con lo cual se simplifican enormemente estos problemas.

Aunque parezca lógico lo que estoy diciendo , no resultó fácil comprobarlo en su tiempo, ni aun por físicos muy competentes, como Max Planck, Poincaré, Michelson, etc.; en cambio, Einstein, al considerar que la gravedad podía deformar el espacio vacío, pudo explicar la presesión del perihelio de Mercurio, y la deflexión que sufre un rayo de luz al pasar cerca de un campo fuerte gravitatorio, como el Sol; así que esto le dio mucha fuerza a sus teorías; lo mismo que el corrimiento hacia el rojo de las radiaciones de las estrellas lejanas. Esto último se explicará mas adelante. Con la idea dada en el párrafo anterior se echó por tierra toda la teoría de la relatividad, y le reintegró su carácter objetivo a la física. Con todo lo dicho cabe meditar en algunas cosas. Einstein hizo un trabajo intelectual muy meritorio, por el esfuerzo y tiempo empleado, pero científicamente muy deficiente, por las razones dichas; pero merece todo el respeto que se le ha dado, por su buena voluntad, y porque aunque deficiente, ha contribuido al progreso de la física; pero en cierto aspecto resulta decepcionante, porque su obra ya no tiene ningún valor científico. Si Poincaré hubiera pensado igual, hubiera desarrollado las teorías de la relatividad con anterioridad.. Mi padre trabajó durante algún tiempo demostrando esto último sin pretender quitarle ningún valor a Einstein. Yo tengo mas de 40 años, en los que con mucha frecuencia le he dedicado todo mi interés a la investigación de la física, y se han ignorado todos estos esfuerzos, como si no tuvieran ningún valor. Lo menos que puede aportar un investigador es que demuestre que camino no se debe de seguir para hacer progresar a lo que está investigando.

Todavía hay muchos que aceptan las teorías de la relatividad, o muchas ideas subjetivas, y esto ha dado lugar a que muchos investigadores de la física hayan empleado su valioso tiempo y capacidad intelectual usando caminos erróneos, y con esto vuelvo a pensar que muchos están desperdiciando su tiempo, porque suponen que están trabajando con desaciertos, y no se han querido reconocer nuestros aciertos.
-
Desde la época de la física clásica ya existía el concepto de los campos de fuerza; pero esta idea resulta muy poco clara y da lugar a malas interpretaciones, pues obviamente resulta inexplicable que el espacio vacío pueda producir energía; por lo tanto llegamos a la conclusión de que si dos partículas o cuerpos separados a cierta distancia se atraían, era debido a que ambos cuerpos emitían fluidos de partículas ultramicroscópicas en todas las direcciones, con cierta frecuencia, con los cuales formaban campos de inducción (no de fuerzas) Al recibir uno de los cuerpos las radiaciones con cierta frecuencia, del otro, era afectado por una inducción que actuaba como si fuera impulsado por una fuerza mecánica actuando en la misma dirección de la recepción e impulsando con cierta energía cinética al cuerpo receptor hacia el otro, y viceversa el otro cuerpo también era afectado de la misma manera. Con esta explicación tan sencilla puedo decir que estoy planteando una nueva dinámica, que la podemos llamar: dinámica corpuscular correspondiente a las partículas mas pequeñas del universo. Suponemos que los corpúsculos y microcorpúsculos son las partículas mas pequeñas que pueden existir y que a la vez pueden satisfacer las condiciones de inducción, y que supuestamente por esto no es posible desintegrarlas, porque a la vez que si esto sucediera, por otro lado se estarían integrando, por sus mismas características En síntesis, los corpúsculos y los microcorpúsculos, no adquieren, ni producen efectos cinéticos por reacciones mecánicas, como sucede con las partículas y cuerpos en la dinámica clásica; dichos efectos dinámicos se producen por una frecuencia inducida.

Si uno quiere investigar la física tendría que pensar en lo infinitamente grande y en lo infinitamente pequeño; al pensar en algo inmaterial como el tiempo, de una manera cualitativa, se
pude apreciar como algo infinito en el pasado y en el futuro; en la producción de algún efecto, o en la transición de este, podemos apreciar al tiempo como algo que nos permita ver como se está produciendo el efecto. En algo material como es el universo, en un sentido lo imaginamos infinitamente grande. Al irse conociendo la estructura del átomo todos los físicos consideraron que las partículas mas pequeñas que podían existir eran los electrones; pero aquí cabe suponer que si de alguna manera podíamos desintegrar al electrón, tendríamos partículas mas pequeñas. El anterior criterio es muy indefinido porque en las máquinas aceleradoras de partículas, al acelerar un electrón a la velocidad de la luz, este se desintegra como si fuera una radiación, que desde luego no es materia trasformada en energía, sino partículas ultramicroscópicas (corpúsculos) que formaban al electrón.

Vamos a hablar de otras partículas que algunos de los antiguos griegos pensaron que era lo mas pequeño que podía existir, o sean los átomos; por lo pronto consideraremos las partículas de que están constituidos (“sus ladrillos”) , y que también con ellos se producen los campos de inducción, que así les llamamos, en vez de campos de fuerzas, como se ha considerado en la física clásica y moderna, porque no concebimos que en el espacio vacío puedan producirse fuerzas. Si tomamos en cuenta dos partículas con cargas eléctricas, separadas cierta distancia, estas se atraen si las cargas son opuestas, y se repelen si son iguales. Esto es debido a que cada una emite radiaciones lineales en todas direcciones, formando un campo de inducción con flujos de radiaciones de corpúsculos separados linealmente (), moviéndose a la velocidad de la luz, con cierta frecuencia (), que al llegar al otro cuerpo producen una inducción en este con la misma frecuencia, y viceversa,; provocando la atracción, o repulsión, como se dijo. Un efecto semejante se produce con los microcorpúsculos de dos cuerpos que se atraen por la gravedad.

Ya hablamos de la amplitud de acción de los corpúsculos y microcorpúsculos. La física moderna limitó su amplitud y claridad al preferir los modelos ondulatorios a los corpusculares, al considera que las partículas mas pequeñas que existen son los electrones; perdiéndose muchos conceptos de lo que es la materia, como el concepto de masa; como la idea de que la materia se puede transformar en energía y viceversa. Un doctor en física que ha estado viendo mis trabajos, me dijo que aunque se explican bien los problemas que planteo, mis explicaciones son muy sencillas, y que la física es mucho mas complicada, y que se necesita ver bien muchas cosas, para obtener una explicación que se entienda bien. Yo le hice ver que para entender bien un problema hay que partir de lo mas sencillo, y no partir de lo mas complicado, buscando mas complicaciones..

Mi hermano me regaló un libro traducido al español del Dr. en física Stephen Hawking: Historia del tiempo.- Del big bang a los agujeros negros.. Dicho autor es un partidario de la física moderna, y aunque su libro no es voluminoso, de una manera breve da muchos datos de las teorías que trata, o sea que está muy bien documentado. Sin embargo para mi tiene muy poco interés científico, porque no soy partidario de conceptos subjetivos aplicados a la ciencia, así que muchas cosas que dice, con todo respeto, mas bien me parecen ciencia ficción. Considero que esto, y otras experiencias me van a ayudar a que se acepten nuestras ideas. En todo esto se presentan problemas en la física moderna al estructurar el núcleo del átomo, formado por partículas positivas, que eléctricamente se rechazan; por lo cual se ha inventado la existencia de fuerzas nucleares débiles y fuertes, con una serie de complicaciones, que se verán mas adelante; además se verá nuestra solución a este problema

A mi padre le fue suficiente comprobar que las teorías de la relatividad estaban equivocadas porque se basaban en algo completamente inobjetivo, como el que la luz era una constante universal. Con respecto al concepto espacio-tiempo, o sea que el tiempo era una cuarta dimensión, ya le resultaba el colmo de lo de lo in objetivo. El propio Stephen Hawking en su libro mencionado dice: Es imposible imaginar un espacio cuadrimensional. ¡personalmente yo encuentro suficientemente difícil visualizar el espacio tridimensional Sin embargo resulta fácil dibujar diagramas de espacios bidimensionales, tales como la superficie de la Tierra... Para todos los que han estudiado un poco de física, es muy conocido dicho físico, al que se le ha dado mucho prestigio por sus investigaciones de la física moderna; sin embargo con sus anteriores declaraciones esta actuando al revés, tratando de hacer las cosas sencillas, como si fueran complicadas, todo esto se debe a que en la física moderna se partió de ideas erróneas , porque originalmente no se pudieron encontrar explicaciones lógicas para obtener fundamentos científicos, no similitudes; por ejemplo Bertrand Russell se desacreditó como filósofo, saliéndose de las normas lógicas...; Einstein nunca pudo encontrar una relación entre las fuerzas de la gravedad y las existentes, o supuestamente existentes; pero Hawking, queriendo ver mas lejos, en su libro dijo: Los cuerpos como la Tierra no están forzados a moverse en órbitas curvas por una fuerza llamada gravedad; en vez de esto ellos siguen la trayectoria mas parecida a una línea recta en un espacio curvo; es decir, lo que se conoce como geodésica. Si con esto quiso dar una idea de lo que es la gravedad: ¿Cómo explica que la luz no se mueve a lo largo de la misma geodésica? Aquí está confundiendo un movimiento orbital con uno de presesión de perihelio. Se está contradiciendo al considerar que existen geodésicas sin que exista gravedad que las produzca.

Al aceptar una idea errónea y trabajar con ella durante un tiempo indefinido, ocasiona cada vez mayores complicaciones; esto sucede si queremos explicar los fenómenos de la naturaleza, partiendo de la observación de los fenómenos macroscópicos, sin considerar la influencia que pueden tener los fenómenos ultramicroscópicos. Por ejemplo al observar que las radiaciones electromagnéticas que recibimos de las estrellas y galaxias mas lejanas, tienen mayor corrimiento hacia el rojo, se consideró que esto era debido a que el universo se está expandiendo debido al big bang; esto ha tenido muchas complicaciones, como veremos mas adelante. Consideramos que una radiación como la de la luz, en que los corpúsculos, alineados en una línea recta, y separados unos de otros una distancia que le llamamos separación corpuscular  (igual que la llamada longitud de onda...); al emitirse tienen una velocidad igual a (c ); pero esta velocidad va disminuyendo en magnitudes iguales hasta llegar a cero después de haber recorrido una distancia igual a la de las galaxias mas lejanas observadas, a lo que llamamos: distancia de retorno. Como el efecto de frenajge que produce la disminución de dicha radiación es continuo, al llegar a cero la radiación, empieza a incrementar su velocidad en sentido contrario al que se emitió, de manera que al retornar al punto en que se emitió, habrá recuperado su velocidad (c )... Otra interpretación podría ser que no es la velocidad la que cambia sino su separación corpuscular...(¿)... En síntesis: no es el universo el que se está expandiendo, sino la velocidad de las radiaciones emitidas por las galaxias se va disminuyendo en proporción a sus distancias.

Al aceptarse malas interpretaciones, como las del universo en expansión, lo único que se consigue es complicar mas la física alejándose del concepto objetivo que esta debía de tener. Sería muy largo y de muy poca utilidad tratar de enunciar muchos ejemplos, a los que no se les daría ningún valor; por este motivo y para no hacer demasiado largo, y con todo respeto me limitaré en todo este trabajo, a tomar datos del libro mencionado, lo que se hará a continuación.
-
Hubble publicó en 1929 el corrimiento hacia el rojo de las radiaciones de las galaxias lejanas, en proporción a dicha lejanía; lo que se interpretó como que estas se estaban alejando. En 1915, al formular su teoría general de la relatividad Einstein pensaba en un universo estable; pero se vio obligado a reformular sus teorías, introduciendo la existencia de una fuerza antigravitatoria innata del espacio del universo; con lo que se podía evitar, tanto que el espacio se expandiera o se contrajera sin ningún control. En 1922 el físico ruso Alexander Friedmann supuso que el universo se estaba expandiendo, debido a que por la fuerza gravitatoria se había concentrado en una zona, por lo cual se produjo una gran explosión (big bang); aquí se supusieron muchas maneras de cómo se produjo dicha explosión; considerando diferentes velocidades, energías, tiempos, distancias, etc., muchas de ellas muy contradictorias. En 1965 dos físicos del laboratorio Bell Telephone en Nueva Jersey Arno Penzias y Robert Wilson, al probar un detector de microondas extremadamente sensible se sorprendieron de encontrar mas ruido del que esperaban, y no en una determinada dirección, sin en todas; por lo que concluyeron que era producido por las galaxias lejanas ,y de acuerdo con la suposición de Friedmann. Aparentemente al mismo tiempo dos físicos norteamericanos de la universidad de Princeton, Bob Dicke y Jim Peebles, interesados en las microondas y en las sugerencias de George Gamow (que había sido alumno de Friedmann) pensaron que observando las galaxias mas lejanas se podrían dar cuenta de cómo se inició la gran explosión; sin embargo en 1978 Penzias y Wilson recibieron el premio Nobel por estos estudios.

En 1965 el físico norteamericano Howard Robertson y el matemático británico Arthur Walker, crearon modelos similares en respuesta al descubrimiento de Hubble a la expansión del universo. De acuerdo con las observaciones y cálculos hechos con las interpretaciones que se le han dado a dichas observaciones mencionadas, se calculó que el universo se expande entre 5 a 10 % cada 109 años; también se ha calculado que la materia que hay en el universo únicamente produce una gravedad menor que 1/100 de la necesaria para detener el efecto de la expansión; se habla de materia obscura que pudiera contribuir a dicha detención, etc. Otra solución dada por dos refugiados austriacos en 1948; Hermann Bordi y Thomas Gold y el británico Fred Hoyle; fue la idea de que conforme las galaxias se iban alejando, nuevas galaxias se iban formando en los espacios intergalácticos. Esta teoría de estado estacionario requiere una modificación de la teoría de la relatividad general; pero la creación involucrada era tan baja (una partícula por Km3 / año) que no estaba en conflicto con los experimentos. A finales de los años 50 y principio de los 60, un grupo de astrónomos dirigidos por Martín Ryle, realizó en Cambridge un estudio de las ondas de radio en el espacio exterior, determinando que las fuentes mas débiles eran las mas lejanas, mientras las mas intensas eran las mas cercanas, resultando haber mas fuentes comunes por unidad de volumen para las fuentes cercanas que para las lejanas. Alternativamente podía significar todo esto en contra de la teoría estacionaria que tendría que ser abandonada.. Se mencionan otros modelos que posteriormente han sido rechazados.

Finalmente en 1965 el físico y matemático británico Roger Penrose demostró que una estrella por su propia gravedad se puede reducir a un espacio nulo de manera que la materia y el espacio-tiempo se hacen infinitos formándose un agujero negro. A Hawking se le ocurrió la idea de que el tiempo se invirtiera y que la idea de Penrose se pudiera aplicar en un universo infinito. En 1970 Penrose y Hawking vieron la posibilidad del big bang siempre y cuando la teoría de la relatividad fuera correcta y que el universo contenga la misma materia observada. Aquí Hawking comenta que al principio hubo mucha oposición a esta idea, entre otros por los rusos, debido a sus creencias marxistas en el determinismo; de la misma manera podría decir que esta oposición es de mi parte por pertenecer a un país tercermundista.
-
Muchos pensaban que los átomos estaban constituidos por una masa formada por electrones y protones. Rutherford descubrió que el núcleo estaba formado por partículas positivas, y que los electrones giraban alrededor de este, como si fuera un sistema planetario. Aquí surgió un problema, que si el núcleo estaba formado por partículas positivas, estas se rechazarían mutuamente, desintegrando al núcleo. Para solucionar este problema los físicos se vieron obligados a considerar que existían otras fuerzas mas potentes que las electromagnéticas, dentro del núcleo, pero con esto se complicó mucho la estructura nuclear, como veremos mas adelante. Cuando yo estudiaba mi modelo de órbitas poligonales, supuse que los átomos estaban formados por sistemas binarios, constituidos por una partícula positiva (= un protón + 1, o 2, o 3 neutrones) y una negativa consistente en un electrón orbital, estas partículas de cada sistema binario, estaban separadas a una distancia igual al radio de una cubierta (shell); es decir que podía haber n = 7 tipos de sistemas binarios de acuerdo a su radio.

La pregunta ahora es: ¿Por qué se formaron estos sistemas binarios con las condiciones dichas? Desde luego hay dos cargas opuestas de igual magnitud que se atraen; pero esta atracción no hace que se junten ambas partículas, porque al mismo tiempo estas adquieren cierta velocidad normal igual a la rotación de los electrones orbitales, y de las partículas positivas alrededor del núcleo; haciendo que este movimiento se equilibre con el movimiento que puede producir la atracción. Pero esta atracción no es como se ha considerado; tanto los electrones como los protones en toda su superficie esférica tienen una cara en que emiten y reciben frecuencias inducidas, que son por donde se producen dichas atracciones; pero al mismo tiempo hacen que las partículas de los sistemas binarios adquieran una velocidad como la de las órbitas poligonales, como ya se dijo. Para que todo esto se produzca, las caras de las partículas positivas y la de los electrones, deben de estar enfrente unas de otras; al verificarse esta condición, cada partícula positiva actuará siempre sobre su respectivo electrón, y no sobre las otras partículas positivas del núcleo; por lo cual ya no existirá ningún rechazo entre las partículas del núcleo. Al estar las caras dichas enfrente una de la otra, del electrón con la de la partícula positiva va a haber un intercambio de una partícula propulsora mn, entre ellas. Cuando el electrón recibe dicha partícula, en un vértice de su órbita, esta se deflecciona; igualmente cuando la partícula positiva recibe en su vértice dicha partícula propulsora, que produce un fluido, con una reacción interior, y así sucesivamente en cada vértice La partícula propulsora está formada por corpúsculos como los de la luz.. Cualitativamente se ha dado la idea de cómo actúan los átomos en el modelo de órbitas poligonales; con los ejemplos numéricos se dará cuantitativamente el modelo.

En la estructuración del átomo siento que la física moderna mas bien ha trabajado como si se estuviera estructurando un recetario de cocina, lo mismo puedo decir de la física cuántica; en otras partes de este escrito ya he hablado algo de esto. El problema del núcleo de considerar el rechazo que pueden tener las partículas positivas, con la física moderna lo han querido resolver imaginando que existen fuerzas nucleares, débiles y fuertes, como ya se dijo. Científicamente no me interesa este problema, por las razones que he dicho, pues con los sistemas binarios se ha resuelto la estabilidad del núcleo; pero aquí voy a aprovechar algunos de los datos que vienen en el ya mencionado libro.

Como en el año 1968 se descubrieron los quarks al colisionar protones con otros protones o con electrones a altas velocidades, con los experimentos hechos por Murry Gel-Mann en el Caltech, con lo cual se le otorgó el premio Nobel 1969. Se cree que hay como 6 flavors (sabores) de quarks que se llaman: up, down, strange, charmed, bottom y top (arriba, abajo, estraño, encanto, fondo y cima; cada uno de los flavors puede tener los tres posibles “colores”. Un protón o un neutrón están constituidos por 3 quarks; un protón tiene 2 ups + 1 down; un neutrón tine 2 down + 1 up. Se pueden construir partículas inestables con quarks strange, charmed, bottom, top, pero rápidamente se transforman en protones y neutrones. En el libro de Hawking se menciona el spin (rotación); el que considero que no existe, pues de lo contrario no pueden existir los sistemas binarios. Aquí se considera a una partícula atómica con spin 0, a la que parece lo mismo en todas las direcciones; para que una partícula con spin 1 parezca lo mismo tiene que girar 360º; si tiene spin 2 con girar 180º parecerá la misma; si la partícula tiene un spin mas alto con un giro de una fracción de círculo parecerá lo mismo. Las anteriores partículas dan lugar a las fuerzas entre partículas.

Hay 3 partículas con spin ½, las cuales forman la materia del universo y obedecen el principio de la exclusión de Pauli (premio Nobel 1945). En 1928 Paul Dirac dio una teoría que estaba de acuerdo con a relatividad especial y con la mecánica cuántica, explicó porque el electrón tenía spin ½ y predijo la existencia del positrón, que se descubrió en 1932, por lo cual recibió el premio Nobel de física 1933. Las partículas portadoras de fuerza no obedecen el principio de la exclusión. Se dice que las partículas portadoras de fuerza son partículas virtuales porque no pueden ser descubiertas como las partícula reales. Las partículas con spin 0, 1, 2, en forma de ondas pueden aparecer como reales. La fuerza gravitatoria entre dos partículas se transmite por una partícula con spin 2 llamada gravitón, que no posé masa propia; los gravitones reales son las ondas gravitatorias. La acción electromagnética se produce por un gran número de partículas virtuales llamadas fotones de spin 1; estos fotones son reales cuando se emiten en forma de luz. La fuerza nuclear débil produce la radiactividad que actúa sobre las partículas de spin ½; pero no sobre las partícula de spin 0, 1, 2, tal como los fotones y gravitones.

La fuerza nuclear débil no se comprendió bien hasta 1967, en que Abdus Salan del Imperial College de Londres y Steven Weinberg de Harvard propusieron una teoría unificadora; también sugirieron que había unas partículas de spin 1 conocidas como: bosones vectoriales masivos, que transiten la fuerza débil; estas partículas se conocen como W+, W-, Zo; Cada una con masa 100 GeV. Esta teoría propone una propiedad conocida como: ruptura de simetría espontánea, que quiere decir que a bajas energías parece ser un cierto número de partículas completamente diferentes, aunque en realidad son el mismo tipo; a altas energía todas sus partículas que se comportan de manera similar. En la teoría de Weinberg-Salan, con energías mayores de 100 GeV las 3 nuevas partículas y el fotón se comportan de una manera similar. A energías mas bajas W+, W-, Zo adquieren grandes masas y su acción es de corto alcance. En 1973 ellos ganaron el premio Nobel de física, junto con Sheldon Glashow de Harvard. En el Centro Europeo Para la Investigación Nuclear (CERN) se comprobó la existencia de dichas partículas, por lo cual Carlo Rubbia y Simon van der Meer recibieron el premio Nobel. Se cree que el quarck es transmitido por otra partícula de spin 1 llamada gluón. La interacción nuclear tiene una propiedad llamada confinamiento de “color” (rojo + verde + azul = blanco). La combinación de partículas (tripletes) de colores producen los mesones, que no tienen color y son inestables. Un gluball es uma bola de gluones . Hay otra propiedad de interacción nuclear fuerte llamada libertad asintótica.

Hasta 1956 se creía que las leyes de la física tenían 3 simetrías independientes: C, P, T; en la simetría C las leyes son las mismas para partículas y antipartículas. La simetría P implica que las leyes son las mismas para una situación cualquiera y para su imagen especular. La simetría T significa que si se invierte la dirección del movimiento de todas las partículas y antipartículas las leyes son las mismas adelante o atras del tiempo. En 1956 los físicos norteamericanos Tsung-Duo Lee y Chen Ning Yang sugirieron que la fuerza débil no posé la simetría P. El mismo año una colega Chen-Shung Wu con ayuda de un campo magnético hizo que todos los átomos de experimentación rotaran en el mismo sentido y demostró que en una dirección se libraban mas electrones que en otra. Al año siguiente Lee y Yang recibieron el premio Nobel por su idea; se encontró también que las fuerzas débiles no poseían la simetría C, pero si la simetría combinada CP. En 1964 dos norteamericanos J. W. Cronin y Val Fitch demostraron que la simetría CP no se concentraba en la desintegración de mesones; en 1980 recibieron el premio Nobel Existe un teorema matemático que considera que cualquier teoría que obedezca la mecánica cuántica y la relatividad debe poseer la simetría combinada CPT; es decir que el universo tendría que comportarse igual si se remplazaran las partículas por antipartículas, si se tomara la imagen especular y se invirtiera el tiempo. Los últimos párrafos de este tema de dicho libro son pura especulación; se podría aceptar el spin, pero no que el tiempo se pueda invertir.

Einstein entró a un terreno virgen y muy amplio con la física moderna, que acaba de cumplir un siglo, en que se ha podido ampliar enormemente. Con todo lo que he dicho aquí, alguien podrá suponer que se necesita una capacidad intelectual verdaderamente extraordinaria, como dije, pero esto no es así; comencemos viendo el caso de Einstein: El tuvo una idea diferente a la de todos los físicos anteriores y contemporáneos a el, o sea que la luz era una constante universal, de naturaleza ondulatoria , y con esto pudo explicar una serie de discrepancias que había entre las teorías y las observaciones existentes; y para poder justificar esa idea se vio obligado a considerar que el tiempo no era absoluto; que el espacio era curvo; que la materia se podía trasformar en energía y viceversa, etc.; todo esto sucedió por considerar válida una idea errónea. Mi padre al final de su vida, y yo, con una idea muy simple, como la de considerar a las radiaciones de naturaleza corpuscular, y que la luz no es una constante universal, también hemos entrado en un campo virgen (para la física moderna) y muy amplio; y con una inteligencia normal, pero completamente libre hemos dado el camino para libertar a la física y poder ampliarla. Durante un siglo ninguna persona “autorizada” se ha preocupado por corregir las fallas de la física moderna. Las personas suficientemente capacitadas no se han tomado la molestia de meditar en los errores de esta física y de las teorías de la relatividad; simplemente las han tomado como un recetario que con las similitudes, y muchas veces con las interpretaciones experimentales, han logrado obtener resultados verdaderos, porque la física y el universo son muy nobles. En una ocasión dije que en el siglo XX hizo falta un Galileo o un Newton para hacer ver la verdad en la física; pero hasta esto lo dudo, en 1945 mi padre demostró que las teorías de la relatividad estaban equivocadas y en las décadas de los 60 y 70 se observaron cuásares que se estaban expandiendo hasta con velocidades iguales a diez veces la de la luz..

Con la física moderna hemos visto que no es imprescindible presentar nuevas teorías exentas de fallas para que se puedan aceptar; esto sería tanto como considerar que no se necesitan los investigadores. Yo estoy conciente de que mi trabajo puede tener sus fallas, por muchas razones, por su misma extensión, por ignorar algunas cosas, por algunas malas interpretaciones, por querer avanzar sin corregir lo anterior , etc.. No me gustaría que todo esto fuera pretexto para no reconocer oficialmente mi trabajo y que todas las personas capacitadas lo puedan juzgar y criticarlo en sus fallas. No se justifica que se piense que soy inmodesto por todo lo que digo, por eso soy investigador; mi modestia consiste en aceptar la verdad cuando estoy equivocado, no importa quien me la diga. Una persona con cierta cultura, pero sin ser un estudioso de la física, cualitativamente me indicó una falla en mi trabajo de investigación; yo había considerado que los efectos de temperatura únicamente se producían con la existencia de los átomos y que si los electrones estaban afectados por velocidades mayores que: v1 = 2160 Kms./ Seg. se desintegraban los átomos. Pero si recibimos radiaciones de rayos X y , de las estrellas; estas radiaciones tendrán que ser producidas por alguna desintegración atómica o radioactividad; esto por un lado, por otro, si estoy considerando la existencia de una dinámica de los corpúsculos, pienso que debo de considerar temperaturas mayores que la que había supuesto, Con toda humildad acepto una critica a mi trabajo, como correcta, dada por una persona que ni siquiera es investigadora de la física; en cierto sentido me alegro por esto, porque no quiero que se me coloque en un lugar demasiado alto e incontrolable. Enseguida voy a demostrar cuantitativamente lo que me dijo la persona mencionada; aunque todavía tengo muchas dudas de lo que es temperatura...

Radiaciones con  < 10 --9 m., corresponden al límite entre rayos X y rayos 
Energía de la radiación: K = (c / ) h = (3 x 108 / 10--9) 6.6266 x 10—34 = 1.988 x 10--16 joule
K = 0.5 me ve2 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10—31 ve2 = 4..555 x 10-31 ve2
ve = (1.988 x 10—16 /4.555 x 10—31)0.5 = 2.089 x 107 m / Seg.
Aplicando la fórmula de Boltzmann: T = 2 K / 3 k = 2 x 1.988 x 10—16 / 3 x 1.38 x 10—23 = 9.604 x 108 oK > 102,656 oK

Aquí hemos concebido una física completa, en su contenido, al incluir la dinámica de los corpúsculos y al hacerla completamente objetiva. De una manera muy injusta no se le ha querido dar un reconocimiento oficial a nuestro trabajo; pero he tenido el apoyo de personas mas valiosas por su inteligencia y su integridad. En el periódico A.B.C del Sr. Gonzalo Estrada Cruz se han publicado algunos temas míos. Cuando se pirateó parte de mi trabajo en 2005 en el canal 11 de T.V. el Arq. Héctor Benavides me hizo un video sobre esto. En la oficina del Depto. de física del ITESM estaba tapizado de retratos de Einstein y últimamente los ha quitado todos; no he preguntado, ni lo haré por que razón, pero me lo imagino.. En la oficina de correspondencia del Sr. gobernador de Nuevo León, Lic. Natividad González Parás me han recibido todos mis temas y me sellan los originales, hoja por hoja, garantizando mi prioridad: Lo mismo puedo decir del director de Salubridad Dr Gilberto Montiel Amoroso, y de otras instituciones En el mes de junio pasado fui a Tucsón y les entregué un trabajo de investigación de mi padre, en la facultad de física y no me quisieron sellar ni firmar de recibido el original ; esto en una universidad del país mas progresista del mundo. Si en 40 años nunca se decidieron en darme ningún reconocimiento, lo tendrán que hacer en este año, porque si no, los voy a declarar antigalileicos, en pleno siglo XXI; con mi padre se cometió una gran injusticia y no toleraré más, en bien de todo lo digno y de la humanidad.

Monterrey, México, julio 1007. Manuel de Hoyos Robles








PROTESTA

En varias ocasiones he dicho que la física moderna es como un recetario de cocina, que mas bien se ha integrado a base de observaciones mal interpretadas, en vez de fundamentos científicos; esto facilita grandemente que se puedan plagiar muchas buenas ideas de personas poco influyentes, por otras muy influyentes; es como un cuerpo elástico que al no ajustarse a ciertas condiciones, se puede estirar o comprimir, para forzarlo a dichas condiciones. Una idea aislada, es muy fácil plagiarla de esta manera. Esto se hizo con una idea mía, que en el 2005 se le otorgó el premio Nobel de física a un catedrático de la universidad de Harvard, llamado Roy Glauber en complicidad con otro de la universidad de Colorado, llamado John L. Hall. y otro de la universidad de Muinich, llamado Theodor W. Henschs en complicidad con el presidente del Comité de física del Nobel: Suine Svanberg; y aunque la idea la disfrazaron de física moderna, no pudieron ocultar dicho robo, no nada mas desde el punto fe vista científico, sino monetario, equivalente al valor material de dicho premio. Según declaraciones de Glauber, el principal plagiador, en 1965 descubrió la idea con la que después de 40 años se le adjudicó el premio Noblel. Se preguntará: ¿Por qué no se le adjudicó dicho premio en aquel entonces? La cosa es muy sencilla: En aquel entonces con sus experimentos esperaba tener ciertas variaciones en ciertas frecuencias de radiaciones electromagnéticas de acuerdo con la variación de la temperatura; y como no descubrió nada de esto que esperaba, abandonó esta idea hasta que a finales del 2004 y principios del 2005, en mis temas que mandaba por internet a las diferentes universidades, manifestaba que la frecuencia de rotación de los electrones orbítales no variaba con los cambios de temperatura, por lo que sucedía lo mismo con la frecuencia con que se podían emitir sus radiaciones. Hasta esta fecha se vino a dar cuenta de su mala interpretación, después de 40 años. .

Prácticamente se puede decir que todos los premios Nobel de física están basados en la física moderna; por lo cual en menor o en mayor grado estos premios mas bien han tenido un carácter detallista. Abreviando muchos detalles y explicaciones, puedo decir que los efectos fundamentales de la física contemporánea fueron efectuados por mi padre, al comprobar de una manera completamente objetiva que las teorías de la relatividad estaban equivocadas; y de una manera similar he demostrado la misma deficiencia en toda la física moderna, por medio de muchos modelos completamente objetivos. Con cada una de mis ideas, muchos influyentes ya se hubieran ganado un premio Noblel; y si no lo han hecho es porque si es fácil robar una ideas aislada a una persona no influyente, no les es fácil querer hacer lo mismo con toda una nueva física

Voy a hacer una limitada descripción sobre los trabajos de investigación de mi padre y míos. Al principio del siglo XX, al haber pequeñas discrepancias entre las teorías existentes y las observaciones, Einstein supuso una serie de conceptos absurdos para obtener teorías coincidentes, como que la luz era una constante universal (a pesar de que en el agua era menor que en el aire...); que el tiempo no era una constante universal; que el universo era curvo, por lo cual existían las diferencias dichas; etc. Como en 1945 mi padre supuso que los efectos aberratorios no nada mas eran lineales como lo supusieron Bradley y Doppler; sino que también variaban proporcionalmente con el incremento de las energías cinéticas cuando estas eran ínter actuantes , es decir al cuadrado de los incrementos lineales; y con esto también comprobó que las teorías de la relatividad estaban equivocadas. Entonces nadie le hizo caso a mi padre, porque lo consideraron como un lego. Esta actitud siempre me disgustó, y en 1965 cuando mis condiciones económicas lo permitieron, decidí estudiar la física en este sentido, tratando de defender las ideas de mi padre y me di cuenta de que la física moderna adolecía de las mismas deficiencias. Estamos en el siglo XXI y todavía hay muchos que defienden las teorías de la relatividad; pero también hay muchos que no están de acuerdo con ellas. En gran magnitud pienso que yo he influido en buena parte en esto. Cuando empecé mi trabajo de investigación, mandé por correo mis escritos a muchos físicos; a principio de este siglo lo he hecho por internet. Para evitar piratería, he hecho copias para que muchos de los que las reciben me sellen de recibidos mis originales con la fecha correspondientes.. Sin embargo, como he dicho en otros escritos, con una física tan ambigua y contradictoria, como es la física moderna, y con tanto físico de tercera categoría, es fácil plagiar ideas, en mas de 40 años ha habido algo de esto con la actitud tan negativa de ignorar oficialmente mi trabajo. Al estudiar el movimiento de los satélites artificiales, se ha comprobando que las teorías de la relatividad estaban equivocadas. Si hace mas de 60 años mi padre lo comprobó. ¿Por qué no lo aceptan? Cuando descubrí que el premio Nobel de física del 2005 fue una piratería y lo empecé a manifestar por internet, lo único que recibí fue bombas de virus para nulificar mi correo electrónico y no poder recibir ni mandar escritos. Hubo que eliminar mi correo de recepción. Si las personas involucradas consideraran que estoy injuriándolas, me podrían demandar; si no lo han hecho es porque tengo la razón.

Este ya no es un problema científico, sino delictivo, porque con su actitud están negando el beneficio que mis ideas pueden reportar a la humanidad, no digo que a mi, porque para ellos mi padre y yo no valemos nada; puedo decir que de una manera inobjetable el espíritu antigalileico empezó en el 2005; y se podría decir que de una manera muy particular, por unas cuantas personas. Yo hice mi protesta por internet para que muchas personas se enteraran de esta arbitrariedad, pero en vez de que el Comité mas representativo del progreso de la física tratara de enmendar esta falla, le dio un carácter mas general, y el premio Nobel de física 2006 fue dándole el reconocimiento a una idea caduca, como es el big bang.. No me agrada mucho hacer esta crítica porque por lo general los ganadores de estos premios no tienen la culpa de usar una ciencia tan deficiente, en sus investigaciones; mas bien tienen más mérito, por trabajar con ideas deficientes para obtener resultados útiles..

Se acaba de adjudicar el premio Nobel de física 2007 a una invención mas que a un descubrimiento científico. Esto no le quita el mérito a los inventores; pero esta actitud si perjudica al Comité del Nobel de física al propasarse de sus atribuciones por considerar un invento en vez de un descubrimiento. Enseguida voy a reproducir lo que leí en el periódico que dio la noticia: Según la explicación del Comité Nobel un disco duro almacena información – desde música hasta imágenes o datos—en forma de microscópicas areas magnetizadas en direcciones distintas.
Lo dicho anteriormente no es ninguna explicación. La explicación la dio Edison cuando inventó el fonógrafo. Los discos duros o no duros almacenan información por efectos de la deformación que sufren por diferentes presiones a la que son sujetos y no porque dichos discos actúen como si fueran magnetos. Un imán o un magneto, producen un flujo que actúa como una fuerza (ver tema: Modelo de Imán --Efecto de Interacción) que se puede amplificar como el sonido, que también puede actuar como una fuerza. . .(ver tema: Reactividad de los Atomos). Lo que se llama magnetorresistencia, en realidad viene siendo la absorción de parte del flujo magnético por los átomos o moléculas que se mueven con el sonido y/o con otros que permanecen estables. A todo esto voy a agregar una falsa idea, aplicada a una falsa interpretación; o sea el spin de los electrones produciendo el magnetismo.

Hay muy mala disposición para reconocer oficialmente el trabajo de investigación de mi padre y mío. Esto no lo puedo catalogar como un problema científico, sino delictivo, comenzando con el robo de mis ideas en el premio Nobel de física 2005. Como ciudadano honesto, entre las muchas atribuciones que tengo me voy a quejar con las autoridades de mi país; ya sea para que reclamen a las autoridades de Suecia o al Comité del Nobel; por ser victima de un robo, que no nada mas me afecta a mi, sino a México, porque mi padre y yo somos para este; como Galileo es para Italia, y Newton es para Inglaterra. A veces siento que muy pronto me voy a morir, por lo cual me urge actuar.

Monterrey, México, 12 de Oct. /’7 Manuel de Hoyos Robles.









Dr. José Manuel Ramírez Aranda Monterrey, N. L. 15 junio / 2004
Presente:

Aquí le incluyo el tema: The Plasma (Magnetotheraphy); con este se resuelve el problema de acumulación calorífica, del que comentamos la última vez que nos vimos. Este problema ahora se puede solucionar de una manera muy rápida; que sería el tiempo en que se produjeran temperaturas en nuestro organismo de 70º C, si logramos que esto se haga de una forma selectiva, que no dañe de una manera irreversible a las células de nuestro organismo. En el anterior tiempo mencionado se podría curar de una forma radical el SIDA. De cualquier manera y con la ayuda de la electroterapia (proceso de tres generaciones).existen muchas buenas posibilidades... Con la electroterapia hemos visto la gran posibilidad de curar la enfermedad del VIH en tres generaciones (un año en los CD4; 1 ½ año en los CD8). La electroterapia produce altas temperaturas que destruyen la cubierta de todos los microorganismos patógenos; cuya cubierta los protege de la humedad de nuestro organismo, pero no del calor de ionización que producen las corrientes eléctricas actuando en nuestro cuerpo. En pocas palabras, todos los microorganismos patógenos que se mueven libremente dentro de nuestro cuerpo, son destruidos; no así los que se enquistan en nuestras células; debido a que al introducirse en ellas se despegan de dicha cubierta auto protectora.

Con la magnetoterapia podemos producir efectos magnéticos diferenciales equivalentes a temperaturas (27º + 43º = 70o) que destruyan a los virus VIH. Esto lo digo porque el efecto magnético no es instantáneo, sino acumulativo. Si nuestro organismo es afectado por un campo magnético en los primeros 70 segundos, unos átomos de las células equivalentes a la capacidad ionizadota de la bovina magnética incrementan l temperatura de unos átomos de nuestro cuerpo; en los siguientes segundos otra cantidad semejante de átomos sufren el mismo proceso; y así sucesivamente, de acuerdo con un proceso que tiende a ser matemático.

En nuestra última entrevista le expliqué de la armonía electroquímica que existe en la formación de las moléculas (ver tema: How are Formed the Molecules). En los últimos medicamentos que han salido contra el VIH, me he dado cuenta de que cada vez se ha logrado con estos, una mayor armonía electroquímica, entre ellos y los virus; al grado de que dichos medicamentos atraen a sustancias (inofensivas) que forman glicoproteinas iguales a las de la envoltura del VIH, y posiblemente también a sus proteínas. Por este motivo el paciente W ha reportado bandas muy gruesas de: GP160, GP120, GP41; y otras bandas muy indefinidas de las proteínas; que los biólogos, ante las dudas, las han considerado como positivas. También quiero afirmar que existe una buena afinidad electroquímica entre los medicamentos y los virus VIH, ya que el conteo viral, según me explicó usted (si mal no entendí), se hace no directamente con los virus, sino con sustancias virales (plaquetas virales). Todo lo dicho anteriormente significa que si el paciente se siente bien y tiene resultados (+) en las pruebas ELISA, Western-blot, conteo viral, etc.; todas estas pruebas resultarán falsas; la única prueba que por ahora yo veo confiable sería la de la polimerazo. Irónicamente en Inmunología del Hospital Universitario, antes la hacían, y me dijeron que ahora no la hacen, porque no les costea, por el poco uso que tiene.

Por todo lo dicho anteriormente quiero manifestar que el trabajo de investigación sobre medicamentos antiSIDA, es muy meritorio, porque sin conocer el mecanismo de afinidad electroquímica han logrado medicinas que en gran parte nulifican los efectos del VIH. En pocas palabras, considero que ya tenemos los suficientes conocimientos para la curación radical del SIDA. Un problema que se necesita estudiar un poco mas es el de poder incrementar la producción de las células CD4; pero para todo esto se necesita, mas cooperación y comprensión, como la que existe entre usted y nosotros.

Por ahora voy a dar algunos datos obtenidos del paciente W, que considero muy ilustrativos, reportados a partir de marzo / 01 en que empezamos a tratarlo, ya que se presentó en un estado agónico.
Marzo /01. conteo viral como 800,000 / mm3. Medicamentos que estaba tomando (no se que tan correcto sean los nombres que se me dieron manuscritos) Zerit; Abacavir; Etaviren 7
Tratamiento que dimos, en general: cada miércoles: 20 minutos de electroterapia; cada sábado igual., hasta Sept./03
Pruebas del CD4: Agto./ 02 = 275; enero / 03 = 236; Nov./ 03 = 249
“ “ CD8 “ =1270; “ = 1786; “ = 706

Conteo viral: Agto./02 = 114,000; de enero /03 hasta Nov./03 = 38,000 / mm3

Electroterapia aplicada desde Sept./ 03 a Dic./ 03 Igual que la anterior, excepto que a finales de cada mes: miércoles = 20 minutos: sábado = 3 horas / sesión

Como a finales de Dic./ 03 el paciente W sufrió una fuerte intoxicación con amoniaco, y en abril / 04, los CD4 = 108; CD8 = 1494; conteo viral = 294,000.

Por todo esto le cambiaron los medicamentos desde Dic./ 03, hasta mayo 15 / 04: Ritonavir (Keletra), para aumentar los CD4, sin ningún resultado; Amprenavir (vigenerase), y Nevapirina. Esta quimioterapia resultó muy nociva ara el paciente; supuestamente por su gran afinidad electroquímica con las células digestivas del estómago; por este motivo su médico le suspendió por un mes todo medicamento, para desintoxicarlo. El paciente X ha resultado muchas veces con ELISA (--) desde hace 4 años; o dudosamente (+) cuando se le hace la prueba en mas de dos días. Nunca ha querido cambiar de medicamentos; supuestamente el AZT y todos los medicamentos antiguos tienen mucho menos afinidad electroquímica que los mas modernos...

En todo esto no me gusta andar con rodeos, para poder decir las cosas como creo que son; a veces agradable, a veces desagradables: - Quiero decir que los médicos que se consideran mas capacitados siempre dicen que la terapia que es buena para un paciente, no lo es para todos. Con esto están afirmando que la medicina no es una ciencia y que no saben distinguir entre lo fundamental y lo detallista; porque una cosa es una terapia y otra es un aspecto parcial de ella. Si un físico dice que un electrón no es igual a otro, estará afirmando que la física no es una ciencia, y que no tiene una idea clara de la estructura de los electrones. Nosotros estamos comprobando que la medicina si es una ciencia..-- En el Hospital Universitario no le quisieron hacer una prueba de Western-blot al paciente W; le dijeron que ya no hacían estas pruebas gratuitas. Esto puede estar muy correcto si se trata de cualquier paciente. Pero si se trata de una persona que voluntariamente se ha prestado a que experimentemos con ella, no solo merece que no se le cobre, sino la deberíamos premiar de alguna forma. Si se le han hecho algunas pruebas de Western-blot, sabiendo que con una es suficiente para cualquier paciente, hay muy buena voluntad en dicha persona en que se haga una investigación que puede beneficiar a muchos. Lamento mucho que se haya tomado esta decisión y me gustaría que recapacitaran. De cualquier manera les doy las gracias y mi agradecimiento por lo que nos han ayudado.

Atentamente: Manuel de Hoyos Robles.
.
.
.
.
.
..EL FIASCO DE LA ENTALPÍA Y ENTROPÍA

Como a finales del siglo XIX se creía que ya se conocían todas las leyes fundamentales de la física y que el progreso de esta se produciría por conceptos detallistas. Sin embargo en esas fechas, al hacer observaciones en fenómenos afectados por velocidades de la magnitud de la luz, y en partículas con magnitudes de los átomo, se observó que las teorías vigentes no coincidían con exactitud con las observaciones hechas entonces; lo cual no se pudo explicar con los conocimientos existentes. Así que Einstein supuso que este problema era debido a limitaciones de nuestras percepciones sensoriales; con lo cual desarrolló sus teorías de la relatividad, basándose en la suposición de que la luz era una constante universal; esto a pesar de que en un medio refringente tiene menos velocidad que en la atmósfera y en el vacío. Con los conocimientos existentes en aquel entonces, los investigadores que no estaban de acuerdo con esto, no lo pudieron rebatir, como sucedió con Poincaré, Max Planck, Michelson, etc
.
Desde la época de Bradley, Doppler, ellos determinaron ciertos efectos aberratorios lineales en cuerpos y partículas que se movía a gran velocidad Sin embargo, hasta la fecha no se ha querido aceptar oficialmente que las fuerzas y energías, también se pueden aberrar, pero proporcionalmente al cuadrado de las variaciones de la velocidad de los cuerpos ínter actuantes. Antes de 1945 mi padre se enteró de los fundamentos de las teorías de la relatividad; y al considerar como actuaban los efectos aberratorios en las fuerzas y energías, demostró que las teorías de la relatividad estaban equivocadas; con lo cual también demostró la incompetencia de los físicos que tuvieron la oportunidad de leer sus trabajos.

Hace mas de 40 años, yo también me metí al trabajo de investigación de la física, porque siempre me indignó que se ignorara el trabajo de mi padre. Científicamente he tenido mucho éxito en esto, y no puedo decir que no se me ha reconocido este trabajo, porque el premio Nobel de física 2005 se les otorgó a tres personas que me robaron parte de mis ideas, que con anterioridad había mandado por internet a diferentes universidades de mucho prestigio: por este mismo medio he estado protestando. Lo anterior, aparte de ser un acto inmoral, también ha sido un acto torpe y muy tendencioso. Se puede robar una idea que tenga un valor limitado; pero no algo que tenga raíces muy profundas. Desde hace mas de 40 años concebí mi modelo de átomo con órbitas poligonales; desde entonces me empecé a dar cuenta de que en el universo existe el movimiento gracias a la existencia de los corpúsculos como los de la luz y de los microcorpúsculos como los de la gravedad.

Cuando era niño recuerdo haber leído en algunos libros del tratamiento que se le dio a Galileo por su trabajo de investigación de la física, y me sentía indignado y pensaba que afortunadamente estaba viviendo en una época en que ya no existía tanta arbitrariedad, porque ya se aceptaban todas las ideas mas avanzadas para que la ciencia pudiera progresar mas rápido. Sin embargo ahora me encuentro que no este problema es muy difícil; ya no se trata de que esté luchando contra instituciones de mucho prestigio e influencia; también a Galileo le tocó hacer esto, y entonces no había internet, pero sí cárceles... Galileo, mi padre y yo, hemos luchado con la razón. En los últimos 30 años de su vida Einstein quiso encontrar, sin tener éxito, la relación que existe entre las fuerzas electromagnéticas y las gravitatorias; pero en este sentido el mismo se cortó la cabeza, al considerar que las radiaciones electromagnéticas y gravitatorias se producen por ondas, en vez de considerar que estas eran corpusculares y dotadas de energía cinética como todo lo que es materia. El considerar ondas gravitatorias le ha costado muchísimos millones de dólares a países ricos como los Estados Unidos y a Europa, al hacer estructuras detectoras costosísimas que no sirven para nada; mejor ese dinero lo hubieran empleado en ayudar a países pequeños y pobres como los de Centro América
.
En otras ocasiones ya he dicho que el concepto de energía cinética en los corpúsculos y microcorpúsculos no tiene el mismo sentido que las partículas y cuerpos macroscópicos Un corpúsculo inmóvil, con un impulso insignificante para él, puede adquirir la velocidad de la luz. Con esto los conceptos de entalpía y entropía, que se han interpretado como destrucción de energía, no tienen sentido; sin pensarlo se está revolviendo la velocidad de los corpúsculos y microcorpúsculos con la energía cinética de las partículas y los cuerpos macroscópicos y contradiciendo el principio de que no existe pérdida de energía, sino transformación de esta (abril de 2006). Yo soy el primero en decir esto, que resulta muy molesto... que se me crea, pero no si se juzga mal. Cuando las cosas cambien va a haber muchos piratas que se quieran atribuirse la primacía de esto; como me sucedió con la electroterapia. En el universo infinito no existen fronteras por donde se pueda escapar la energía. Un electrón, un protón, como todos los cuerpos y partículas del universo tienen que estar formados de corpúsculos; cada corpúsculo tiene capacidad de moverse de cero a © velocidad y viceversa; sin el concepto macroscópico de energía cinética, siempre que se requiera... no hay necesidad de considerar conceptos absurdos como que la materia se transforma en energía y viceversa...

En el trabajo investigación hay dos requisitos: 1)Investigar como se produce un fenómeno. 2) Investigar por que se produce así; por ejemplo, Newton investigó como actuaba la gravedad en los cuerpos celeste; pero nunca supo el por qué; oficialmente, en la actualidad tampoco se sabe En su parte fundamental yo he satisfecho el primer requisito para que se me reconozca mi trabajo de investigación, y no se me ha querido conceder, a pesar de lo muy deficiente que es a física moderna. Siempre me he dado cuenta del valor de mi trabajo de investigación; pues he recibido actitudes aprobatorias y hostiles; de estas últimas voy a omitir dar mas detalles si no me afectan, como la piratería, por ejemplo.

Agradezco a todos los que me han dado algún apoyo aunque sea incompleto y limitado. En todas las cosas, buenas o malas, siempre he obtenido algún provecho. En el 13 de octubre del 2004 el Tecnológico de Monterrey invitó al químico Mario Molina (premio Nobel de química 1995) para que diera una conferencia. Entre los muchos que lo entrevistaron yo fui uno de ellos; es una persona muy accesible y vale mucho; me he enterado de su descubrimiento para producir una gasolina muy económica y que reduce mucho la contaminación; esto tiene que ser muy útil para la ciudad de México. De algunas personas si he tenido un apoyo completo, dentro de sus posibilidades y buena voluntad; como del técnico en computación, que siempre me ayudó cuando tuve el problema de las bombas de virus que me mandaban contra mi internet. Agradezco a las personas e instituciones que de muy buena voluntad reciben copias de mis trabajos de investigación, con lo que puedo comprobar mis prioridades, como me ha sucedido con los tres últimos gobernadores de Nuevo León; con el cónsul de Suecia en Monterrey, etc. Agradezco al Arq. Héctor Benavides por el video que se presentó en su programa de televisión, canal 11. Al locutor José Luis Portugal que me entrevistó en Radio Alegría, haciéndome preguntas, muy bien documentada en la física.

Ojalá que muchos de los que vean mi trabajo por internet sean como el Dr. Rodolfo Castillo Bahena, que a pesar de ser partidario de la física moderna, siempre me quiso ayudar apoyando mis ideas mas objetivas de la física. Este mismo espíritu lo tuvieron Poincaré, Max Planck, Michelson y tampoco lograron sus objetivos. Por lo que respecta a Don Gonzalo Estrada Cruz, es una persona muy humanitaria que siempre ha ayudado a los pobres y necesitados: también es una persona muy comprensiva y valiente; lo digo, porque la generalidad de las personas se cuidan mucho de no decir ni hacer nada que les moleste a los poderosos e influyentes, y el no se fija en esto, sino sen las arbitrariedades e injusticias que ellos cometen. El no se ha negado a publicar en su periódico las cartas reprobatorias de estas injusticias. Si los que premiaron a los roba ideas en 2005, insisten en su actitud de premiar las mejores recetas de cocina y las piraterías, cada vez que lo hagan se morderán la lengua y estarán obstaculizando el progreso de ka química, la medicina y toda la ciencia .

Monterrey, México, mayo del 2006 Manuel de Hoyos Robles.
.









POLYGONAL, VIRTUAL AND COULOMB´S ORBITS (corrected theme)

Our original idea in this theme was to find a relation between the behavior of the impulses produced in the systems of the seven polygonal orbits and the impulses produced in the Coulomb´s law. Because this, here was consider that some of the effects produced in the system of the seven polygonal orbits could be produced outside of their orbits. So we consider that it was possible to form polygonal orbits with 8, 9, . . . etc. orbits, if could be fill certain conditions. Our idea was to ¨structure¨ orbits that every time tried to work as circular ones. From a mathematical point of view, this practically is obtained with a regular polygonal orbit with a big quantity of sides of the same length than those of the system of the seven orbits; or could have bigger length, if this does not affect our mathematical calculations. Here for some reasons we will not say, for no complicate more this complex problem, were accepted the data given here. With other data, also will obtain the same result.... In the system of the seven orbits, the impulses are not uniform, but are produced every time of vertex. In the Coulomb´s law they are uniform, as would be in a system of circular orbits. For our study to obtain the data we want, was consider a system of transition of regular polygonal orbits, with a bigger and growing the number of sides, till practically of circular orbits; this one could be obtained with impulses similar to that of the Coulomb´s law.

Beside all say before, here was obtained other interesting data. At a distance near the seven shell of the atoms, the action of the Coulomb´s law is produced faster than we thought...; and even nearer, the effects were so rapid that would lost their uniformity... With an opposite criteria than those of modernist physicists, with mechanophysics I try to simplify the theories and eliminate, as far as possible all the particles required to explain the behavior of the physics phenomena. Nevertheless, to find an explanation for the electric charges, I was forced to consider other kind of corpuscles as those of light, and of microcorpuscles as those of gravity. In spite of all these, I continue remiss to accept other kind of corpuscles and microcorpuscles, so, I suppose they are not different to those we have study, they ought to be the same, but working in different conditions than those we have study. These and many other doubts we have, will not be clear up here.

As will be seen in this theme, it is required to know more about the return distance of the corpuscles and microcorpuscles, and some new behavior (for us) of them. With some observations (and information) have been made, have arrived to some conclusions; for instance, at very low temperature some elements and substances behave as superconductors; at normal temperature (21oC) some conductors wires get higher temperatures when electric currents move along them; we can approach at relative short distance from wires in which circulate a big quantity of electricity, and we do not feel the influence of such current in our organism.

From all have study, that is long to enumerate, have arrived to some conclusions; one of them is that it is very much important to know the return distance of some particles, as the corpuscles and the microcorpuscles working in different conditions. Other is that if it were possible that the free electrons could behave in some aspects, as they do in the atoms, this would be enough for to have atoms with more than seven shells. The most interior shell can be obtained, is the first one, because in this only is space for two orbital electrons. In the theme: The Return Distance (No Growing of Entropy) was seen the return distance of a light corpuscle. We have not study the gravity microcorpuscles and many of their characteristic, so, are not able to affirm they have a return distance and their magnitude. Nevertheless, we are inclined to consider it of the same magnitude as that of the light corpuscles. By the moment will accept this as correct one. Since I conceived the model of atom with the theory of the polygonal orbits, also was consider that between the nucleus and the orbital electron, was an interchange of a propeller particle formed by a quantity of corpuscles, as those of light.

Although we ignored many facts, was consider the propeller particle able to transmit to the orbital electron an energy equal to the kinetic energy of the propeller particle moving at light velocity, and consider this was possible because the propeller particle transmitted the fore mentioned energy to the orbital electron with a sequence of pulsation, being each pulsation equivalent to the energy transmitted by a reflection effect. With this mechanism, and knowing the mass of the propeller particles of all the shells given in our model of atom, in which there is a perfect synchronization of all the movements of the orbital electron and the mentioned interchange of energy. If it is pretended to obtain an orbit bigger than the seven one, we have to suppose that some of the effects of interchange between the positive particle and the electron, act beyond the seven shell; but not so, the required synchronization. To this imperfect¨ or hypothetical orbits, corresponding to shells bigger than the seven one, we will call: virtual orbits, or shells. In order to have the maximum radius, and quantity of the virtual orbits; first will be consider that such orbits are similar to those of the seven polygonal orbit system, in the following aspects:

The quantity of matter of the propeller particle, here, can consider diminish in the same proportion than in the normal seven orbits; that is in an inverse proportion to the square of the number of shell. In this condition the biggest virtual shell will have only a propeller particle with one active corpuscle. At a temperature of 0oK, all the propeller particle is an active one, that is, formed with one corpuscle. At higher temperature, also, only acts the one active corpuscle, although the propeller particles could have more corpuscles, as those of caloric fluid. All these ideas, now are clear with the concept of inherent energy (see theme: Gravity Microcorpuscles)

As was say in the fore paragraph, can be given some fundaments to explain the return distance of the light corpuscles and of the gravity microcorpuscles; by the moment it is not necessary to talk more of this. Nevertheless for to explain the interaction between the positive and the negative particles of a binary system, now also will consider is not enough the interchange of the propeller particles between both particles of the binary system. We could suppose that between the last two mentioned particles also there is an interchange of microcorpuscles as those of gravity, emitted by the orbital electron; and that their return distance is not as long as was say for the light corpuscles and the gravity microcorpuscles. Also can consider some action of corpuscles as those of light, that also do not have to travel a long space of return distance. What was say before, is not so evident in the space between the seven shell of an atom, and the biggest orbit of the virtual shells.

As in this problem will deal with two kinds of orbits, as the circular and the polygonal ones, in both orbits there is different quantity of energy for the orbital electron moves around the nucleus. In the seven normal orbit there is the maximum number of sides (28); of the real orbits, this is the most approximate to a circular one. Nevertheless, there are signifying differences, as will be seen forward. If the seven orbit were circular, it would require an energy En for its orbital electron to effectuate an orbit. The acceleration (radial) of the orbital electron, will be obtained with the following formula:
a = v7 w = w2 r7 = v72 / r7 308,5702 /1.13763 x 10—10 = 8.37 x 1020 m / Sec2.

Force of acceleration:
Fa = me a = 9.1091 x 10—31 x 8.37 x 1020 = 7.6231 x 10—10 Kg. m /Sec2
Energy employed in one orbit:
Eo = 2  r7 Fa = 2  1.13763 x 10—10 x7.6231 x 10—10 = 5.45 x 10—19 joule / to
In the seven polygonal orbit with 28 sides, the electron employs the following energy:
E> = 0.5 me v72 28 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10—31 x 69,0982 x 28 = 6.09 x 10—20 joule / to
The energy employed in a circular orbit is (no/> ) times bigger than that of the polygonal orbit:
no/> = Eo / E> = 5.45 x 10—19 / 6.09 x 10—20 = 8.95
The propeller particle of the seven shell has an impulse: mv7, that can be determine as follow:
0.5 me v72 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10—31 x 69,0982 = 2.174585 x 10—21 = 0.5 m7 c2
0.5m 7 (3 x 108)2 = 4.5 x 1016 m7
m7 = 2.174585 x 10—21 / 4.5 x 1016 = 4.8324 x 10—38 Kg. =
4.8324 x 10—38 / 1.47236 x 10—50 = 3.282 X 1012 corpuscles

The interaction between two particles (positive, negative) of a binary system is produced every time of vertex, in a continuous way, this is due that in both particles are produced some conditions that verify in the seven polygonal orbits model. In some space beyond the seven orbits, some of the fore mentioned conditions are verify, but other do not. If with some special circumstances would be possible that the continuous acting conditions, or at least part of them could act outside of the seven orbits, as in an eight, nine, etc. orbits; to this bigger system of orbits we will call: virtual orbits. These other orbits also will be polygonal, with straight line sides, Omitting a series of considerations, that will be understand better in the structure model of the virtual orbits, will be consider that the velocity (vn) of the orbital electron diminishes in a proportion equal to: (n) ; and also the length of the sides will grow.
n the seven shell the propeller particle has: 3.282 x 1012 active corpuscles: With this value can be determine the number of corpuscles there are in a propeller particle corresponding to the first shell, and also will find the number (n) of orbit (virtual ones) in which the propeller particle is minimum; as will be seen forward this is the biggest virtual orbit. In the polygonal orbits (the seven ones), if we multiply the quantity of corpuscles that has the propeller fluid (mp) of a vertex of an orbit by the number of orbit at the second power (n2), we have a constant value.
In order to apply the fore rule to the virtual orbits, will be done a compensative consideration in our mathematical operations, that will not affect our final result, but will simplify our operations. This will consist in consider the length of the sides of all the polygons as a constant value, equal to that of the system of the seven polygonal orbits; and the quantity of corpuscles of each mp varying in a uniform way from the first virtual orbit: n = 8 to mp = 1 corpuscle (maximum rn). As it is not possible to have a propeller particle with a fraction of quantum; then beyond the virtual orbits will be consider other orbits that we will call: Coulomb´s orbits . Practically, most of the virtual orbits are circular ones; same thing can be say of all the Coulomb´s orbits, so we can consider these last ones acting in a similar way than a star and its planets.

As was say before, the virtual and Coulomb´s orbits, are hypothetic ones, and this is because in they can not be produced all the effects that verify in the polygonal systems of the seven orbits. Nevertheless, some of the mentioned effects are produced, and because this we will be able to determine many properties, with their intensities and limitations, specially of the electrons. In the theme: The Masses of the Stars, was evidential that the propeller (interior) fluids that deflect the orbital electron in a time of vertex (more correct, in a time of deflection) work in all their magnitude in deflect the electron orbit; not so in deflect the orbits of the positive particles. In the Coulomb´s law, in which the effect of attraction is not limited to a time of vertex or of deflection.
N n2 = constant = 3.282 x 1012 x 72 = 1.6082 x 1014 x 12 = 1 n2 The rule: N n2 = constant. N = quantity of active corpuscles in a vertex of the (n ) orbit = 1.6082 x 1014 corpuscles; when: n = 1. ? In the biggest virtual orbit: N = 1; n = (1.6082 x 1014)0.5. = 1.268 x 107

The radius of the n orbit (the biggest virtual one) is:
rvn = n r7 / 7 = 1.268 x 107 x 1.13763 x 10—10 / 7 = 2.061 x 10—4 m.
For determine the maximum virtual orbit was consider a propeller fluid formed only by one corpuscle. In the practice this is not possible, as will be seen forward. So, we can choose other del with other values for to determine the virtual orbits. With this will be reduced in a signifying way the number of orbits; and the sides of them will be bigger than that would correspond to orbits with N n2 = constant, in which N varies unitary values. With this last consideration, by advance can consider that the orbital electrons are affected by a longer time than an electric induction, and because this, the value of (vn) obtained first will be bigger. With a numerical example, will be evidential other facts that will be seen afterward. In the virtual orbit system will be consider the variation (reduction of the quantity of orbits) in a proportion of: n0.5) Velocity of the electron in its biggest virtual orbit:
vn´ = v1 / n0.5 = 2,160,000 / (1.268 x 107)0.5 = 606.5707 m / Sec.
As was mentioned before, the definitive value of vn will be bigger that the value just obtained.
 = 360º / 4 (1.268 x 107)0.5 = 0.o025275 = 2 x 0.o012637
vn´/ Sec. = 2 vn Sin.( / 2) = 2 x 606.5707 Sin.0o.012637 = 0.26757 m / Sec
Fn . = me vn´ = 9.1091 x 10—31 x 0.26757 = 2.4373 x 10—31 Kg m / Sec
In the biggest orbit there are: 4 ( 1.268 x 107)0.5 vertices the quantity of impuses produced in one rbit is:
 Fn = 4 n Fn = 4 (1.268 x 107)0.5 x 2.4373 x 10—31 = 3.47159 x 10—27 Kg m / orbit This impulse was obtained considering the biggest virtual orbit with an electron moving at a velocity: vn = 606.5707 m / Sec.

Circumference of the biggest virtual orbit:
Lo = 2  rm = 2  2.061 x 10—4 = 1.294 x 10—3 m (see forward...)

At the same distance (rvn), with the Coulomb´s law are obtained the values will be given forward. By the condition of this problem, ought to be a numerical coincidence with the fore value expressed in distance, and the action of the Coulomb´s law, as will be proved with the values obtained forward, and those used in the theme: How Are Formed the Gravity and the Coulomb´s Fields.
Time of orbit: to´ = Lo / vo´ = 1.294 x 10—3 / 606.5707 = 2.1333 x 10—6 Sec. :
The impulse produced by the Coulomb´s law by two unitary charges in a given instant, at a distance: (rn), is equal:
Fc = K (q1 q2) / rn2 = 9 x 109 (1.6 x 10—19)2 / (2.061 x 10—4)2 = 5.4241 x 10—21 newton.

:The exterior impulse acting during a time of orbit (to) is:  Fc = Fc to = 5.4241 x 10—21 x 2.1333 x 10—6 = 1.15712 x 10—26 newton / orbit . . . .

We expected that the impulses of the Coulomb´s law would be equal to  Fn, but were produced bigger than that, for the reasons were said before in this theme. There are two different forces: one that produces a kinetic effect (exterior one) and the other that produces a deformation effect ( the interior one)

Some paragraphs before was consider that the value of vn = 606.5707 m / Sec., is smaller than the real one. The Coulomb´s effects are produced in a longer time than the virtual ones:
 Fc /  Fn = 1.15712 x 10--26 / 3.47159 x 10--27 = 3.3333.
The interpretation we give to the fore result is that in the biggest shell of the virtual orbit the velocity of the orbital electron has grown at a rate greater than in the polygonal orbits, that is: vn = 3.333330.5 x 606.5707 = 1,107.44 m / Sec.
In order the virtual orbits be in accordance with the polygonal and de Coulomb´s ones, the velocity of the orbital electron in the biggest virtual orbit ought to be equal to the velocity of the smaller Coulmb´s orbit; and the velocity of the orbital electron of the smaller virtual orbit ought to be equal to the velocity of the orbital electron of the biggest polygonal orbit.
vvn = 1,107.44 m / Sec. = vc1;
nmax = (1268 x 107)0.5 = 3561 orbits.
to = Lo / vn = 1.294 x 10—3 / 1107.44 = 1.168 x 10—6 Sec.
vn = 2 vn Sin(/2) = 2 x 1,107.44 Sin.0o.012637 = 0.4885 m / Sec. Fn = me vn = 9.1091 x 10--31 x 0.4885 = 4.45 x 10--31 Kg. m / Sec. Fn = n Fn = (4 x 1.268 x 107) 0.5 x 4.45 x 10--31 = 6.338 x 10--27 newton / orbit

From the Coulomb´s law we have:
to = Lo / vn = 1.294 x 10--3 / 1,107.44 = 1.16846 x 10--6 Sec.
 Fc = Fc to = 5.4241 x 10--21 x 1.16846 x 10--6 = 6.338 x 10--27 newton / orbit
There is a coincidence between the impulse of the biggest virtual orbit and the smaller Coulomb´s one.

In order our model of the atomic orbits be correct, the biggest virtual orbit ought to be in accordance with the smaller Coulomb´s orbit; next will be given the data of the biggest virtual orbit.
vn = 1,107.44 m / Sec.; n = 2,160,000 / 1,107.44 = 1,950.44
 = 360o / 4 x 1,950.44 = 0.o0461433 = 2 x 0.o0230717
vn = 2 vn Sin (/2) = 2 x 1107.44 Sin 0.o0230717 = 0.80269 m / Sec.
Fn = vn me = 0.80269 x 9.1091 x 10—31 = 7.3118 x10—31 newton
 Fn = Fn 4 n = 7.3118 x 10—31 x 4 x 1950.44 = 5.7045 x 10—27 newton /to
to = Lo / vn = 1.294 x 10—3 / 1107.44 = 1.16846 x 10—6 Sec.

The biggest virtual orbit has a radius: rn = 2.061 x 10—4 m,
in the orbit number: n = 1950; a side has a length: ln = Lo / 4 n = 1.294 x 10—3 / 4 x 1950 = 1.66 x 10—7 m
The space between the virtual shells is: d = 2.061 x 10—4 / 1950 = 1.057 x 10—7 m.  rv1

Here we will consider that with the Coulomb´s law can continue applying the rule: N n2 = constant, but now admitting that N can be a quantity smaller than one; that is, considering that the Coulomb´s law works with microcorpuscles in applying the mentioned rule; in this way the biggest distance will be defined by one microcorpuscle = mn. In order to continue with the same law of variation of mass of the propeller particles, will consider a fraction of corpuscle, that really is a fraction of 1.885 x 107 = mg / mm = 1.47236 x 10--50 / 7.811 x 10--58 negative microcorpuscles. For continue with the same process was done with the virtual orbits; for the Coulomb´s orbits will be established the proportion:
N n2 = 3.282 x 1012 x 72 = 1.6082 x 1014 x 12 = 1 n2 = (1 x 1.885 x 107)
r> r > biggest Coulomb´s orbit.
n> = (1.6082 x 1014 x 1.885 x 107)0.5 5.506 x 1010 .
The dimension (radius) of the maximum Coulomb´s orbit, that also is equal (?) to the return distance of the negative microcorpuscles is:
r> = nr7 / 7 = 5.506 x 1010 x 1.13763 x 10—10 / 7 = 0.895 m.
Apparently there is a coincidence between the return distance and the intensity (of 1 h). Several, or many charges can produce a higher intensity than 1 h,, but not in the same line of action....

Monterrey, México, September 18, 2001 Manuel de Hoyos Robles
January 16, 2007

Con el tema: Sound Velocity (II) no nada mas se ha comprobado la velocidad del sonido, sino la validez de mi modelo de átomo con órbitas poligonales y el de la corriente eléctrica; con puros valores numéricos de macanofísica voy a comprobar esto: Una multimolécula se produce en un tiempo de tm = 2k8 x 10—5 Seg.; la órbita de un átomo tiene 28 lados; la influencia energética de un átomo afectado a los demás átomos de una mutimolécula es; no = (28 / 2.8 x 10—5)0.5 = 100, Un tiempo de deflexión es igual a t> = 4.47 x
10—20 Seg. Un átomo de multimolécula es afectado por un electrón de corriente eléctrica durante un tiempo de brinco tj = 1.12 x 10—11 Seg., o sea por el siguiente número de tiempos de deflexión: n1 = 1.12 x
10—11 / 4.47 x 10—20 = 2.5 x 108 efectos de deflexión. Estos efectos distribuidos en los átomos de una multimolécula nos dan: nm = n1 / no = 2.5 x 108 / 100 = 2.5 x 106 = número de átomos que tiene una multimolécula

Con el tema: Velocidades de Rechazo y de Admisión, complemento las leyes de gravitación universal de Newton. Con únicamente estos dos temas, entre otros muchos, demuestro de una manera irrebatible que la física moderna está equivocada. De cualquier manera le doy una honrosa despedida de una física óptimamente constituida,, por su buena voluntad, a Enstein y a todos los que contribuyeron en su estructuración a la física moderna; porque el progreso de una ciencia (y todos los progresos...) se han hecho a base de aciertos y fallas; desde luego tratando siempre de eliminar a estas últimas.











THE MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE COULD EXIST (CONTROVERTIAL THEME….)

To explain any structure in the nature we ought begin from the most elementary parts. But in the Universe can be imagined from the infinite small toward the infinite big. In this way we are not able to define what are the smaller particles could have an atom. In accordance with mechanophysics (and all physics....) every atom emits fluids of particles as those of light, gravity, electric and magnetic ones. But those particles do not are the structure, but only make to work such structure, we part from them considering they make the structure of the atomic particles, supposing they give not only the form, but their behavior The most elementary atoms are those of hydrogen, and with them is formed most of the matter of the stars, as our Sun.

A hydrogen atom is formed by a proton and an electron, as have been explained in the theme of binary systems. There is not a material contact between both particles, that spin around a point that we can consider as the center of the nucleus of the atom. To understand better this it is required to study the theory of the double fluid, the theory of the polygonal orbits, and of course that of the binary systems, and others ones of mechanophysics. The interaction between the proton or electric positive particle and the electron, the negative one, is due to another particle (a propeller one) , that when is into the electron transmits all its kinetic energy to it, in such a way that this kinetic energy and those due to its translation velocity makes the electron to move around the center of the nucleus, as was explained before. Similar thing can be say with respect to the proton or positive particle of the binary system.

A neutron is formed by a proton and an electron, united in a material way, so that between a neutron and a proton or an electron, there is no rejection, neither attraction forces. Considering this, or the binary systems, it is easy to imagine that uniting two or more binary systems and / or neutrons, it is easy to form more complex atoms, as helium, lithium, etc. This idea, as many great ideas, is easy to understand. As a neutron has not a manifested electric charge, it could be introduced in an easy way into an atom with atomic mass m, and obtain other atom with mass (m + 1), but this is not so simple, because it is required some temperature and pressure, as those are in the stars and some celestial bodies, as will be seen forward with some numerical examples.. In nature there is abundant material to obtain any element it is required; so this first step is no problem. In a second step it is required that each binary system, forming an atom, works in a determined way, different to the other ones.

Before to aboard a second step, it is necessary to understand and interpret other problems in a different way than those accepted by modern physics. In modern physics has been consider that heat is produced by the movement of the atoms and molecules, and with this consideration have been obtained many complexities, as entropy, statistical physics, etc., that we reject. For instance, in a stable gas, all its atoms or molecules have the same temperature, of course in an average way, because if two atomic particles bump, are suppose there is a momentary interchange of inherent energy in accordance with our model; it does not matter with which velocity they move; what determine their temperature is their propeller fluid (caloric fluid) they have into them, and not the kinetic, or any other movement of the particles (atoms or molecules) that move into the volume of the gas, at different velocities. And with this it is visualized that can not be a temperature, higher than a certain limit. In modern physics it is talk of temperatures equivalent to millions degrees Kelvin, produced in some atomic process, and these because it is easy to imagine, for instance, a proton moving at light velocity, in accordance with the actual accepted theory of heat. But in accordance with our theories and models, if the electron that is moving at light velocity has few excess of this propeller fluid into it, its temperature could be near zero Kelvin.

It is not easy to measure the temperature of a free proton, or a free electron, or an atom, moving into a gas, only considering their kinetic energy. It is required to determine such temperature by the quantity of propeller particles there are into each atomic particle of the gas, that could be obtained under certain conditions, that we suppose are in the binary systems, in an easy way, and this is due they are in an equilibrated state. The most simple binary system is that that form the hydrogen atom, because this is not affected by other binary system, as happen in more complex atoms, in which are produced the ce and the ci effects, In the theory will be study here will not be consider these, neither other effects could complicate our explanations. In a binary system free of the ce and the ci effects can consider that the translation velocity of the orbital electron around the nucleus, gives the kinetic energy of it and is equivalent to a calorific temperature. In our theory of the polygonal orbits, it is well known for all have study it, that the most exterior orbit and less energetic one are equivalent to the seven shell, and the most interior one and more energetic is the first one.. In our theory of the polygonal orbits in each shell (n orbit) there is a velocity of the orbital electron equal to: vn = 2,160 / n Kms./ Sec. With this velocity and in accordance with the Boltzmann´s formula, can determine the equivalent temperature Tn of such electron moving in its corresponding orbit.

If it is consider that the velocity of an orbital electron gives a kinetic energy equal to its temperature. Then seen the problem in an opposite way, in a medium in which there are free electrons and protons, in order they unite each other forming binary systems; can be obtained them if the medium is at a temperature Tn , equivalent to the velocity of the electron: vn . The free electron in the medium with temperature Tn , in a fast way gets the velocity vn and after this, the electron continue receiving calorific fluid of the medium. In order the electron gets more caloric fluid than that of equilibrium, it begins to emits the excess of fluid at a rhythm equal to a time of vertex and a quantity proportional to a propeller fluid of orbit. Similar conditions could happens in the free proton into the medium, in such way that when an electron and a proton meet, must form a binary system, It is suppose that also is required some pressure. After is formed in the mentioned way a binary system, corresponding to an atom, this new atom with its new binary system has to move to other zone with less heat, in order the new atom gets in a stable condition. In a metal atom this condition is obtained at a temperature lower than that of the melting point.. If n = 7, is formed a hydrogen atom. If n = 6:
v6 = 2,160 / 6 = 360 Kms./ Sec.;
K6 = 0.5 m6 v62 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10--31 x 360,0002 = 5.9027 x 10—20 joule

In accordance with Boltzmann´s law, the temperature for to form a binary system corresponding to the sixth orbit is: T6 = K6 / (3/2) k = 5.9027 x 10--20 / 1.5 x 1.38 x 10--23 = 2,851o.5 K.
In modern physics has not been defined a limit to the maximum temperature could exist, and some times they talk of temperatures of millions degrees Kelvin, and we consider this is absurd. In accordance with what has been say, the maximum temperature could exist is: T1.
K1 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10--31 x 2,160,0002 = 2.125 x 10--18 joule T1 = 2.125 x 10--18 / 1.5 x 1.38 x 10--23 = 102,656o K.

Some atoms have several orbital electrons in a given shell; the shells with more orbital electrons are the fourth and the third one. The Md atom has 32 orbital electrons in the 4 shell, and 30 in the 3 shell. In accordance with our model, the 32 binary systems of the four shell are formed and united to structure the Md atom at a temperature T4 , and practically in a simultaneously way. With all say here can get some ideas: Why the atoms only have seven shells? Why can not exist temperatures higher than T1 ? For instance in the seven shell there is much free space for the two orbital electrons to move. In the first shell the temperature T1 is high, but the space is too small to admit more than 2 orbital electrons . Here have not talk of pressure, chemical properties, etc.

Monterrey, México, July 30, 2001 Manuel de Hoyos Robles










EL PREMIO NOBEL DE FISICA 2005 Y LA PIRATERIA

Hace como 40años, en que mis condiciones económicas me lo permitieron me he dedicado a la investigación de la física, pues me di cuenta de que la física moderna adolece de muchas deficiencias. Precisamente desde entonces concebí mi modelo de átomo con órbitas poligonales, que me ha permitido avanzar mucho en mi trabajo de investigación. Como en el año 2000 comencé a mandar por internet mis trabajos de investigación de física a las principales universidades del mundo. Antes de enero del 2004, considerando que la gravedad se produce y actúa en los átomos con gran precisión, supuse que en ellos algo se tenía que mover con la misma precisión; o sea que las radiaciones electromagnéticas (internas y/o externas) se tenían que producir con igual frecuencia que las gravitatorias. Esto quiere decir que me correspondía haber ganado el Nobel 2004, por dos razones: Por haber descubierto la relación que existe entre las radiaciones electromagnéticas y las gravitatorias; cosa esta que no logró Einstein en sus últimos 30 años de su vida. Además me hice acreedor a dicho premio, por haber descubierto la frecuencia con que se producen dichas radiaciones. A esto último nunca se le dio ninguna importancia hasta enero del 2004.

El 4 de octubre del 2005 salió la noticia en los periódicos que el premio Nobel de física 2005 se lo ganaron: Roy J. Glauber de la universidad de Harvard, John L. Hall de la universidad de Colorado y Theodor W. Hensch de Munich; por haber encontrado con gran precisión la frecuencia en que se producen de las radiaciones electromagnéticas. Sire Svanberg, presidente del Comité Nobel de Física, dio todas su declaraciones, sin aclarar la importancia de la exactitud de las radiaciones electromagnéticas. Borge Johansson, de la Academia Real de Ciencia Suecas, al manifestar “que era un típico premio a la física” evidenció la sorpresa de que todo un presidente del Comité Nobel de Física, le haya dado tanta importancia a una cosa tan simple y sabida. En este sentido yo no me sorprendí; me di cuenta de que los involucrados estaban enterados de mi tema de enero del 2004, por lo cual no se referían a la frecuencia de una radiación, sino a la frecuencia en que esta se produce.

En la información periodística se menciona que en 1963 se publicó un trabajo de investigación de Glauber. Aquí cabe suponer, que al no ser enmañada dicha noticia, Glauber descubrió algo (que no voy a detallar para no alentar el pirateo); pensaba que iba a obtener unos efectos que variaban en la misma proporción a otro, y al no suceder esto y no haber ninguna variación, resultó con cierto interés, máxime que no se tuvo idea de la razón de esto. Hall y Hensch lo único que hicieron fue copiar el descubrimiento de Glauber y “ajustarlo” a una física cuántica disfrazada y que se presta a presentar las mentiras como si fueran verdades.

Unicamente los que tienen pereza mental pueden creer en una “ciencia” tan incoherente como la física moderna. Urge eliminarla, entre otras cosas, para evitar piraterías. El premio Nobel de física 2005 es un insulto a la verdadera física; a los investigadores de todos los países del mundo que no son unos privilegiados por alguna universidad de mucho prestigio; al Patronato Nobel; a un país de gran integridad como es Suecia, etc, etc.

Monterrey , México, Oct. / 05

Manuel de Hoyos Robles


c.c.Lic. Vicente Fox Quesaca; Presidente de México
c.c. Lic. Natividad González Parás, Gobernador de Nuevo León
c.c. Cónsul de Suecia en Monterrey, México
c.c. Periódico A.B.C.
c.c. Canal 11 de Monterre.c.c
c.c. .. por internet










CRÍTICA DE MI TRABAJO DE INVESTIGACIÓN POR X CATEDRÁTICO. (No identifico a dicho catedrático para n perjudicarlo en su trabajo)

Página 1
Los resultados relativista si son conocidos por los sentidos, siempre y cuando consideremos su efecto dentro del rango de operación de los mismos.
El hecho de que la radiacion electromagnetica pueda iajar en el vacio no es un resultado de la dualidad onda particula.
Cuales son las bases para juzgarla física moderna como subjetiva y que quiere decir con esa aceveracion ? De ser invalida porque usa la dualidad onda particul a que es una de las fundaciones de la física moderna.
Pagina 2
El autor tiene una idea erronea del proceso y los metodos usados para adquirir conocimientos en física.
Perder una fuerza ? Mecanofisica ?
Pagina 3
Particulas propulsoras emitidas por particulas positivas moviendose a Loa largo del diametro del electron ? Y eso que se iba a hablar de física “objetiva”.
Pagina 4
De nuevo hablando de un modelo mecanofisica sin definir que es ? Cuales son sus postulados ? Cual es su origen ? Qué fenomenos explica mejor que teorias existemtes ? Esto ultimo para sentar los alcances de su validez.
Asume validez sin prueba. De donde obtuvo informacion de que los electrones son libres en todos los materiales. Tiene una idea de los ordenes de magnitud involucrados cuando compara electrones y celulas ?
En las siguientes paginas el autor habla de macromoleculas, en la estructura de los materiales, sin proporcionar en wue evidencia esta basada su propuesta e ignorando la evidencia experimtal acumulada en los ultimos 100 años proporcionada por un numeroso numero de experimentos de difraccion. Una teoria no puede ser aceptada sin evidencia experimental que soporte sus postulados.
A partir de la pagina 12 y con el tema de distancia de regreso el autor gasta la mayor parte del escrito tratando de esacreditar por de facto el trabajo de otros. En primer lugar no presenta informacion de por que el trabajo de Einstein es incorrecto, y en segundo lugar no presenta razones y fundamentos para aceptar la teoria ue el propone como sustitucion, y eso sin mensionar que en nigun momento propone una teoria estructurada sino que todo el documento son o ataques trbajos reconocidos o aplicación de una teoria nunca expuesta.
Siguiendo con el mismo tma de la distancia de retorno, aparece como un intento del autor para reconciliar sus pensamientos con una paradoja de su trabajo explico :
Sin presentar evidencia o razon en paginas anteriores el utor asigna una masa para la particula de luz, de ser este enunciado cierto entonces los cuerpos que irradian deben de alguna forma dar masa a esas particulas, y entonces sufriran una perdida de masa conforme irradian esta perdida deberia de ser evidente por experimentos u observaciones de efectos gravitatorios en las estrellas, sin embargo en 200 años no hay un solo reporte que necesite la perdida de masa como explicacion. Para resolver esta paradoja el autor inventa Loa que denomina distancia de retorno diciendo que la particula simplemente retorna a su origen entonces no hay perdida de masa, como es usual en el documento no presenta una linea de evidencia que pudiera soportar sus conclusiones, asumiendo sin mensionar cual es la base de sus conclusiones.
Continua el documento y el siguiente tema es el de particulas de entropia ? prefiero no opinar.
Continua asumiendo que el electron que emite no es afectado por la gravedad solamente el proton correspondiente, con esto esta asumiendo 2 clases de masa, complicando todavia el panorama y de nuevo sin proporcionar evidencia.
Una de las bellezas de la física es que uno no existen limites para lo que uno puede pensar, la teoria mas increible puede ser aceptada como ciert y como explicacion del mundo natural, el unico requisito es que esta teoria sea congruente y este basada en hechos experimentales, o mejor dicho en cuestionamiento del mundo natural. Y al mismo tiempo debe de proporcionar una razon para remplazar la teoria existente, el aceptarla unicamente por que para una persona es mas bonita no es razon para su validez
Los pasos a seguir deben ser :
1.- Cual es la evidencia que lleva a la necesidad de crear una nueva teoria. Es decir que evidencia no puede ser explicada por la teoria aceptada. Simplemente el ser objetiva o subjetiva no es razon por cambiar una teoria fundamentada por una sin fundamento.
2.- Si existe la necesidad de fundar la teoria. Es decir cuales son sus postulados y desarrollarla.
3.- En base a este desarrollo explicar los fenomenos que no pueden ser explicados por la teoria anterior, y demostrar que asimismo explica los fenómenos explicados por ella.
$.- Proporcionar predicciones acerca de fenomenos no observados, o sea que guie no unicamente explique.

Monterrey, México, October 1998







MechanophysicsIb











THE COMPTON’S EFFECT (checked)

In a binary system in which the propeller particle m moves in the same direction than the axis of it, when moves along the diameter of the positive particle and of the orbital electron, this movement is appreciated as along practically straight lines, that are the axis of the binary systems ; this could be perceived in an easy way, because the position of all the interacting parts, but now suppose that a propeller particle different to that corresponding to the binary system is introduced in other direction, into the orbital electron, here will be some variation in the normal behavior of the binary system; but before we continue it is required to define what is a propeller particle. We can imagine it as a unitary particle moving along the diameters of the particles of the binary system, when the particle is into the binary system, this is all right, but if the orbital electron jumps to an interior shell; it is because the propeller particle acts as impulse fluid, this propeller particle is ejected out of the electron and afterward is spread open forming a ray. The fore means that the propeller particles could be represented by a unitary particle and by a spread open ray, that if introduced into the electron, gets integrated forming a unitary particle.

In the return distance effect there are many similitude between the interaction of the receding and the advancing corpuscles (that form the cosmic rays) , that intersect in the return distance effects, and the Compton’s effect; so we consider those phenomena as a variation of one, as is interpreted by mechanophysics. Using radiation as incident beam of monochromatic X ray to fall in a sample of scattering material (loose carbon particles), he examined the scattering radiation with a X ray spectrometer (an instrument which measure the corpuscular separation –wavelength- of X ray incident in it). In addition to the radiation at the same wavelength, as the incident X ray, he also found a scattered wavelength ´ greater than that of the incident beam: wavelength ’ greater than that of the incident beam:  = ´ -  = h (1 – Cos ) / 0.5 m c2; m = mass of the incident ray (mass of all its corpuscles); we will talk of this forward...

In other themes have been give a astronomic model to explain how are integrated the atomic particles with the intersection of a ray of corpuscles, that after it reaches the return distance point, begins its receding trajectory and meet with another similar ray of corpuscles that is moving (advancing) toward the mentioned point. When both rays meet, they have the same velocity but in an opposite way. The corpuscles of the advancing ray have more remanent gravity than those of the receding ray; when an advancing corpuscle meets with a receding one, the first mentioned corpuscle will acts as if were a propeller fluid particle, because this yields its remanent gravity to the receding corpuscle, and with this remanent gravity the receding corpuscle will inverse the direction of the kinetic energy that had the advancing corpuscle, as if it were a reflection process, in such way that the receding corpuscle is not affected in its return velocity, after the intersection; this process is verify with all the corpuscles of both rays, in a similar way, so that the returning ray, beside does not lost its returning velocity, gets integrated in a single mass formed with all the corpuscles of both rays; really this is not a new process that was evidenced; this is the same mechanism that was given in our model to explain the movement of the propeller particles in the binary systems (see theme: The Return Distance in the Atomic Particles).

I said that the ideas mention in the fore paragraph are not new from the point of view of mechanophysics, also I am to dare or venture to say that neither to quantum physics, because in both physics there is the inquietude or restlessness to find a mechanism to explain the conservation of energy and mass into the atomic particles. But in mechanophysics there is not only try to find a different mechanism for different phenomenon, but also to have a connection and to harmonize them, one with each other. Here I will make a healthy critic of the quantum physics, because they have pretend to give elastic properties to all the atomic particles in a generalize way, but the elastic property is only one of the properties that have the particles in order could produce the interchange of energy without any lost of it. The idea got since Wolfgang Pauli and before him that the interchange of kinetic energy between one atomic particle and another one, are produced as if the particles were as tennis balls or billiard ones, can not have a fundamental value, because ignore in a more complete way the atomic structure. Between this idea of Pauli and the neutrino and that of Yukawa of interchange of matter or energy into the nucleus, there are many contradictions points, in some way here we have given them, so we will not have to get outside of this theme to explain them. Insisting: We can not work with the atomic particles as if they were tennis balls, although these balls are much more voluminous than the atomic particles, they do not have a mechanism to transmit their kinetic energy in form of inductive fluid to the other particles with which they bump. Because all mentioned this theme has a fundamental importance in mechanophysics and in all physics.

In one of our models of binary systems, the positive particle and the negative one (the orbital electron), there is an interchange of a propeller particle (mp). It is considered that this particle moves at light velocity between both binary particles; nevertheless, when it is absorbed by one of the particles, it is not produced any reflection effect that will try to reject one particle of the binary system to the other one. We suppose that this happens, because when the propeller particle (mp = m) penetrates either in the positive particle or in the negative one, it is in the front side of them (parallel and collineal with the axis of the binary system). We imagine this diameter in which move the ppropeller partuicles as a hollow tube with equal length to the diameter of the particle (positive, or negative): In this tube is not produced any bump effect between the propeller particle and the binary system particle (+ or -); only is produced an interchange of inherent energy between both particles, in such way that when the particle mp has moved over one of the diameter of the binary system particle, this last particle is affected by a fluid whose energy is equal to: 0.5 mp c2, acting toward the other particle of the binary system. In normal conditions, the fore fluid is produced in an internal way that is not appreciated outside of the particle. In the case of an ionization (for any reason could be considered), the fluid is manifested in an exterior way, as a radiation. In our theory of the polygonal orbits the fore mentioned fluids act as have been explained in such theory.

When a radiation penetrates in a refringent medium, it continues moving along it with smaller velocity... When the radiation penetrates to an opaque medium only introduces a small space. Here all the corpuscles join, forming as a propeller particle that can penetrate to a binary particle, for instance, to an orbital electron: But the penetration not always is along the axis (or tube) of the particle. In the annex figure is indicated an orbital electron (in the 7 shell). Here can be disregarded the translation velocity (v7), compared with the radiation velocity (c ). The axis of the electron is indicated by the line: aOb. In the left side of the electron is indicated an approaching radiation with a frequency (The force of the incident radiation is: h  . This radiation in form of propeller fluid penetrates in the electron, and when meets with its axis having an angle  ; it will acts in two ways: 1) Will move the electron with an impulse: (h ) Sin , in the direction Od; the rest of the radiation: (h ) Cos  will act as a propeller fluid that will be ejected by theorbital…….electron and at the same time will move the electron with the same (but opposite) imulse in the direction (Oa).

The vectorial sum of the two movements of the electron mentioned before will give an impulse equal to that of the incident radiation (h  / c). Here we have the following values:
(h  / c) Cos  = h ´/ c = to the impulse of the ejected fluid; h  / c = to the impulse of the approaching radiation.


The corpuscular separation of the incident ray is:  = c / .  = quantity of corpuscles / second,
c = light velocity.
The corpuscular separation of the ejected ray is: ´ = c / ´ = c / ( Cos .
There is a proportion between the fore values:
 : c /  :: ´ : (c /  Cos ; ´-  = (c / ) (Cos ) . . . . (A)

In accordance with our model a part of the radiation: (h Sin. ) will act moving the electron in the direction O d. The other part (  h Cos.  ) will act as a propeller particle (mp) that will be ejected by the electron in the direction: O b. We have::
0,5 mp c2 =  h = c h / ;  = h / 0.5 mp c ; ´ = [ h / (0.5 mp c) ] Cos.
´ -  = ( h / 0.5 mp c) [ (1 / Cos. ) – 1]  (h / mp c ) [ 1 – Cos  ] ; when: Cos.  Sen 

In the experiment of Compton with the X rays radiation with corpudcular separation . changed after being scatered to ´ . In accordance with the interpretation was given to this, was obtained the following formula:
´ --  = (h / m c) (1 – Cos ) . . . . (B)
In this formula: ´ = h / m c Cos., and  = h / m c
This is absurd, because: ´ = (c ) /  Cos., and l = c /  ´

.
.













SOME RETURN DISTANCE EFFECTS (checked)

Since I was a small boy I had singular conversations with my father about the nature of the structure of the Universe. He believed that the same laws that are applied to the macroscopic bodies, also are applied to the atomic particles ; for instance,, as he was supporter of the corpuscular theory of light, he considered that when a ray of light enters to a refringent medium its velocity does not change, but its trajectory became a zigzag one. He also considered that the radiation emitted by all the stars, including our Sun, in some way returned to the emitter body, this because after millions years had a reflection effect in the sidereal space, or because the Sun moving around our galaxy, or our galaxy around other ones, dragged such radiation, making their trajectory as a closed curve, etc. About the gravity and electric fields he considered similar conditions ; for him they were not fields of forces, but fields that induced forces into the atoms they affected, this because these ones were as rockets, that when affected by the mentioned fields, oriented theirs “jet motors” in accordance with the action of the mentioned fields. He was in accordance with the movement of the orbital electrons around the nuclei of the atoms, but not in a curved trajectory, because the great centrifugal forces, but in some polygonal orbits ; about this considered that in the atomic magnitudes were produced some changes in a rapid way, but not in a brusque and instantaneous one, as consider the quantum theory, but by small and rapid steps.

Maybe I was wrong, but all these and other ideas were assimilated by me in such way that I never believed in those of modern physics, as definitive ones ; either my father and me believed that if our ideas were not accepted by most physicists was not because the theories were wrong, but because most physicists have a conservative spirit ; since Galileo and Copernicus’ epochs had happened so. In my father’s epoch it was hard to divulge new ideas for a person with limited mediums or economic resources, because most of the physicists had a restrained mentality, as that of the physicist mentioned in the epilogue, but now with the Internet the situation has changed. When I was a young boy, in some way were an impulsive person, because this, I think I would not be a good student of physics. Now I think that a good student of the contemporary physics, could not be able to make a work as this one. I consider absurd and hurtful the idea some of them have for to defend their ideas as long as possible and at all intellectual cost (see commentaries with cursive letters in the theme : Super fluid Helium 3) ; nobody is owner of the knowledge of the Universe ; all us ought to be opened to the new ideas.

In the first part of this work my main interest was to divulge the idea of a model of a structured atom formed with binary systems, and when I began this task had not a clear idea of many important facts, as the ionization of atoms, the modulus of elasticity and other ones ; nevertheless, with my limited knowledge could advance till I got an idea how could be made an atom by uniting several binary systems ; but the medullar problem now is : How can be united such binary systems in a practical way ? If this were easy with our present knowledge, we could make precious metals as gold and platinum. We ignore many facts, Fermi knew how introduce low energy neutrons into the nuclei of the atoms, and because this, we think that in the future it will be easy to introduce the positive particles of the binary systems in the nuclei of the atoms, and with free electrons, form new binary systems ; maybe a neutron is formed by a proton and an electron fusion in one particle ( ?). But all these are problems corresponding to the first part of the protocol. Now we will try to make the first intent for to aboard the problem of the formation of electrons, positrons, protons and neutrons with corpuscles as those of light. When was obtained some information about the cosmic rays, with it we got aquatinted of the hypothesis of Millikan, than the particles of such rays are formed by corpuscles as those of light ; with this are confirmed some ideas we had before ; if you can make a house with bricks, an atomic particle could be made with corpuscles as those of light ; by the moment we will not pretend how is that one corpuscle unites to other one, a third to the two mentioned before, etc., but at least it will be tried to obtain a law can be applied in these processes.

Has been consider that the atomic particles could be formed because the intersection of the emitted radiation of our Sun, with the returning ones. The first ideas we get in this are: What velocity have the interacting particles? How much remnant gravity have? How interacts one particle with respect to the other one when they intersect ? How long time can live or remain a particle that is integrating, in accordance with the conditions in which is effectuated the integration ? etc. Some of the fore question can be answered with observation data ; unfortunately we have no access to them ; but if the behavior of the particles is governed by the same laws, even into the atomic particles than in the free spaces, we can obtain some important data from the atomic particles and apply them to the interstellar space movement of such particles. Those that were supporter of the theory of the expanding Universe and made astronomic observations, must know in which magnitude varied the velocity of the light corpuscles, due to the effect of the return distance ; some years ago I read in some place that the far celestial bodies were receding at a velocity manifested by a variation about 6 % of (c) ; unfortunately now that I need this value for my investigation work I was not able to find it ; but if we divide : c / 16 = 18,750 Kms./ Sec, we obtain a value of 6.25 % of c, that fix very well ; If it is considered that at : 5 x 1010 light years of distance = 1.58 x 1018 light seconds of distance (see theme : Return Distance) there are galaxies that recede at light velocity, in accordance with the theory of the expanding Universe, then the average velocity of light will be: c / 2 = 150,000 Kms./ Sec.

Lr / 2 = 1.58 x 1018 x 150,000 = 2.367 x 1023 Kms.; 2 Lr = 5.73 x 1023 Kms. (of receding and return distance)

With respect to our solar system it is not easy to determine the fore values, because there are intersection between the emitted and the returning corpuscles, in such way that with this intersections are formed the cosmic ray particles. Now our direct interest is to found how are formed such particles, but if when we were investigating in the first part of this work we had many doubts, now we have more than then and this is because the first part has many ignored points yet. There are two ways to get knowledge, one is by accepting them because are given by authorized investigators ; the other one is not only because the fore reason, but also because they can support an exhaustive logical analysis ; as the first one is the most easy way, most people accept it. Generally the progress of science has been attained because parting of known facts are obtained unknown or ignored ones ; in this theme we do not see that in a direct way can be obtained known facts that will help to attain unknown ones. Here will work in an opposite way, not in a direct one. We will make some intuitive suppositions, not scientific ones, and parting from them will try to arrive to true facts. It is logic to suppose that with the intersection of corpuscles the first atomic particles that are formed, are the smaller ones, as the electrons ; if the integration of corpuscles continue, are formed the positrons, next the protons and finally the neutrons.

Repeating : here will not explain how are formed the cosmic ray particles due to our ignorance in this field ; nevertheless, and in accordance with the return distance effects will be obtained some interesting conditions that eventually will help to attain positive results. We consider it is not necessary that the corpuscles travel distances of the magnitude of 5 x 1010 / 16 light years for to obtain some evidences of the return distance effects ; in our solar system can manifest such evidences. In this theme will be seen in a ratter semi empirical way a very much fundamental point. In all the theories have been see here of mechanophysics, always have been consider that either the gravity microcorpuscles, as the light corpuscles move at light velocity in their normal behavior and also have been seen that in some conditions, such particles could reduce that velocity, as in the return distance effects (astronomic and atomic ones), and do not doubt that such velocity could increase in other phenomena. Based in that gravity microcorpuscles and light corpuscles move at light velocity was consider the action of the propeller particles m7, in the binary systems. Here in the Earth the fore consideration is satisfactory, but in the exterior planets of our solar system can not be sure that the gravity (of the Sun) has ( c) velocity, but c- c, and maybe a reduction of c could affect the movement of the propeller particles along the diameter of the binary particle in such way that are not produced the required deflections in the polygonal orbits in such way that all the molecules are affected and even destroyed. I consider that in the future will be require to write some themes about velocities slower than light velocity acting in the mn particles.

Monterrey, México, January 4, 1999
Manuel de Hoyos Robles
















LIBERATION VELOCITY (corrected theme)

With all have been say till here there are enough fundamentals for to accept mechanophysics, nevertheless there are many doubts about gravity force, for instance, it is not know if there is a return distance for gravity force, if a particle is saturated with gravity: Can be attracted by any other body? Can it attract to other particles, or not? The fore questions and others have some reasons to be made, because if the gravity can acts till infinite distances, as some ones suppose, in the infinite time of existence of the Universe, all the matter of it would be concentrated in a single place. It has been seen that there are some relations between the electromagnetic forces and the gravity ones; in some behavior of the electrons seem as if they are not affected by gravity, etc.; but is better do not continue pointing out the many doubts, they will be demonstrate as far as it is advanced in the investigation work.

Between the many facts can be seen of gravity is interpreted that a body is attracted at different velocity in different mediums, for instance in a medium in which the body weight more than in other, the velocity with which is attracted the body is faster in the more intense medium than in the less intense one. Also could be imagine that in all intensities the bodies are attracted at the same velocity (?), but with more energy in the more intensity medium (as if they have more weight), but this is not so, because (g) grows with the intensity. Can be remember the experiment of Galileo in the Piza’s tower, in which two bodies with different weight fall at the same velocity and time; all are affected with the same intensity. In order to see the problem in the most objective point of view of mechanophysics will deduce some formulas; in first place, will determine the formula that gives the velocity of escape or liberation that must have a body in order to escape from the return effect of the Earth, produced by gravity. The so called velocity of escape or liberation has a value equal to: ve ; its impulse is equal to: m vs; m = mass of the propelled body. The force of desacceleration produced by gravity on the body is:
Ec = G m M / r 2 Kg. m / Sec2

In a brief way will be seen how is produced the liberation velocity in the surface of the Earth, in order to know what radial velocity must have a unitary body for to escape from the influence of the gravity of the Earth.

g = 9.81 m / Sec2 = desacceleration velocity in the surface of the Earth.
G = 6.673 x 10—11 m3 / Kg. Sec2. = constant of universal gravitation.
M = 5.975 x 1024 Kgs. = mass of the Earth.
r = 6.375,163 m = radius of the Earth.

g = G M / r2 = 9.81 m / Sec2 = Desacceleration of the unitary body in the surface of the Earth.
After a time (t) the desacceleration of a body that is moving upward will be: ge  0; so the average desacceleration will be: g / 2 = 9.81 / 2.
In order the unitary body escapes from the influence of the gravity of the Earth (disregarding the influence of the air), its liberation velocity must be: ve / 2 = g t; t = ve / (9.81 x 2).
In order the body start receding at velocity ve from the surface of the Earth, it would be able to move a distance equal to R in a time (t); and from the surface of the Earth toward the outer space; the velocity begins to decrement, as was specified; and with the same magnitude the value of (g).
R = 6.375,163 m =. ve t = ve (ve / 9.81 x 2) = ve2 / (9,81 x 2)
ve = (2 x 9.81 x 6,375,163)0.5 = 11,187 m / Sec

Now have been study the velocity of escape or of liberation, it would be interesting to study it in different cases, in order to begin to know its amplitude and its limitations, so it will be seen the case of a black hole; as we ignore many facts about this celestial bodies, here will imagine a body formed by a matter with equal density than a proton or a neutron, as with a neutron’s star.
Radius of proton: rp = 1.7143 x 10--14 m.
Volume of proton: Vp = (1.7143 x 10--14)3 4  / 3 = 2.1103 x 10 --41 m 3
Mass of proton: mp = 1.6725 x 10--27 Kg.
The density: p = 1.6725 x 10--27 / 2.11 x 10--41 = 7.92654 x 10 13 Kgs./m 3
The formula for a celestial body to work as a black hole is:
1 = G M / (2 rc c 2); M = 2 rc c 2 / G = 4 rc3 p / 3 .... (1)

Half of the liberated velocity is for to conteract the velocity (gt) = ve / 2, that is in the surface of the Earth; and the other half 9is for to nullify the action of attraction force of (gt) = ve / 2 toward Hearth, in free space The condition for the celestial body with uniform density... behave as black hole is (Eq. 1):
rc = (3 c2 / 2 G p)0.5 = [3 (3 x 108)2 / (2 x 6.673 x 10--11  7.92654 x 1013) ]0.5 = 2,850,293 m.

Mc = 2 rcc2 / G = 2 x 2,850,293 (3 x 108)2 / 6.673 x 10--11 = 7.688487 x 10 33 Kgs
2 c (c / rc) = 2 accelerations produced by black hole.
rc = radius of the blasck hole sphere.
D = average density of the black hole

In a black hole is consider that gravity force is so intense, that neither a corpuscle of light can escape from it. The fore conclusion was obtained because has not been observed any ray ejected from them. Here will be suppose that in such celestial body can be produced light radiation, in such way that each corpuscle in the instant is emitted has a kinetic impulse equal to: m c; if the corpuscle is emitted in a radial way, from the celestial body, from the beginning will be affected by the desacceleration effect produced by such body; m = mass of a light corpuscle = 1.47236 x 10--50 Kg.

The desacceleration impulse produced in a light corpuscle in a unitary time is:
Fc = G Mc mc / rc2 = 6.673 x 10--11 x 7.688487 x 1033 x 1.47236 x 10--50 / 2,850,2932 = 9.29816 x 10--40 Kg m./ Sec2
mc c = 1.47236 x 10--50 (3 x 10 8) = 4.41708 x 10--42 Kg. m / Sec.
Time (unitary) of braking:
tc = mc c / Fc = 4.41708 x 10--42 / 9.29816 x 10--40 = 4.7505 x 10--3 Sec.
Space in which is produced the braking:
dc = 0.5 c tc = 0.5 x 3 x 108 x 4.7505 x 10--3 = 712,573 m
Energy of braking: W = Fc dc = 9.29816 x 10--40 x 712,573 = 6.6256 x 10--34 joule =
1 quantum.
G Mc / 2 rc gc = c;
vc = G Mc / 2 rc c = 6.673 x 10--11 x 7.688487 x 10 33 / (2 x 2,850,293 x 3 x 108) = 3 x 10 8 m / Sec = maximum velocity
..
Note: From a theoretical point of view the fore problem is all right, but can not exist a black hole as the fore one because its acceleration is bigger than c …
gc = G Mc / rc2 = 6.673 x 10—11 x 7.688487 x 1033 / 2,850,2932 = 9.6896 x 1010 m / Sec2

Some speculations. In the fore model there are several indeterminations, beginning with the structure of the black hole; also is not defined if the gravity that acts over each light corpuscle is a remnant one, or is the one that meets with the corpuscle in each point of its receding trajectory; if both kind of gravity act; if the first law of the double fluid theory work here in an evident way, etc. .

With the fore result is proved that (g) is not a constant value and also that it is not possible there could be formed celestial bodies heavier than Mc, if in a distance bigger than dc there is matter that the body can attracts, this because it is not possible that (g) can produce velocities bigger than c; with all these have been found some direct relation between gravity force and the electric one, but since long time ago have conceive a model of gravity force, in which the gravity is transmitted by so small particles that wl call: gravity’s microcorpuscle; this particles are saturated with gravity and of course, if they are emitted by a body with mass Mc they only can advance a distance dc, but it is premature to talk more of this by now

From all have say here, are get some doubts. Since was made the model of the return distance, was suspect that the electrons were not affected by gravity, being this correct or not, here is concluded that with so great: g = 3 x 108 m / Sec2, produced in the corpuscles of light, the electrons must be affected by gravity, if it is enough intense, maybe they are affected by the black hole and move around it as satellites, maybe they get exhausted by the great density of gravity and get disintegrated; it is possible that gravity can be transformed in electric negative charges; if the return distance of gravity is given by the distance dc, the capacity of attraction of a black hole is limited to the fore distance, but this does not mean that their mass could not grows in such way, that if the electrons move as was say before, around the black hole, in some aspects they behave as the orbital electrons in the binary systems; in this way it would be easy to determine the laws that govern the behavior of the propeller particles m acting in the orbital electrons and in the positive particles of the binary systems. With the fore doubts and others not mention, it is evident that the study of gravity is in a incipient state, there is much to be done about this .

Monterrey, México, August, 1999; July 11, 2002
Manuel de Hoyos Robles























SPECIFIC HEAT (I) (corrected theme) -

The specific heat of a substance at a given temperature, is the quantity of calories required by a gram of the substance for to increment its temperature 1º C. In a complete study of physics can not be omitted that of specific heat. At the moment to write this theme, are ignored by us many facts related with this phenomenon, but, any way, have decided to write it, in spite of this, only because in mechanophysics the interpretation of this phenomenon is too much different than that given in modern physics. In few words, this theme is written here, not because we have many interesting data, but because at this phase of our investigations, feel obliged to write it.

Can not define when was observed with a rather scientific character the property of the substances to absorb heat: nevertheless in 1819, two young Frenchmen, Pierre Lous Dulong and Alexis Theres Petit made a unexpected discovery during the researches in the thermometry in which they have been engaged for some years with a dozen metals and sulfur (at room temperature), they found that what was name them as specific heat (c´ ) had practically the same value, approximately 6 cal mole. deg.: from this they inferred that the atoms of all the elements have the same heat capacity. Although they consider this as a general law that could be applied not only to solids (and liquids), but to gases: in 1830 this was not accepted in a satisfactory way, much remained to be learned about atomic weights. One of the first to find some discrepancies with the law of Dulong Petit, was Amadeo Avogadro that remarked some deviation in the case of carbon, but his measurements were not very precise. Matters got more serious in 1840, when two Swiss physicists: Auguste de la Rive and Francois Marcet, with diamond powder obtained c´  1.4 (3º to 14º C). At almost the same time Henry Victor Reynault, with diamond obtained: c´ = 1.8 (9º to 98º C). During the next 20 years, he continue his studies of specific heat and find many other deviations from the general law, though none as large as for diamond.

In 1870, Henrich Friedrich Weber studied the specific heat considering big variation of temperatures, for instance between 0o to 200º C, he confirmed his conjecture for diamond (c´) vary by a factor of 3 over this range. The next time was hear from Weber is in 1875, when he presented his beautiful specific heat measurements for boron, silicon, graphite and diamond from - 100º to 1000º C. For the case of diamond c varied by a factor of 15 between these limits. Other investigator in 1872, James Dewar working at high temperatures as 2000º C found that carbon had c  6 at such temperatures. Dewar´s most important contribution to this subject deals with very low temperatures, for diamond he found c´  0,05 in the interval between 20º to 85º K. Here have been given in a brief way the investigation work had been made in the practical field of the specific heat that was made mainly in the XIX century. About this have been given different interpretations, considering that the atoms of the samples are affected by heat due to vibrations in the three dimensions by velocity (kinetic energy) and rotation energy, also produced in the three dimensions.

Boltzmann was the first one to give theoretical interpretation to the Dulong Petit law. In 1871 he showed that the average kinetic energy equals the average potential energy for a system of particles, each one of whish was suppose oscillates under the influence of external harmonic forces. In 1876 he applied these results to a three dimensional lattice. This gave him an average energy 3RT  6 cal / mol. As Boltzmann himself out it, his result was in good agreement with experiment for all sample solids with the exception of carbon, boron, and silicon went on to speculate that this anomalies might be a consequence of a lost of degree of freedom due to a sticking together” at low temperatures of atoms at neighboring lattice points. As the equipartition theorem of classical statistic mechanics used by Boltzmann did not fixed well in diamond, gases molecules, the theory of Boltzmann was consider incomplete or not definitive, they considered there were other unknown vibrations. For instance, Maxwell found that: cp / cv = 5 / 3, for mercury vapor.

Other considerations were made with gases combined with the ether, in which there was not attained equilibrium. Kelvin considered that the classical equipartition theorem was wrong. Einstein study the problem from the point of view of quantum physics, his first formula fails at low temperatures, as was proved by Nernst. The correct temperature dependence at low temperatures was first obtained by Peter Debye, for nonmetallic substances. Einstein ended this active research of specific heat of solids. Debye, Max Born and Theodore von Karman were working for more exact data of specific heat. In 1913 Einstein returned to the investigation of specific heat in gases, this due to the discovery made by Arnold Euken; it was known then that cv = 5.0 for molecular hydrogen at room temperature, he showed that at T = 60º K; cv  3, that is consider to the following of two rotational degree of freedom.

Heramm Walther Nernst, in 1905 proposed a new hypothesis for the thermal behavior of liquid and solids at absolute zero, for example, graphite and diamond, in the case of carbon, their specific heat tends to zero as T  0. Therefore it does not exclude a nonzero specific heat at zero temperature. In fact in 1906 (without concluyent tests) Nernst assumed that all specific heat tends to 1.5 cal / deg at T = 0o. In 1910 he and after many experimental the zero specific heat at low temperature was imposed.

In a brief way (taking data from the book: The Science and the Life of Einstein, by Abraham Pais) has been given the history of the specific heat since the XIX and XX centuries; the data obtained here will be very much useful for to obtain a model from the point of view of mechanophysics. All that dedicate to the physical investigation feel a great admiration and respect for the persons that in some way contributed to the progress and knowledge of a branch of science (physics). If it is consider by us that they took a wrong way, will not be criticized by this; since Galileo and Newton always have been respected the experimental data and if the theoretical interpretation is wrong, this is not a simple decision.

Talking in a general way, in an atom there are two kind of orbital electrons; the interior shell and the exterior shell ones. This last can form the molecules uniting one atom with other one; to this electrons we will call: molecable electrons, and in most atoms they correspond to the seven shell. In carbon and silicon there are also two molecable electrons in the sixth shell, than can move to the seven one. In our model of specific heat will consider that all the molecable electrons try to absorb the caloric fluid when the atom is in a medium of higher temperature; and this fluid is distributed in all the orbital electrons of the atom.

Also can eliminate heat when is in a medium with lower temperature. As the carbon atom has four molecable electrons can absorb more heat than the atoms that have two molecable electrons; so its specify heat is smaller But not all the caloric fluid is employed in produce the specifics heat, but also in change the substances from a solid state to a liquid one, or to a gaseous one. At very low temperature, the atoms have few calorific corpuscles that oppose the absorption of corpuscles that can increment their temperature in an easy way; an opposite effects happens with a high temperature.

But the binary systems with molecable electrons not only contribute to change the temperature of the bodies affected by heat, but also to change their physical conditions; for instance, water is a solid substance at a temperature lower than 0o C, and transform in vapor at 100º C. When water is in an ice or in a vapor state its specific heat is reduced to half. The quantity of calories required to change a substance from solid state to liquid one is called: latent heat of fusion. To transform ice at 0o C to water at the same temperature are required 80 calories / gr. In accordance with our model of interchange effect; this means that ice has the fore capacity of cohesion. When water gets 100º C, it is required 540 calories / gr. to transform it in vapor (in gas). Next are given some latent heat of fusion: cf and of vaporization cv:

ºº cf cv cal. /gr.
Water 80 540
Alcohol 25.8 204
Cu 49.4 1150
Fe 59.1 1500
Hg 2.7 71
Au 15.0 411
Äg 25.6 556
Pb 5.6 207
Äs we have seen, a more complete study of specific heat will not be complete without explaining the latent heat, maybe in the future will have to do this. By now will limit to give some simple numerical examples for to explain our elementary model of specific heat, so, next will be given some technical concepts.

An atomic mass unit (amu) is approximate the mass = 1.672 x 10—27 Kgs.
One mole is the quantity of matter whose mass is numerically equal to its atomic mass expressed in grams. One kilo mole of a substance equals the quantity of it, whose mass in kilograms is numerically equal to its atomic (or molecular) mass. The fore means that one kilogram of hydrogen is practically equivalent to one kilo mole. The Avogadro´s number (6.02252 x 1026 molecules / k mole) multiply by one (amu) is equal to one kilogram:
1.672 x 10—27 x 6.02252 x 1026 = 1.0 Kg. / k mole.

If it is known the dimension of an atom and its (amu), could be determine the Avogadro´s number, I suppose there are several methods to determine the fore values; for instance, if the X rays have a corpuscular separation similar to the diameter of an atom: d  10—8 cm, by some interference effect could be determine the diameter of the atoms in a given body. In most of the problems given in mechanophysics have consider as diameter of the atoms the following value: 2 r = d = 2.27 x 10—8 cm.; with this value can obtain the Avogadro´s number (N) in an approximate way for all the elements, also can obtain the specific heat / amu. From the book: Chemistry by Michell J. Sienko and Robert Plane, were obtained the following values:

ce amu ce / k mole 2r
Al 0.216 26.98 5.8 2.50 x 10—8 cm.
Cu 0.0922 63.54 5.9 2.34 ´´
¨Fe 0.108 55.85 6.0 2.34 ´´
¨Ni 0.105 58.71 6.2 2.30 ´´
Äu 0.0306 197.0 6.0 2.68 ´´
Äg 0.0565 107.88 6.1 2.68 ´´

The specific heat of water is: ce = 1 calory / cm3 = 4.2 joule / cm3. In accordance with the Avogadro number (6.02252 x 1023 atoms / cm3) there are the following quantity of water molecules, that are formed by two H atoms and one O atom = 3 atoms:
n = 6.02252 x 1023 / 3 = 2.0075 x 1023 molecules.
The energy for to increment the temperature of one water molecule is: K1 = 4.2 / 2.0075 x 1023 = 2.09215 x 10—23 joule / molecule
With the Boltzmann´s formula we have.
T = 2 K / 3 k = 2 x 209215 x 10—23 / 3 x 1.38 x 10—23 = 1o.0 C.

Considering an isometric distribution of the atoms will be determine the volume occupied by one copper atom:
VCu = (2rCu)3 = (2.34 x 10—8)3 = 1.28 x 10—23 cm3
Number of atoms there are in 1 cm3:
n1 = 1 / 1.28 x 10—23 = 7.8 x 1022 atoms / cm3 = 7.8 x 1022 / 8.9 = 8.764 x 10—21 atoms / grm

The density of copper is: Cu = 8.9 gr. / cm3
N = 7.8 x 1022 x 63.54 / 8.9 = 5.572 x 1023 atoms / mol
63.54 = (amu) of Cu.
As the fore value of N is smaller than the obtained: N = 6.02 x 10--23,… the first idea we get is that the copper atoms are not distributed in an isometric way in the sample, but in a more compact one, could be other reasons that will be seen after our model will be better integrated

Next will be given the models that explain the specific heat of different atoms and molecules, seen from the most simple way, so avoiding the details that complicate the explanations and clarity of the problem and that only contribute in a minimum part to the exactness of the problem. As most of the atoms have 2 molecable electrons, here will be consider most of them have practically the same orbital velocity and practically and proportional incremented the orbital velocity when the temperature grows 1º K.

When the temperature in a sample is incremented 1º C, this increment is not made in an instantaneous way, but in a uniform one, during a lapse of time (t); at the beginning the increment is practically 0o K, and at the end of the mentioned lapse the increment is 1º K, so the average increment is; T = 0.5 º K, so the increment of the energy in the mentioned lapse in each atom or molecule of the sample is;
Kl´ = 1.5 k T = 1.5 x 1.38 x 10--23 x 0.5 = 1.035 x 10 –23 joule.
Number of molecules in a mole: N = 6.02252 x 1023 = Avogadro number.

In the molecules of a mole of sample have: Kl = 6.02252 x 1023 x 1.035 x 10 –23 = 6.23 = specific heat /atomic mass. When the temperature of the medium in which is the sample, is incremented 1º K, the atoms of the sample begin to absorb the calorific corpuscles corresponding to the incremented temperature; and afterward they are distributed in all the orbital electrons, as will seen afterwards. till the sample gets its temperature equilibrated with that of the medium. Generally most of the atoms have two molecable electrons in the seven shell; but silicon and carbon atoms have the fore mentioned electrons in the seven shell plus two molecable electrons in the six one. The capacity to interchange heat (change of the specific heat) can vary with the number of molecable electrons in each atom; the interchange of heat is produced in the vertices of the polygonal orbits in a magnitude proportional to the energy of deflection.

The atoms absorb the corpuscles that produce heat, by conduct of the molecable electrons; most of the atoms have two molecable electrons in the seven shell, with them the atoms can absorb and emit corpuscles producer of heat. Few atoms as C, Si, also have two molecable electrons in the sixth shell, so they can absorb and emit corpuscles producer of heat more faster than than the atoms of two molecable electrons; we suppose they do this operation proportional to their deflection energy. For instance, the atoms with two molecable electrons require a certain time to reach an incremented temperature and maintain its specific heat of their atomic mass at a value of  6.2. This due to their capacity to absorb and emit corpuscles. The atoms with four molecable electrons obtain the fore process in less time (t/2…?).

If the fore process is produced in a medium with very low temperature, the molecable electrons can absorb more rapid the corpuscles producer of heat and the values of the specific heat of the atomic masses try to diminish. The opposite happens when the temperature grows.: In molecules formed with several atoms; the interior atoms with all their molecable electrons linking in both sides the adjacent atoms; and only in the two extreme atoms with their molecable electrons linking in one side with an atom and in the opposite side free; these last electrons are the only can absorb corpuscles when the temperature grows and emit heat corpuscles when the temperature diminishes. These and other problems could be appreciate with numerical problems. Let see an example of a sample of Cu atoms when their temperature is incremented 1o C

Specific heat: ce = 0.0922 Cal. / gr 1oC; amu = 63.54
ce = 0.0922 Cal. = 0.0922 x 4.2 = 0.38724 joule
mCu = 63.54 amu = 63.54 x 1.6752 x 10—24 = 1.0644 x 10—222 gr.

Energy required for increment its temperature 1oC
K = ce mCu = 0.38724 x 1.0644 x 10—22 = 4.12136 x 10—-23 joule
Increment of temperature of the structure of the atoms + the vacuum space covering such structure:
T = 2 K / 3 k = 2 x 4.12136 x 10—23 / 3 x 1.38 x 10—23 = 2oC (= 1o + 1o)
The energy of deflection of two molecable electrons in the seven shell is:
E7 = me v72 = 9.1091 x 10—31 x 69,1002 = 4.3494 x 10--21 joule
The energy of deflection of two molecable electrons in the six shell is:
E6 = me v62 = 9.1091 x 10—31 x 93,9802 = 8.0454 x 10 --21 joule.
The specific heat for a molecule with two molecable electrons in the seven shell is:
ce2 = 6.23 E7 / E7 = 6.23 x 4.3494 x 10--21 / 4.3494 x 10--21 = 6.23

The specific heat for a molecule with two molecable electrons in the seven shell, plus two in the six shell
is: ce4 = 6.23 E7 / (E7 + E6) = 6.23 x 4.3494 x 10--21 / (4.3494 x 10--21 + 8.0454 x 10--21) = 2.19

In our original theory was consider that the molecules would be formed by orbital electrons that move in the seven shell, and also by electrons that move in the sixth one; as happens with molecules formed by carbon atoms. There is other alternative that consider that the molecable electrons of the six shell can move to the seven one, for to form the molecules: If this is so, the molecable electrons of the seven shell diminish their capacity to absorb heat (corpuscles of heat), so we have:
6.23 x 4.3494 x 10--21 / 2 x 8.0454 x 10—21 = 1.68
For to have a more complete theory of specific heat it would be necessary to include the molecules; my knowledge in chemistry are practically null, so I can not explain with fundamental reasons the behavior of them from the point of view of specific heat. Here it is necessary to clear out the interpretation of Avogadro´s number: in the book: Introduction to Modern Physics (second edition) by: C. H. Blanchard, C. R. Brunet, R. G. Stoner and R. L. Weber was copied the following paragraph:

Let NA represent the number of atoms in 12 Kgs. of carbon. The mass of NA helium atoms will be 4 / 12 as great, or 4 Kgs. In general, the mass of NA atoms of a subsistence of atomic mass A• will be A• Kgs. This is just one kilo mole of the substance. A kilo mole of any element (compound), then, contain the same number of atoms. This number NA, is called Avogadro¨s number. Notice that we do not at this point know anything about the size of Avogadro´s number, except that it must be very large. As a matter of fact, Avogadro´s number is not easy to measure. We shall see later that its current best value is
NA = (6.02252 0.0038) x 1026 molecules / kmole.

In the fore explanation they do not give the quantity of molecules that there are in a unitary volume (one liter); if they refer to atoms, the number of these in the unitary volume is given by the Avogadro´s number: if they refer to molecules, the Avogadro´s number gives the quantity of atoms that there are in a unitary volume and also the quantity of molecules divided by the quantity of atoms that has each molecule, that there are in a unitary volume, the fore considering that most of the atoms have more or less the same volume, it is easy to conceive from a mathematical point of view, the validity of the fore explanation, but here will be given other interpretation from the point of view of the specific heat, for instance, considering the water molecule, it has: c = 1.0, but the ice and vapor have: c = 0.5

The water molecule in both extremes haas 2 H atoms, in one side of them are connected to the O atom, and in the opposite they are free; in accordance with the Pierre Lous Dulong and Alexis Theres Petit rule, in the free sides are absorbrd 3 calories x 2 = 6; in accordance with the experiment are absorbed 2.1 x 2 = 4.2

Monterrey, México, November 24, 1999, March 20,2001; Manuel de Hoyos Robles


















THE MASSES OF THE STARS (corrected theme) .

Maybe the investigators that have had most difficulty to be accepted their theories, were my father and me. My father considered that the so called fields of forces, were not so, only were fields of induce ultramicroscopic particles moving at light velocity that affected the atoms of the celestial bodies in a way that the atoms emit inducers fluids in the opposite side were they received the mentioned induce ultramicroscopic particles, so that between two celestial bodies there are attraction forces. He considered that in the infinite time of existence of the Universe the fluid of the ultramicroscopic particles did not exhaust, this was because if a celestial body emits its fluid, by other side this celestial body receives the same quantity of such fluid from all the bodies of the Universe. Although from a mathematics point of view, the idea of my father was a satisfactory one, from a strict point of view has some unsatisfactory conditions, so, was conceived other idea, that is that of the return distance of all the emitted particles of the fluids. Here will not talk more of this, in order do not get outside of this theme, only will mention again, that about 1945 my father proved that the theory of relativity was founded in wrong concepts; and till now the work of my father has not been recognized in an official way. A similar thing can say of my model of polygonal orbits of the atoms and of the binary systems. All right, they give the solution of a part of physics, but not of all, and in this way our theories do not solve all the present problems. But with our work do not pretend to displace the modern physics, only to give an alternative, in order all physicists have an ampler field for to choose better ideas, that in the future will define which is the most correct physical science.

In the fore theme was defined the maximum temperature could exist in the Universe, and from the point of view of the atoms, the fore definition seems too logic, because an atom can not have but limited quantity of caloric fluid particles. If the atoms are forced to yield more quantity of caloric fluid, the only thing could be attained is to reduce their masses. In an acceleration machine, if a proton or an electron are accelerated at light velocity, the only thing is attained, is to disintegrate their structures.

In the Earth a body moving in a horizontal direction at a velocity of 7,908 m / Sec. (with no resistance of air....), does not fall toward the Earth; this is because the fore velocity would be equal to that of a satellite moving around our planet. In accordance with the theory of the binary systems, seventh orbit, a proton moves around its nucleus at a velocity: v+7 = 672.268 m / Sec.; the electron moves at a velocity: v7 = 308,570 m / Sec.
v+7 = 4 x 308,570 / 1836 = 672.268 m / Sec. = velocity of the positive particle of the binary system, seven orbit.
1836 me = 1836 x 9.1091 x 10--31 = 1.6724 x 10--27 Kg. = mass of proton

With all say in this paragraph, we think that if there is a star that has a: g7 = 672.3 m / Sec2, in this star could not exist binary systems corresponding to the seven shell. g7 = v+7 / Sec.; this is because the acceleration capacity of the star can nullify the translation velocity of the positive particle of the binary system of the seven shell. Here is pertinent to mention that the electrons are not affected in the same way by gravity as the nuclei of the atoms (see theme: The Return Distance - No Growing of Entropy-) In this star can not be formed any hydrogen atom, or any binary system corresponding to the seven orbit or shell.

In the surface of the Earth its gravity force can accelerate the falling bodies the following value: g = 9.81 m / Sec2. In the surface of the Sun the acceleration effect of its gravity is bigger, and can be determine by the Newton’s law:

F = m gs = Gm Ms / rs2 ?¿?¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿???????????¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿????¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿???????¿¿¿¿¿¿¿
m = mass of the attracted body by the Sun.
gs = acceleration of the body by gravity of Sun in its surface.
Ms = mass of the Sun = 1.985 x 1030 Kgs.
rs = radius of the Sun = 7 x 108 m
G = universal gravitation coefficient = 6.673 x 10--11 m3 / Kgs. Sec2
gs = G Ms / rs2 = 6.67 3 x 10--11 x 1.985 x 1030 / (7 x 108)2 = 270 m / Sec2

Our first problem in this theme is to define all the characteristics of a star that has a: g that can nullify in its surface, the velocity: v+7 = 672.268 m / Sec. of the positive particle (a proton) corresponding to the seventh orbit. In this way can not be formed binary systems corresponding to the seven shell in such planet. In this problem and in all will be seen here intervene several phenomena acting simultaneously, in some way are not well known by us, and because this, the solutions will be given here will be rather qualitative, than quantitative. Our main objective will be to fix the limits in which the phenomena verify and avoid some ideas that do not consider such limits, and because this, some times give very much wrong results. For instance, if it is consider that the density of a celestial body grows with its mass, the matter of the Sun ( = 1.4) would be denser than that of the Earth ( = 5.5). In our fore theme was given a model in which it is required high temperature to produce the binary systems of the different shells. In that model the temperature at which is formed a binary system is defined by the kinetic energy of the negative particle (the electron). The electron moves from one vertex to the adjacent one (time of vertex) without the propeller particle into it, that in some cases acts as calorific particles.

This propeller particles only remain into the electron during the time is produced the deflection (time of deflection); after this such particles are emitted toward the positive particle or proton. In this proton the propeller particles remain into it during the time it moves from a vertex to the adjacent one (time of vertex). The fore explanation is very much important, because, as was explained in our fore theme, the calorific energy (and any other one....) of an atomic particle is given not only by its kinetic energy, but by the calorific corpuscles the particle has into it. As it is convenient that the reader have a clear idea of this, will be obtained the calorific energies of both particles, in a binary system corresponding to the first shell.

mp / me = 1.6725 x 10--27 / 9.1091 x 10--31 = 1,836.
Velocity of the positive particle of a binary system corresponding to the first shell:
v+1 = 4 v1 / 1,836 = 4 x 2,160,000 / 1,836 = 4,706 m / Sec.
Kinetic energy of the orbital electron (negative particle):
E = Et = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10--31 (2,160,000)2 = 2.125 x 10--18 joule = calorific energy of the electron.
Calorific energy of the positive particle:
E+ = 0.5 x 1.6725 x 10--27 (4,706)2 = 7.4467 x 10--21 joule
Et = energy that has the positive particle due to the calorific corpuscles it has into it....

In our Sun almost all atoms are hydrogen ones, maybe there are many binary systems corresponding to the interior shells, with out heavier atoms. Here will not be defined this, neither other complex problems. For to obtain the star with: g = 672.268 m / Sec2, it will be consider that it has all its other characteristics similar to that of our Sun , and this because we believe there are not enough perturbing differences. With the fore criteria and using the Newton’s law will be obtained the required characteristics of the star without binary systems corresponding to the seven shell.

672.268 / 270 = 2.49
Its radius is: r = 2.49 rs = 2.49 x 7 x 108 = 1.7429 x 109 m.
Its mass: M = 2.493 Ms = 15.44 x 1.985 x 1030 = 3.0645 x 1031 Kgs.
g = G M / r2 = 6.67 x 10--11 x 3.0645 x 1031 / (1.7429 x 109)2 = 672.9 m / Sec.

The idea of not giving limit to some processes or to some phenomena have consider the existence of the neutron stars. These stars could be obtained if it is not take in account a limit to the action of gravity. In the fore theme was define the maximum temperature could exist, and was consider that with this temperature could be formed a binary system corresponding to the first orbit or shell; in other words, at this temperature could not exist binary systems corresponding to bigger orbits than the first one, and because this, we suppose that if this maximum temperature “increments” its rhythm of action, neither could have binary systems corresponding to the first shell. If with gravity force was eliminate the possibility to obtain binary systems of the seven orbit, as was seen in the fore numerical example, it is possible to eliminate the binary systems corresponding to the first shell. With this we have two ways to obtain the same thing and find a relation between temperature and gravity, and many other things.

It is well known that in the interior of our Sun there are zones in which can not exist binary systems corresponding to the exterior shells (7, 6, ...). In the examples will be made here will be consider that all the atoms of the stars deform in a uniform way, it does not matter they are exterior or interior ones; this will be made because in this way are simplified the solutions without having evident errors. In order to simplify our problem, will be consider that the Sun is formed practically of binary systems.... that is near 100% hydrogen atoms, some of them affected by great compressions.
Ws = 1.985 x 1030 Kgs. = weight of Sun.
Wh = 1.6725 x 10--27 Kgs. = weight of a proton.
N = Ws / Wh = 1.985 x 1030 / 1.67252 x 10--27 = 1.18683 x 1057 = quantity of H atoms there are in .the Sun (in the supposition all atoms are of H).
2rh = dh = 2 x 1.1376 x 10--10 = 2.2752 x 10--10 m = diameter of an atom.

If it is suppose that the atoms are distributed in an isometric way, we have that the volume that occupy an atom is (a cube):
Vh = (2.2752 x 10--10)3 = 1.18 x 10--29 m3
2 rs = ds = 1.4 x 109 m = diameter of the Sun.
Volume that occupy the Sun: Vs = (1.4 x 109)3  / 6 = 1.4368 x 1027 m3
Volume that occupy Vn atoms:
V n = N Vh = 1.18683 x 1057 x 1.18 x 10--29 = 1.4 x 1028 m3
Vn / Vs = 1.4 x 1028 / 1.4368 x 1027 = 9.744 = times that reduces its volume the Sun due to its gravity.
For a star to reduce the volume of its atoms from the seven shell to the first shell, there will be a reduction of volume of: 73 = 343 times. For the Sun to reduces 9.7 times, some atoms will have a diameter equal to that of the 3 shell; 33 = 27; 343 / 27 = 12.7 > 9.744.

With a process of try and error, and parting from the data of the Sun, will find a star without any binary system that is, here is seen the problem from a mathematical point of view, with polygonal orbits, because the density of the caps of the star grows from the surface to its center...:
M1’ = 73 x 1.985 x 1030 = 6.81 x 1032 Kgs.
r1’ = 7 x 7 x108 = 4.9 x 109 m.
g1’ = G M1 / r12 = 6.67 x 10--11 x 6.81 x 1032 / (4.9 x 109)2 = 1,891.82 m / Sec2
g1 > 2,160,000 x 4 / 1836 = 4706
Second try:
4706 / 1,891.82 = 2.49
M1 = 2.493 x 6.81 x 1032 = 1.05 x 1034 Kgs.
r1 = 2.49 x 4.9 x 109 = 1.22 x 1010 m
g1 = 6.67 x 10--11 x 1.05 x 1034 / (1.22 x 1010)2 = 4,705.4 m / Sec2.

In the theme: Liberation Velocity is given the escape velocity: ve = (2 g r)0.5 , for any celestial body. In order the star works as a black hole: ve > c = 3 x 108 m / Sec.
The fore star with mass M1 has a escape velocity: ve1 = (2 g1 r1)0.5 = (2 x 4,705.4 x 1.22 x 1010)0.5 = 10,715,025 m / Sec. c / ve1 = 300,000,000 / 10,715,025 = 28.
With our model of atom of the seven shell, we have the liberty to conceive many models of seven nushells that harmonize in a geometrical way with that of the seven shells, as will be seen forward. The first one model conceived was that in which there is a value of the shell with respect to the nushell equal to: 1,836 / 4 = 459. In this model only was take in account geometrical values. But for a more definitive model will be necessary to take in account the time of action of all the elements that intervene here; and also there ought to be a complete harmony between the action of the atoms and the action of the celestial bodies.
In the fore mentioned star was consider that in each space equal to the volume of the first shell there is a proton (can be two....). In our theory of the polygonal orbits, it is consider that all the sides of all the orbits have practically the same length (L).

r7 = radius of an atom = 1.1376 x 10--10 m
L = 2  r7 / 28 = 2  x 1.1376 x 10--10 / 28 = 2.55 x 10--11 m = length of a side of the 7 orbit. The sides of all orbits are equal.
Length of a side of the seven nushell = 4 x 2.55 x 10—11 / 1,836 = 5.56 x 10—14 m .

In the fore length (L) moves an orbital electron corresponding to a binary system. The orbital electron or negative particle of a binary system, moves around a shell; the proton or positive particle moves around a nushell (see theme: Hydrogenized Model of Atom). A binary system corresponding to the first shell has a radius of the magnitude:
r1 = r7 / 7 = 1.1376 x 10--10 / 7 = 1.625 x 10--11 m.

The radius of the first nushell has a magnitude:
r1’ = 4 r1 / 1,836 = 4 x 1.625 x 10--11 / 1,836 = 3.54 x 10--14 m.
In a coarse way in each side of a nushell or nuorbit, corresponding to a binary system of the first shell, there is space for 3 protons. Also in a coarse way, in the volume of a nushell (first orbit) there is space for the following number (n) of protons: n = 33 = 27 protons (27 binary systems corresponding to the first shell)  28.....

With the fore geometrical consideration it is possible to have a star of the same diameter:
d1 = 2 r1 = 2 x 1.22 x 1010 m. = do, as the fore one obtained, but with a mass equal to: Mo = n1 M1.
Omitting some physical variations, here will be respected all the geometrical considerations mentioned before; in this way the star with mass Mo (see forward) could not be consider a neutron star, in which all the neutrons are in material contact one with each other.

Without changing the dimension: r1 = ro’ = 1.22 x 1010 m ; and without affecting the geometrical conditions mentioned here, can be incremented the mass of a star:

Mo’ = 28 M1 = 28 x 1.05 x 1034 = 2.94 x 1035 Kgs.
go’ = 6.67 x 10--11 x 2.94 x 1035 / (1.22 x 1010)2 = 131,751 m / Sec2.
veo’ = (2 x 131,751 x 1.22 x 1010)0.5 = 56,698,512 m / Sec.
300,000,000 / 56,698,512 = 5.29

Second try
Mo = 5.293 x 2.94 x 1035 = 4.355 x 1037 Kgs.
ro = 5.29 x 1.22 x 1010 = 6.455 x 1010 m.
go = 6.67 x 10--11 x 4.355 x 1037 / (6.455 x 1010)2 = 697,142 m / Sec2.
veo = (2 x 697,142 x 6.455 x 1010)0.5 = 3 x 108 m / Sec = c = liberation velocity.

In the fore problems the volume of the stars grew, when was reduce the volume of their atoms; this was correct till the deformation reached to the first shell of the atoms. In order to simplify the problems, in all cases was consider that all the atoms of the stars have the same deformation from the core of them to their surfaces. In accordance with the deformation of the atoms could be determined their temperature. When the temperature grows. the radius of each star grows.

If it is consider that with the growing of the mass of a star, never there is a diminish of its volume, so the fore explanations are satisfactory, nevertheless, if the volume of the star could diminishes, because into the first shell of its atoms there is space for many protons, that can be in a material contact, one from each other, this star would have the same density than one neutron’s star,
The volume that occupies an atom is: Va = (2.2752 x 10--10)3 / 6 = 1.1778 x 10--29 m3
Volume of the first shell: V1 = Va / 73 = 1.1778 x 10--29 / 343 = 3.4338 x 10--32 m3
Diameter of a proton: dp = 2 rp = 2 x 1.7143 x 10--14 = 3.4286 x 10--14 m

Considering the volume occupied by a proton (a cube):
Vp = dp3 = (3.4286 x 10--14)3 = 4.03 x 10--41 m3.
If it is consider that the protons do not get deformed when they occupy all the volume of the first shell, although are in material contact one with each other, are required the following quantity of them:
N1 = V1 / Vp = 3.4338 x 10--32 / 4.03 x 10--41 = 8.52 x 108



Taking in account all the fore information, it can be obtained a neutron star, in which obviously the escape velocity ve ought to be higher than: ve = 3.0 x 108 m / Sec. If the star with mass Mo could be compressed to a volume in which its density would be equal to that of a neutron’s star, i From an astronomy book were take the following values: the Betelgence and the Antares stars, by far are more voluminous than the Sun. Exist the idea that a huge celestial body has more capacity to attract other bodies; but if it is take in account that in a big celestial body its escape velocity does not permit, neither the light radiation to escape; this make us to think that also the gravity fluid could not escape. Also we do notwhich is the return distance of the gravity in a huge celestial body.
Monterrey, México, August 15, 2001; January / 2007 Manuel de Hoyos Robles.




































MICROCORPUSCLES OF GRAVITY (corrected theme)

In our investigation work, the smaller particles have been study are the corpuscles as those of light and the calorific ones. Nevertheless are other particles very much smaller than those mentioned, and those are the gravity microcorpuscles. From them there is few information, but as have been say in other themes, all the particles and bodies of the Universe, are formed from the smallest and most elementary particles ones, and as far as we know, this particles ought to be those that produce the gravity force. These particles are so small and move at light velocity, in such way that all the particles and bodies of the Universe, known by us are transparent to such microparticles.

For all us it is not difficult to understand that if light and gravity are formed by material particles, and these particles move at light velocity, they were emitted at the fore velocity by the atoms of any body. Who read this, immediately get some doubts; for instance. Why the corpuscles of light and the microcorpuscles of gravity are emitted at the light velocity and not at any other one? The fore question will not be answered immediately, first will be seen how are structured some atomic particles, as the protons, electrons, etc.

From the smallest particles to the biggest bodies of the Universe, it is easy to conceive they are formed from the most small particles could exist in the Universe. Here we get inclined to consider that the smaller particles, all them have the same characteristics. This does not happens in the macroscopic world, in which can be structured different bodies with different elements (more than one hundred of them), Omitting a series of considerations, explanations, even the corpuscles as those of light, as the microcorpuscles as those of gravity are emitted at light velocity, because both have some similar characteristics and conditions. Heavier particles formed by corpuscles as those of light and microcorpuscles as those of gravity: Why do not this other particles are moving in the Universe at light velocity?

For Einstein the light velocity was the maximum could exist in the Universe, he considered it as a limited one and a reference for all the processes of the Universe. But all these are very much feeble arguments for an objective physics, because if a ray of light is emitted from a body that is moving at a velocity v, this ray will be moving at a velocity: c v. Since I conceived the theory of the polygonal orbits, also conceived many things, one of them was that into an atomic particle, as a proton or an electron, there are particles formed by corpuscles, as those of light. For to explain the action and behavior of them I was forced to consider that into any atomic particle working in normal conditions, there is neither a win, nor a lost of energy, and that if into such particles there is a movement of other smaller ones, this could be so, because there is an interchange of energy between the particles, and this interchange is manifested by the kinetic energy of the particles. This could be understand better if it is consider that any particle of the Universe, by itself has an inherent energy equal to that given by its mass moving at light velocity.

For to explain the structure of an atom formed by several orbital electrons, it was consider that each orbital electron corresponds to a binary system, whose the negative particle is the orbital electron, and the positive one is a proton alone, or integrated with one or two neutrons. The positive and the negative particles work together, as if they were a unitary particle, because between them is shared a propeller particle that acts in the negative particle (deflect the orbit of the electron) when it is in a vertex of its orbit; after that the propeller particle is ejected by the orbital electron toward the positive particle, were it works in a similar way with such particle. The propeller particle works into the positive or the negative particles, because it has an energy equivalent to a kinetic one, equal to its mass moving at light velocity. -With the propeller particle mn , for instance, in the negative particle, the fore axial kinetic energy is manifested by the velocity of the orbital electron moving with an energy equal to: 0.5 me vn2 (= 0.5 mn c2); vn = axial velocity of the orbital electron; c = velocity of light;; me = mass of the orbital electron; mn = mass of the propeller particle.
For instance, when the orbital electron is in a vertex of its orbit, the propeller particle and the electron have the interchanged energies given before. . . In this process there is neither a lost nor a win of interchange energy, only an interchange of it. In the macroscopic world, it is observe how the planets move around the Sun by indefinite time without any lost of energy. . .

Of course if it is required to obtain a complete model for to understand how is produced the interchange of the inherent energy, it is required to know how this is produced. In the macroscopic world, when an elastic body shocks with other one, part of the kinetic energy of the first body, that we will call: active body, is transmitted to the second body, that we will call: passive body, this in accordance with the laws of impulse and momentum. The time both bodies shock, we will call: time of elasticity. Into the atomic particles (proton, electron), there are active particles (as corpuscles) that can yield its inherent energy, for instance, in an electron, the action of interchange energy would require a longer time than the elastic time; this time of interchange can be produced in a continuous way, or by a series of pulsation, in accordance with one model.

If the interchange of inherent energy is produced by simple elastic effects, can be used the formula: K2 / K = 4 & / (1 + &)2 = energy yield by the active particle / inherent energy of the same particle; being done this in an elastic pulsation; & = mp / ma; mp = mass of the passive particle; ma = mass of the active particle. Each pulsation is equivalent to the time of elasticity. It is possible to make others models. By now we consider it is not essential to know this mechanism, so here will be omitted; maybe in the future will be require to know if the gravity microcorpuscles can be reflected; what is positive and negative charge, etc. When we have talked of the binary systems, it has been consider that the positive and the negative particles are united by the action of a particle that moves between them at light velocity, as have been explained in other themes. To this particle we have not given a definitive name, some times we have named: charged particle, other propeller particle, etc.; of the two mentioned names we consider by now, more correct to name as propeller particle.

One of the main objectives of this theme, is to determine the mass of a gravity microcorpuscle, and this could be obtained if it is know, at least in part, how is the interaction of the atomic particles. As we use to do, with a numerical example can be better explained the theory. Here will be consider the orbital electron of a binary system corresponding to the seven orbit or shell.

The interaction between the propeller particle and the orbital electron has been explained in other themes, nevertheless, in order to make more accessible the explanations, will be repeated some ideas obtained in other themes. The radius of the seven orbit is: r7 = 1.13763 x 10—10 m. The seven orbit has 28 equal sides of length: L = 2 r7 Sin.(180º / 28) = 2.54748 x 10—11 m. The velocity of the orbital electron is: v7 = 2,160 / 7 = 308.57 Kms./ Sec. When the orbital electron arrives to a vertex of its polygonal orbit, its trajectory is deflected an angle: 7 = 360º / 28. In order to produce such deflection it is required an axial velocity equal to: v7 = 2 v7 Sin.(180º / 28) = 69,098 m / Sec.

The kinetic energy required to deflect the orbital electron an angle 7 is equal to:
E7 = 0.5 me v72 = 0.5 x 9.1091 x 10—31 x 69,0982 = 2.174585 x 10—21 joule.
The fore energy E7 is obtained because (in accordance with our model) the propeller particle yields the inherent energy to the orbital electrons; this energy is equal to:
0.5 mp c2 = 0.5 (3 x 108)2 mp = E┴7
mp = 2.174585 x 10—21 / 4.5 x 1016 = 4.8324 x 10—38 Kg. (mp = m7 )

The fore mass mp is formed by a big quantity of corpuscles, as those of light. A corpuscle has an inherent energy equal to one quantum = h, so:
h = 6.6256 x 10—34 joule = 0.5 mc c2
mc = 6.6256 x 10—34 / 4.5 x 1016 = 1.47236 x 10—50 Kg. = mass of a corpuscle.

So a propeller particle is formed with n corpuscles:
n = mp / mc = 4.8324 x 10—38 / 1.47236 x 10—50 = 3.282 x 1012 corpuscles.
Although we ignore many facts, are able to anticipate some results by logic deductions. For instance, for an active particle to yields its inherent energy to other passive particle or body, it is required that both particles do not have any movement, or both have similar movements. In other words, ought to have a satisfactory contact between them in a polygonal orbit. If the orbital electron moves with a velocity v7, the propeller particle ought to move parallel at v7, also. Other condition for the interchange of inherent energy, before is produced the interaction between both particles; is the time in which it is produced; if the active particle is one corpuscle, it is required one time t; if the active particle is formed by n corpuscles, by this reason its energy grows n times in the same instant; the velocity of interaction (time of vertex) grows in a proportion of n times and the kinetic energy grows in a proportion of n2; so the total energy grows in a proportion of n3..
In order the propeller particle moves at the same velocity v7 of the orbital electron, it is required that the mentioned particle be affected by the following energy
:0.5 mp v72 = 0.5 x 4.8324 x 10—38 x 69,0982 = 1.15362 x 10—28 joule.

For the propeller particle to get the fore energy, it is required that into the corpuscles there be a quantity of active gravity microcorpuscles, forming a kind of propeller particle that we will call: nugravity. In this example the nugravity of the propeller particle, is formed by n = 3.282 x 1012 gravity microcorpuscles. If we denominate by mg the mass of a microcorpuscle of gravity, then:
0.5 n mg c2 = 0.5 mp v72 = 0.5 x 3.282 x 1012 (3 x 108)2 mg = 1.15362 x 10—28 joule
mg = 1.15362 x 10—28 / (4.5 x 1016 x 3.282 x 1012) = 7.811 x 10—58 Kg. = mass of a microcorpuscle of gravity.

The mass of the nugravity of the propeller particle:
n mg = 3.282 x 1012 x 7.811 x 10—58 = 2.56357 x 10—45 Kg.

It is suppose that each corpuscle of light, when is emitted has a given quantity of microcorpuscles that with their inherent energy makes each corpuscle and its microcorpuscles to have equal movements in order they continue united.. We consider that one active microcorpuscle of gravity has each corpuscle, many times acts an interchange of inherent energy during the return distance time. Knowing the mass of a gravity microcorpuscle, have a datum for determine the time of the mentioned particle to yield its inherent energy to the corpuscle that contain it. This will be done in an indirect way, that is, during the return distance effects.

We are interested in which time (2 t>) is produced the deflection of the trajectory of the orbital electron in a vertex of the seven orbit. With the knowledge we have till here, will obtain this value. With the solution of other problem of theme: Velocity of Sound (II) will confirm this. Our first idea was consider the movement of the propeller particle mn = m7, doing this along the diameter of the electron (2 ), similar to the movement of a corpuscle along the return distance: 2 Lr. In both cases the particle start with a proportional velocity (v7 and c / 2…); when each reaches the point of return, the fore velocities are reduced to zero, and when they arrive to the starting point, they recuperate their original velocity. In accordance with this we have:, for the electron: re = 1.4 x 10—15 m = radius of the electron; then: 2 T> = 4 re / vn = 4 x 1.4 x 10—15 /( 69100 x 0.5) Sec = 4.05 x 10—20  4.47 x 10—20 / 1.1. = half time of return distance into the diameter of the electron (with out considering the time of interchange of inherent energy. . . L1 = aberralogic effect.. . .

Here we have that 2 t> is proportional to 2 tr; but we have not take in account that in the trajectory equal to: 4 re the particle m7 delay several times of interchange of inherent energy, between the orbital electron and the propeller particle. This time is very much big compared with 2 .t>, but practically null compared with 2 tr.

In the theme: Polygonal, Virtual and Coulomb´s Orbits, was obtained the constant value N nx2; in which N = quantity of active corpuscles that are in a vertex of (n ) orbit; nx = number of orbit, that value is proportional to the radius of the orbit, and to other values will be seen forward.. It is possible to find other constant with N, considering the volume in which it acts; and also the time tx, required for a corpuscle (of light) to move over the diameter of the mentioned spheres; first into the diameter of the ejecter electron, and after in the outer space diameter in which is produced the return distance effect. In our investigation with the polygonal orbits we are familiarized with some characteristic of them, so we supposed there are other constant values using the quantity of corpuscles N; and for to find this constant will consider the variation of (x) will be inverse proportional to the volume in which it acts.. The volume will be the sphere obtained with a radius equal to the return distance. . . The half return distance: rr = 0.5 c Tr. In a vertex of the seven orbit of the electron: N = mn7 = 3.282 x 1012 corpuscles. The volume of a sphere with radius of an electron: re = 1.4 x 10—15 m, the value of: N1 = 3.282 x 1012 corpuscles

We consider that an orbital electron of the seven shell has a propeller fluid of: m7 = 3.282 x 1012 corpuscles; that are proportional to the volumen of the electron, or to itas radius: r7. Here will make a relation between the movement of the propeller fluid along the diameter of the electron, and the movemente of the ejected fluid (light radiation) along the the eturn distance Lr.

It was say berore that that the variation of time; and also of distance, is proportional to the distance L3. For these will consider the minimun effect of the fore action;, that produce in a time of eflectio: t> ; that can be produced when the propeller fluid moves from one side to the opposite one ( 2 d at c/2 velocity = 4 r at c velocity) in a time t>. This could be consider is produced by one corpuscle: t> x 12. The maximun would be: t> (3,2682 x 1012)3 = tr = 1.58 x 1018 Secs. = return time.

tr = t> nx3 = t> (3.282 x 1012)3 = 1.58 x 1018
t> = 1.58 x 1018 / (3.282 x 1012)3 = 4.47 x 10—20 Sec. = timee of vertex

Here was made a relation between an astronomic return distance and the movement of the propeller particle mn along the diameter of the electron The time of vertex is:
tlv7 = dv7 / v7 = 2.55 x 10—11 / 308,570 = 8.27 x 10—17 Sec.;
tv7 / t> = 8.27 x 10—17 / 4.47 x 10—20  m+ / me . . .
For the deflection of the orbital electron there is one microcorpuscle acting over one corpuscle.

Monterrey, Néxico, August 30, 2001; January / 2007 Manuel de Hoyos Robles
.
. .







.. 21 cm. RADIATION OF INTERSTELLAR HYDROGEN (checked)..

In 1949 was discovered the 21 cm. radiation produced in clouds of interstellar hydrogen. I doubt that with modern physics could be given a satisfactory explanation of these phenomenon. In the year 2000 I approached this problem, because I had some ideas how could be produced, and I made a theme with the same name than this one (April 18 / 2000). Now I decided to eliminate that theme, because is more complex than illustrative, in opposition to this one. In the theme: The Gravity Force, was obtained the liberation velocity for a body to escape from the attraction of gravity by a celestial body: vL = (2 g r)0.5 . . . . (A).
Here: r is the radius of the planet and g the acceleration produced by it. This same formula (A) can be applied to atomic particles, for instance, to an electron and a particle emitted by it.

In the case of a hydrogen atom that is in a interstellar cloud, it is supposed that can absorb some corpuscles from the other atoms. In this condition its propeller particle m7 = mp gets over saturated; the excess of matter will be ejected by the atom, and here we need to know how much is this excess, and other data. We know that all the atoms can get their propeller particles with more mass than that they have at normal temperature (21ºC), if they are warmed. The excess of heat is emitted in form of caloric fluid. In the atomic particles there are gravity microcorpuscles. In other theme have been say that the orbital electrons are not affected in a direct way by gravity. In some way, here will prove this again, because the propeller particles that move between the positive particles and the orbital electrons have a quantity of gravity microcorpuscles, and if their masses are incremented, the quantity of microcorpuscles will be incremented. Omitting a series of considerations, that could be understand with the numerical example, here will be consider that the interaction between the oversaturated propeller particle and the radiation of: L = 21 cm Half of the energy of rejection will be employed for produce the  = 21 cm. radiation, vL = 2 (gL re)0.5. Here: re = radius of the electron = 1.4 x 10—15 m; v7 = g7 = 69,100 m / Sec.; m7 = 4.8324 x 10—38 Kgs. vL = 2 (69,100 x 1.4 x 10—15)0.5 = 1.967 x 10—5 m / Sec.;

A radiation with a corpuscular separation equal to: 1 = 1 m has an energy equal to: h (c). Here (c) has no physical dimension, only a numerical one, equal to 3 x 108. The energy that has the propeller particle of the binary system corresponding to the seven orbital electron is equal to: 0.5 m7 c2; this by one side; by other side we have that the terms: 0.5 m7c2 and h (c) / vh ; corresponding to the energy of propeller fluids, have similar variation of energy...so we can give the following proportion: 0.5 m7c2 : h (c) x / vh. Because the fore characteristic, it is possible to give to (x) any value we which, with out to affect the fore proportion; if we choose: x = 1 we obtain the following equation:
0.5 m7c2 = h = h (c) / vh; vh = h (c) / 0.5 m7 c2 = 6.6256 x 10—34 / 0.5 x 4.8324 x 10—38 x 3 x 108 = 9.14 x 10—5 m / Sec.
But if we know that the liberation velocity is equal to: vL Also there is a lineal proportion between vh and vL; so, we have: vh : 1 m :: vL: L
L = vL / vh = 1.967 x 10—5 / 9.14 x 10—5 = 0.215 m = 21.5 cm.
Impulse of the liberation radiation: mL = mc (c) / (L) = 1.47236 x 10—50 x 3 x 108 / 0.215 = 2.054 x 10—41 Kgs. mc = mass of a corpuscle.- - - - -
Monterrey, México, March 25, 2002; Manuel de Hoyos Robles

.













VELOCITY OF SOUND (I) (corrected theme) ---- pendiente

For to study the sound conductor we will imagine an isometric distribution of atoms, and imagine the volume of the sample is going to be study (could be a cube of nm3 atoms) is divided by transversal planes separated one from each other a distance equal to the diameter of an atom (2r), so that between two adjacent planes there is a slice of conductor in such way that if the sound is produced in one slice in a given instant, in the next instant the next slice is affected by such sound, and so on. In accordance with the fore explanation will be made our model of sound conductor. Can be considered that only a small part of the atoms of the cross section work as there will be specified, and that the other atoms do not interfere in the production of the sound effect.

nm = length of a multimolecule = 2,497,996 atoms = L
A = nm2 = area of a plane (multiplane)
w = density of the material of the conductor (gr./ cm3)
M = mass of the conductor = A L w = (gr)
m = mass of a slice of conductor = 2r A w
V = volume of sound conductor = L A (cm3 )
dV = volume of a slice of conductor = 2r A
f = fatigue produced in a transversal section of the conductor due to the vibration of sound (gr./ cm2) *
E = modulus of elasticity (Kgs./ cm2)
g = acceleration produced by the gravity (cm./ Sec2 )
vs = velocity of sound in a medium whose gravity has a value of: g = 981 cm./ Sec2 (.... ?....

This is only a proportion of a fatigue that is proportional to the intensity of the sound; for a given intensity the value (f) could be equal to the real one.

A f g = force (newton) produced by sound in a plane of the sample in a medium with a gravity that produces an acceleration equal to (g).

Due to vibration of sound each slice of conductor gets a kinetic energy: 0.5 m vs2 (gr cm2 / Sec2 )
When the actions get regulated in a time of multimolecule, we have a fatigue f (gr./ cm2) acting in a time t2r in each one of the slices of a unitary space of conductor with length: L = 1 multimolecule.
nm = 2,497,996 atoms; this is mathematically equivalent to a fatigue (f) acting in one slice of the mentioned conductor, in the mentioned time.
m vs2 = f nm g dV = E g dV (fundamental deduction).
As the mass of the conductor is: M = m nm , then, multiplying the fore equation by: nm
nm m vs2 = M vs2 = E g nm dV = E g V ; here: nm dV = V; f nm = E;

The equation that gives the velocity of sound is:
vs = (E g V / M)0.5 = (E g / w)0.5 . . . . (A)
Density of material: w = M / V

In order to have a better idea how works our model in accordance with the polygonal orbits will be made a numerical example with iron atoms.

Some times it is necessary to deal with some unsolved problems for to be able to structure a new model that works in accordance with our requirements. Have been commented that each element has its own modulus of elasticity different to the modulus of the other ones elements; till here has not been seen why are produced such differences and in this problem will not be done this, because it would get outside the present theme; here will be limited to consider such modulus of elasticity in accordance with the experimental data, without pretend to make any technical or scientific analysis. In my investigation work I have had some negative experiences trying to explain something before I have study some other correlated problems, in such way that have appeared some contradictions and wrong concepts in some of the theories, because the fore reason, so, I prefer to omit some ideas I have in the present time, and this is because I am preparing this work for the internet.

In a sample of a material, the atoms of the sample are in contact one from each other, in their 7 shell zone, in order the modulus of elasticity E works in the atoms of the sample it is required to compress it applying some forces; because this the shell of their seven orbits will try to penetrate in the other one, because this there will be an opposition between the adjacent atoms, and this is due to the modulus of elasticity. In Fig.(1), with a, b, c, d is represented a piece of the trajectory of the orbital electron of an atom that coincide with an adjacent one, whose trajectory of its corresponding orbital electron is: e, b, c, f. If it is applied a compression force to the sample, the trajectory of the orbital electron of the first atom will change in accordance with the pointed line: a’, b’, c’, d’, in this way the side bc of the first atom penetrate in the shell of the second atom, in accordance with the side b´c´, because this, the modulus of elasticity of the sample gets working opposing such penetration as is well known from experimental data, the fore opposition of the modulus of elasticity is not only produced by the action of mechanical forces of compression, but also by tension, and by vibrations, change of temperature, etc. The tension resistance could be explained considering the link there is between the atoms of each multimolecule, by the orbital electrons.

In our problem of sound, when this begin to work, the atoms of the sample get some kinetic energy in such way that the velocity of the orbital electrons is incremented, of them our immediate interest are those of the seven orbit. It is supposed that the sample is at 0o K when the orbits of two adjacent atoms are as indicated in the two pieces of orbits by the continuous line a, b, c, d and e, b, c, f. In this condition, the orbits of the two orbital electrons of the two adjacent atoms move freely at their fundamental velocities. Next, because it is produced a sound in the sample, the orbit of the first atom moves from b to b’, then from c to c’ and from d to d’ etc. In this way the first atom will transmit its sound effect to the second one; but this transmission is not produced by one step, or one time of orbit, but by several ones; this is because the transmission is not complete while the orbital electron of the second atom does not get an equal increment than that has the orbital electron of the first atom. For the orbital electron to advance from one side to the opposite one of its orbit, it moves at an average velocity equal to: 308,570 /  = 98,221 m / Sec. For an iron sample the velocity of sound advance a diameter of atom after the following steps (orbits): nFe = v / vFe = 98,221 / 5,080 = 19 .3 orbits. For water: nw = v / vw = 98,221 / 1,450 = 68 orbits.. With the interchange effect can be obtained a very much satisfactory model of sound conductor, because when the atoms vibrate produce tension and compression.

In the structure of our model of sound we see some problems that in some way the practical observations have helped us in a great deal to solve them, and because this, maybe this structuration will not be made in the most logical way, that is, deducing the data with which we work, and with them make all the steps of our structure, some times we will depart from semistructured data. Let aboard our problems; here will be considered all the problems limited exclusively to the effect of sound, avoiding to mix them with others due to other observations, as heat, electricity, magnetism, etc., if the orbital electrons have some change in their velocities, here will be attributed exclusively to an effect of sound; if the atoms of the sample, also have some variation in their movements, also will be attributed exclusively to an effect of sound, and because this will be able to relate both kind of movements one with each other.

Sound, as heat is a kind of energy could be consider, in some way as a particular manifestation of heat, in this way the atoms get some movements and these movements are produced by the interior particles of them, that is, the orbital electrons, or viceversa, it does not matter how it is. One important fact is that if all the orbital electrons of the atoms, change their movements due to sound, only with considering the effect produced by the orbital electrons of the seven shell we will be able to determine the exterior movements of the atoms of the sample, and because this, the structure of our model will simplify in a great deal. The orbital electrons of the seven shell are those that are in contact with their adjacent atoms, and because this, they are responsible of the exterior movements of the atoms of the sample; in these electrons are manifested in a direct way some properties of the atoms, as their modulus of elasticity, in which is based our model; about this modulus of elasticity, that gives resistance of compression and tension to the atoms, as was say, here will omit give details have not been study yet; here we will be limited to apply its properties to the model. In the integration of our models, by preference will be considered binary system formed with a positive particle of one proton. When the sample is not affected by sound, would be considered the orbital electrons (7 shell) have a velocity = ve7. When the sound acts, this velocity is incremented in a quantity equal to:  ve7 It was seen before, that for sound advance the diameter of an atom, the seven orbit electron of the iron atom makes nFe = 19.3 orbits:
nFe = v7 / vs = 308,570 /3.1416 x 5080 = 19.3


In all these have been consider that all the atoms of the sample are affected by sound in a given time(“mathematical” time). In the He atoms at lambda temperature, only 9180.5 (see theme; Superfluid Helium 3) orbital electrons from 2,497,996 atoms in a cross section of the sample are affected, in this way the modulus of elasticity E could not be apply in the same way as in the fore example, because the fatigue produced in one atom will be distributed in:
2,497,996 / 9180.5 atoms.

For He4: ma = 4 x 1.6725 x 10- 27 = 6.69 x 10—27 Kg.

In a weekly popular science magazine: “Ciencia Ilustrada”, edited in Sao Pablo, Brazil some years ago I read an article about the Russian investigator Lev Davidovish Landau, with respect to an investigation work with liquid helium at very low temperatures, in 1941, he foresaw the existence of a kind of vibrator propagation in the liquid helium, different to the ordinary sound, this because the superfluity of helium. He named it sound second and show that near absolute zero those waves would have a velocity of: cs / 30.5 , were: cs = velocity of ordinary sound. In 1944 the sound second was confirmed in the practice. About ten years later he studied a new type of wave in helium 3 that he named: sound zero = 30.5 cs all these results were obtained by very much complex deductions. In our theme: Superfluid Helium 3 was say that at the same time it is tried to obtain 0o K also it is tried to produce an ionization effect; although here will not be solved this problem, it is logic to consider that the effects of sound zero and sound second, are related with this.

With our model of sound conductor the fore results can be obtained in a simple way and at the same time are confirmed very important facts of mechanophysics, as the theories of the polygonal orbits; of the multimolecules; of the binary systems; of the caloric fluids that can vary from zero to light velocity; etc. As we have not access to data practically exclusive of specialized investigators, as some sound velocities at different temperatures, pressure, modulus of elasticity, etc., the explanations will be given without these data; maybe in the future will be able to deduce them theoretically.

Water density: ww = 1 gr./ cm3
Helium 3 “ : w3 = 1 x 3 / 18 = 0.1667 gr./ cm3
Helium 4 “ w4 = 1 x 4 / 18 = 0.222 “

If we confine a liquid into a closed recipient and reduce in a mechanical way its volume, the liquid substance will oppose to this. Knowing the energy required to reduce a given volume of the liquid, can be determined its modulus of elasticity. The fore explanations are well known facts for any physicist, but seen from the point of view of mechanophysics they have a special importance as will be seen in the determination of sound zero.
Because the helium is at lambda temperature: T = 2o.2 K; applying Boltzmann’s formula, can be obtained the increment of energy of the orbital electron due to the lambda temperature: K2 = K He = 1.5 k T = 1.5 x 1.38 x 10-- 23 x 2o.2 = 4.554 x 10-- 23 joule / atom.

In classic physics it is considered that sound is propagated by waves, in accordance with this is a frequency and a wave length. For an equal wave length one system of waves has more amplitude while more energy has. Considering a similar medium in which sound propagates, the velocity of sound in this medium depends of the properties of such medium. The length [] and the frequency [] of a wave of sound vary with the intensity of it, but as:  = constant, also the velocity of sound is constant in such medium, it does not matter that are higher or lower tones of sound. At very low temperatures, as the lambda, it can not be consider that He is affected by sound in a similar way that if He is at higher temperature, because at lambda temperature the exterior energy: K = 4.554 x 10-- 23 joule / atom, can not correspond to an interior energy characteristic of an ordinary sound; from this point of view can not be considered that He at 2o.2 K is a similar medium than He at 14o.85 K, or higher. At very low temperatures the fatigue (f) is not constant but grows in the same proportion than the temperature.

In the theme: Superfluid Helium 3, was considered that from 2,497,996 multimolecules, only 9180.5  30 multimolecules were working for produce sound second from the helium in a liquid state (lambda temperature = 2o2 K). If it is applied formula (A), can not be considered that the acting multimolecules (30), can produce the normal fatigue (f) in the transversal section (multiplane) of the sample of the sound conductor, so that:
 f2 = n f2 < E (real value); n = 2,497,996 atoms

Exterior energy for sound 2:
K2 = 0.5 x 4 x 1.6725 x 10-- 27. vs22.. = 3.345 x 10-- 27 vs22 = 4.554 x 10—23 . joule
vs22 = 4.554 x 10-- 23 / 3.345 x 10-- 27 = 13,614
vs2 = 116.7 m / Sec.; vs0. = 3 vs2. = 350.1 m / Sec.

Exterior energy for He3: KHe3 = 0.5 x 3 x 1.6725 x 10-- 27 vs 02. = 2.50875 x 10-- 27. vs 02. =
2.50875 x 10-- 27. x 350.12 = 3.075 x 10-- 22. joule
KHe3 / K2 = 3.075 x 10-- 22. / 4.554 x 10—23 = 6.75;
To. = 6.75 T2 = 6.75 x 2o..2 = 14o.85

For sound zero, and considering similar conditions (liquid state) for the sound sample, but also considering:
mo = 3 m2 / 4 = 0.75 m2 ; so: fo = 0.75 x 32 f2 = 6.75 f2 ; also:
 fo = n f o < E ; vs0 = 3 vs2 = 3 x 116.7 = 350.1 m / Sec.;.
vs = 202 m / Sec. = 116.7 x 30.5

In the case of electricity in a multimolecule, each time that the orbit of a current’s electron has spin over all the surface of the shell, such electron jumps from an atom to the adjacent one, this is effectuated in what have been called a time of jump:
tj = 1.12 x 10-- 11 Sec. (see theme: Model of Electric Current), the fore means that for the current’s electron to move along a multimolecule it is required a time of multimolecule.
tm = n tj = 2,497,996 x 1.12 x 10—11 = 2.798 x 10—5 Sec.
t2 = time of orbit = 2.3084 x 10-- 15 Sec.

The classical model of sound’s conductor was obtained from observation experiments, our model will be justified by some fundamentalist facts and will be proved with its coincidence with the classical model. For the reader to see the problem in a more objective way (see theme: Model of Electric Current) it is going to determine the number of active atoms in a cross section of an electric conductor of 1 cm2 that is equal to the number of multimolecules that are formed in such surface.

n12 = 1.9317 x 1015 atoms / cm2 (= number of multimolecules / cm2 ) = 1 / (2r)2 =
1 / (2.275 x 10—8)2
n = 2,497,996 atoms = number of atoms of a multimolecule.
2 r = 2.275 x 10-- 8 cm = diameter of an atom.

Some explanations that were given in the electric conductors will be used for the sound conductors. It was mentioned before that sound propagates along the atoms of a multimolecule, one atom gives impulse to the adjacent one, this transmits this impulse and also gives another impulse to the next one and so on, the impulses of each atom are accumulating along the multimolecule till the last one that get the velocity of sound and with this impulse effects the plane of the slice that is adjacent to two multimolecules and that we will denominate as multiplane. A multiplane is formed by the following number of atoms: n2 = 2,497,9962 = 6.24 x 1012 atoms.

In a multiplane can act more than one multimolecule at the same time. If the acting ones are few the sound gives lower tones; as the acting ones grow, the sound gets higher tones. Each acting multimolecule tries to deform the conductor in its multiplane in a longitudinal way, in accordance with the elasticity of the conductor, this means that while more multimolecules act, more deformation is produced.

It is well known that the sound frequencies audible are between 20 to 20,000 Hz. This information will orient us in the structure of our model.. As has been say, could not be given a model of a physical phenomenon in a complete satisfactory way if one part of such structure does not satisfy the fore condition; in our model of sound conductor, the failing part is that of the modulus of elasticity of which we ignore how works. The model of sound has a special importance in physics in such way it is more important to give an incomplete model than wait for to have a complete solution of all its parts. While more multimolecules are working in an instant the length () gets smaller..

vs = (E g / w)0.5 ; E = w vs2 / g

With the fore formula could be attained the sum of fatigues of the atoms that are acting in a multiplane. It is considered that the fore action is distributed in its corresponding multiplane for determine the fatigue that produces a multimolecule acting in the multiplane.

Monterrey, México, August 1997 Manuel de Hoyos Robles


























VELOCITY OF SOUND (II) (corrected theme)

GE aboard by first time this theme in August, 1997, and afterward in April, 1998. All these was done because we have not consider the wave theory as something essential, as consider modern physics; that they have applied not only to the sound or heat phenomena, but to the light and the gravity. The second mentioned date I had the opportunity to read an article about Lev Landau. It says that Landau believed that the quantum mechanics was correct in its fundamentals, and because this, he never had interest in analyze them. Although I recognize that his investigation work on physics was very much valuable, I consider the mentioned lack of interest, not so much scientific. In the mentioned article it says that he studied why at very low temperature the helium, at liquid state was super fluid in such way that if it was placed in a recipient, it climbed up by the wall of such recipient. In 1941 he explained the superfluity of helium at low temperatures, considering determine collective movements of particles that he supposed were elemental or almost particles, he named them as: rotons. With this he was able to find a vibration in helium, different to that of sound,, whose velocity was equal to: vs / 30.5. Here: vs = sound velocity. To these vibrations he called: sound second. In 1944 the sound second was discovered in the practice. Almost ten years later, studding He 3, he discovered other type of vibration, he named sound zero, whose velocity was: 30.5 vs.

The theory of helium at very low temperature is considered the most important contribution of Landau in this field. These theories were so complex that many physicists doubt of them. If with them were explained some results that were prove in the practice, we can not consider his theories useless; on the contrary, we consider that his work was very much meritorious, because with deficient theories he was able to discover so important facts. and with this we are able to prove how much deficient is the quantum physics, and all modern physics, as will be proved forward.

The only way to explain the movement of sound in a substance (solid, liquid, or gaseous) is considering that their atoms have a given movement at sound velocity. If it is consider a solid substance, this could not be complete rigid, so any atom of this substance can move at sound velocity in a differential space, and afterward transmits this velocity to an adjacent atom; and this atom to another one, and so on. In this way can consider that the sound moves in a straight line, for instance, along a chain of atoms, and from this to an adjacent one, and so on, along a straight line. As the sound propagates in all directions of the affected sample, we can consider that from the origin of it, the sound propagates in all directions, in a radial way, as we mentioned. Of course at certain distance, it begins to dissipate, because other atoms that are not aligned are affected. Here will be consider the action of sound before it begins to dissipate. It can be represented the energy produced by sound as: 0.5 ma vs2. Here: ma = mass of an atom of the sample; vs = sound velocity. The fore can be consider as an exterior energy.

When an atom transmits its kinetic energy to the adjacent one, it is produced an elastic energy proportional to: 0.5 E g (2 r7)3. Here: E = modulus of elasticity of the sample; g = gravity acceleration in the Earth; (2 r7)3 = volume occupied by an atom (isometric distribution of them). The fore one can be considered an interior energy. In order to present in an objective way and to explain better the problem, we will make a numerical problem, with a sample of iron. Considering a line of atoms, as with a multimolecule, we will make the exterior energy equal to the interior one, so:
0.5 ma vs2 = 0.5 E g (2 r7)3 . . . . . (A)
Here: E = 2.1 x 1010 Kgs./ m2;
Discovering the velocity of sound in iron we have:
vs = [E g (2 r7)3 / ma]0.5
(2 r7)3 = (2 x 1.13763 x 10—10)3 = 1.1778 x 10—29 m3 = effective volume of iron atom = effective volume in which acts the force (fi )
ma = 56 x 1.6725 x 10—27 = 9.366 x 10—26 Kg. = atomic mass of iron x mass of proton
1= ma / (2 r7)3 = 9.366 x 10—26 / 1.1778 x 10—29 = 7952 Kgs./ m3 = density of iron.
vs = (E g / )0.5 = (2.1 x 1010 x 9.81 / 7952)0.5 = 5090 m / Sec.

With the fore data will verify equation (A):
0.5 ma vs2 = 0.5 x 9.366 x 10—26 x 50902 = 1.213276 x 10—18 joule .
0.5 E g (2 r7)3 = 0.5 x 2.1 x 1010 x 9.81 x 1.1778 x 10—29 = 1.2132 x 10—18 joule .

The fore data were obtained considering the action of the sound in iron acting during one second in an average way. In them was not define how many atoms were affected, and how long. Next will be seen this; by determining the forces that produce the energy.

The force (actung one second) that produces the energy: 0.5 ma v s2, is:
Fe = ma vs = 9.366 x 10—26 x 5090 = 4.7673 x 10—22 Kg m / Sec .

The force (acting one second) that produces the energy: 0.5 E g (2r7)3, is:
Fi = E g (2r7)2 = 2.1 x 1010 x 9.81 (2 x 1.13763 x 10—10)2 = 1.06647 x 10--8 Kg. / Sec . (here- was consider the radius of iron equal to: rFe = 1.13763 x 10-10 m)

Although fe and fi are too different, they produce the same energy in one second; and this is because they act in different lapses of time in different quantity of atoms. What we call external effects, are considered to be produced by propeller fluids, emitted by a positive particle of the nucleus of the atom. Being this correct or not, the fact is that this advance is manifested at a rhythm of effective velocity equal to vs = sound velocity. In accordance with formula (A), the exterior energy produces the interior one. This means that both energies are equal. When a solid body is hit by another one (as in the case of a bell), is produced a sound that is propagated in all directions of such body. Being each direction represented by a straight line of atoms, as was say before. That is, in a very much different way that as been considered in any wave propagation theory. In accordance with this, we will have to consider a straight line of atoms in which propagates the sound. In our example of iron, as a solid material; the straight line of atoms, will be as a straight rod. If in the extremes of the rod is applied a force (tension or compression), the same force is manifested in any transversal section of such rod, and not only this, but in a normal section are produced normal forces in accordance with the Poinsson´s ratio. In our case of the straight line of atoms, they will behave rather as a liquid or gaseous substance. If a confined liquid is compressed in one side, the same compression fatigue will be produced in all the molecules of the liquid, in all sides of them.

With respect to the value of the term: 0.5 E g (2r7)3, it will behave as a liquid substance, as will be appreciated better with the numerical example. As in our model of sound velocity, the forces that produce it, are different, as was seen before, this is due, that in a straight line of atoms = n atoms, the same force is manifested in each atom of such line. This in spite of that the force is applied only in one atom, it is transmitted to all them; in similar way it happens in a liquid substance. We say this because in our model of the (n) atoms of the line, in a given instant, only in one atom is acting the sound. The given instant is equal to that in which one electron of an atom is in a material contact with other electron of the adjacent atom. This happens every time of jump: tj = 1.12 x 10—11 Sec., and the contact between both electrons is produced in a time of deflection: t> = 4.47 x 10—20 Sec. (see theme: The Deflection Time). But as the force produced by E in the so called interior effect is manifested in the atomic magnitude, as a liquid substance. A solid body does not distribute the tension or compression fatigues in a uniform way in all directions of its atoms, as does a liquid substance. But this does not matter, because the fatigue produced by sound is distributed in a uniform way in all the atoms of the solid body.

The effect of E is not only manifested in a vertex (the direct contacted one) of the seven shell, but in all them, that is in the 28 vertices. The orbital electron continually is moving. In the seven shell of almost all atoms (except H), there are two orbital electrons, and this means that both are affected by sound at the same time. If here is only consider the action of one acting in half of the system, will give the same final result than two acting in all the system.. Note: the advance in each one of the two of the 7 obits of them. is only in half of them…

The external fatigue (fe) will acts in the extreme atom of a multimolecule, but will affect all the atoms of it, in similar way that a force acting in the extremes of a fixed rod, or column will affect all the atoms of the rod. The external force is acting in one atom; this atom is the extreme one of the rod or chain of (n) atoms, that also are affected, as was say..
Fe tj n = 4.7673 x 10—22 x 1.12 x 10—11 n = 5.3394 x 10—33 n Kg. m
28 Fi t> = 14 x 2 x 1.06647 x 10—8 x 4.47 x 10—20 = 1.3348 x 10—26 Kg. m
n = 28 Fi t> / Fe tj = 1.3348 x 10—26 / 5.3394 x 10—33 = 2.5 x 106 = quantity of atoms that has a multimolecule

As (n) resulted equal to the number of atoms that has a multimolecule, this gives a preponderant value to all mechanophysics. With this we are able to determine the energy required to produce sound in iron. Such energy is produced in a time of multimolecule:
tm = 1.12 x 10—11 x 2.5 x 106 = 2.8 x 10—5 Sec. .
Energy of sound: Ks = tm Ki = 2.8 x 10—5 x 1.2132 x 10—18 = 3.4 x 10—23 joule / Sec.. .
We do not know the details of the problems that had Landau and other physicist in studding the helium at very low temperatures. With respect to the property of helium to climbs up in the recipient, we deduced there is a good cohesion between the helium and the wall of such recipient; being the cohesion stronger than its capacity of evaporation due to its light weight and if it climbs up by the wall of the recipient, it is because the helium is lighter than the air. If the recipient and the helium were in a vacuum space, the helium will not try to climbs. With respect to sound second, we have at lambda temperature: t2 = 2.o2 K.

Applying Boltzmann´s formula:
K2 = 1.5 k t2 = 1.5 x 1.38 x 10—23 x 2.2 = 4.554 x 10—23 joule / atom K2 = 0.5 ma vs2 = 0.5 x 4 x 1.6725 x 10—27 vs22 = 3.345 x 10—27 vs22 vs2 = (4.554 x 10—23 / 3.345 x 10—27)0.5 = 116.7 m / Sec.
vs = 30.5 x 116.7 = 202 m / Sec .

With respect to sound zero, in He 3:
vs0 = 3 x 116,7 = 350 m / Sec.
Ko = (3 / 4) x 4.554 x 10—23 x 32 = 3.074 x 10—22 joule / atom.
to = (3 / 4) 2.2 x 32 = 14o.85 K

Monterrey, México, February 19, 2002 Manuel de Hoyos Robles


















Manuel de Hoyos Robles
Químicos 224-1; Col.Tecnológico
64700, Monterrey, N. L, Monterrey, N. L: México, 19 Sept. del 2005

Cónsul de Suecia en Monterrey
Presente.
tiendo este oficio a The royal Institute of Thechnology- Department of Theoretical Physics.- S – 100- 44, Stockholm, Sweden.; porque necesito que se me conteste dándome una solución a lo que aquí manifiesto, ya que por internet y con mis conocimientos de física no se me ha atendido; lo que necesito que se me haga por las razones que aquí expongo. Le pedí al Sr. Gobernador de Nuevo León que me ayudara, recomendándome para que se me atienda; por lo cual confío en usted y él, para esto.

Tengo buen número de años investigando en la física; en muchas ocasiones de una manera muy intensa; todo esto porque en la física moderna hay muchos puntos que no me satisfacen. Por lo dicho desearía y es muy justo, que se me diera un reconocimiento oficial; para esto desde principios de la década he estado mandando por internet mis trabajos de investigación a algunas de las principales universidades del mundo y no he recibido ninguna contestación, esto me disgusta mucho.

La institución mas representativa del progreso de las ciencias mundialmente es la mencionada anteriormente; cada año otorga el premio Nóbel a los trabajos científicos mas destacados. Por esto yo me estoy dirigiendo a ustedes; pero no se trata de que esté pretendiendo dicho premio; para darme un reconocimiento no es necesario esto. A Einstein no se le se le concedió dicho premio por sus teorías de la relatividad, sino por la ley del efecto fotoeléctrico; y con igual criterio se puede hacer con mi trabajo de investigación; y dejar que se acredite pro si solo, pero dándole la oportunidad de un reconocimiento oficial para esto; para que todas las personas competentes y honestas que vean mi trabajo, al juzgarlo se pongan en mi lugar, sin ninguna predisposición.

En todos los países del mundo hay personas torpes y personas competentes. En los países tercermundistas se estudia una profesión para librarse del hambre y la pobreza; en los países primer mundistas muchos profesionistas han estudiado para poder investigar y poder hacer progresar a la ciencia. No me gustaría que se me discriminara por pertenecer a un país tercermundista y por investigar como un profesional primer mundista. La India que es un país tercermundista ha dado grandes investigadores científicos.

Todas las ciencias han progresado porque la presente es mejor que la pretérita y tendrá que ser inferior a la futura.. De acuerdo con esto aquí voy a decir algunas de las fallas de la física moderna, no como crítica destructiva, sino tratando de corregirla y evitando que se repitan: La física moderna, a semejanza de mi trabajo de investigación, representa mucho esfuerzo intelectual y tiempo de muchos investigadores, y por esto merece todo nuestro respeto. Pero al contrario de mi trabajo, desde un principio dicha física tuvo un reconocimiento oficial; esto le permitió que siempre se aprovechara en beneficio de la ciencia; con lo cual todos los esfuerzos de sus investigadores quedaran compensados. Pero un reconocimiento oficial también significa que una ciencia puede ser aceptada de una manera definitiva si llena los requisitos requeridos; o rechazada en caso contrario; lo que es falso no puede beneficiar a nadie. De una manera muy breve voy a indicar algunas de estas fallas. Toda ciencia debe de partir de algo que corresponda y se relacione directamente con ella y que a la vez sea un valor que se pueda tomar como fijo. Para establecer las teorías de la relatividad se tomó como base inmutable a la velocidad de la luz: c = 3 x 108 m / Sec.. Muchos fenómenos físicos se pueden explicar perfectamente sin que intervenga para nada la velocidad de la luz. En cualquier fenómeno físico, siempre intervienen los átomos, porque toda la materia que existe está formada por ellos. Una parte de ellos produce ciertos efectos de una manera muy precisa como es la acción de la fuerza de la gravedad, y esta parte hemos visto que es el período de las órbitas de los electrones; y esto nos ha permitido obtener muchas características muy útiles de los átomos. Algo que nunca pudo Einstein, ni han podido otros investigadores es obtener una relación entre las fuerzas electromagnéticas y las gravitatorias, esto no ha sido por falta de capacidad intelectual, sino porque han empleado teorías deficientes como las de la física moderna Yo sin emplear la capacidad intelectual de ellos lo he logrado; por lo cual no se puede argumentar que mi trabajo de investigación está muy incompleto; pues en realidad todos lo son; porque es mucho lo que desconocemos, comparado con lo que hay que conocer.

Cuando Zeeman descubrió que ciertas radiaciones de los electrones producen varias rayas espectrales, esto se interpretó como una manifestación de la energía del spin (rotación) del electrón. Yo he comprobado numéricamente que las radiaciones externas de los electrones con cierta intensidad se producen por varias partículas propulsoras emitidas simultáneamente por un fluido propulsor. Antes del experimento de Compton se creía que todas las radiaciones electromagnéticas se producían por ondas; con su experimento se llegó a la conclusión de que si una radiación de alta frecuencia era afectada por un electrón fijo, dicha radiación aumentaba su separación corpuscular (longitud de onda). O sea que estas radiaciones únicamente se pueden producir considerando radiaciones corpusculares (no ondulatorias). Considerar electrones fijos en cualquier sustancia es algo sumamente improbable; así que yo comprobé numéricamente que la interacción era entre la radiación y un electrón orbital. El concepto de que la materia se transforma en energía y viceversa, lo considero muy pobre, se pierde el concepto de cuerpo o partícula y sus masas y que estas pueden producir energía debido a su movimiento, como lo establecieron Galileo y Newton. Cuando se concibió el modelo de átomo con electrones orbitales en forma ondulatoria, por Schródinger, con una gran habilidad intelectual, se esperaba un promisorio porvenir de esto. Por lo que yo he entendido no ha sido así. ni lo será nunca. Como he manifestado, si el átomo tiene que ser la base para un ciencia física firme, también debe de armonizar de una manera objetiva con el concepto de materia, tal como lo establecieron Galileo y Newton. Para ajustar las teorías de la física moderna con las observaciones, se consideró que el factor tiempo no era una invariante universal, y con esto se perdió el concepto de simultaneidad; por lo cual para Galileo , Newton...y yo esto es un gran error. Lo mismo se puede decir del principio de la incertidumbre y de muchos otros.

Aquí se han dado algunas razones teóricas, respaldadas con valores numéricos, considerando las deficiencias de la física moderna. Dichas razones están respaldadas por observaciones prácticas Desde que se estableció el principio de la constancia universal de la luz, dicho principio no fue muy firme. Por ejemplo, si un rayo de luz con velocidad (c) se refleja normalmente en un espejo pasa de velocidad (c) a cero y de cero a velocidad (-c). Un rayo de luz al penetrar a un medio refringente disminuye su velocidad. Los experimentos de Michelson y Morley, probaron además de la no existencia del éter, que la luz tenía ciertas variaciones de velocidad de acuerdo con múltiples condiciones. En 1934, Tcherenkov descubrió que unas radiaciones en las pilas atómicas tenían velocidades mayores que: c = 3 x 108 m / Sec.. En 1977, 1980, los astrónomos observaron que algunos cuásares: 3C-345, 3C-279, 3C-273 se estaban expandiendo a velocidades varias veces mayores que (c). Ante la evidencia de todas estas observaciones, los científicos aferrados a la constancia universal de la velocidad de la luz, consideraban que esta, formada por ondas, estas avanzan normalmente a la velocidad (c), pero diagonalmente a varias veces dicha velocidad; esto último en contradicción de que la máxima velocidad que puede existir es igual a: c = 3 x 108 m / Sec. y también en contradicción de ellos mismos, que la luz se percibe perpendicularmente a las ondas ópticas.

Entre algunas de la universidades a las que les he mandado por internet mis trabajos de investigación, y no me han contestado, están las siguientes: webmaster@fpaxpiuscies; weitrbidungil@wiech; webmaster-ulp@.u-astrasbg.fr; weiterbildungil@zhwin.ch; physic@cdi; contact@especi.fr; ilomero@sssup.it; info@iuvienna.edu; public@suba.sk; rastine@adm.lt; webmaster@epfl.ch; info@fh-offerburg.de; jutta.baezner@lh; info@fh-rosenhelm.de; zoopke@fh-tried.de; webmaster@www.arizona.edu.

Ignoro porque no me han contestado, pero me gustaría que lo hicieran. También me he dado cuenta de otras universidades han tratado como basura mi trabajo. Lo menos que hubiera esperado de ellos es que con toda atención me manifestaran que no se interesaban en mi trabajo y que les daba pena que me molestara mandándoles mis temas. Esta hubiera sido una contestación razonable. Que bueno que en el mundo haya personas con diferentes gustos y vocaciones y que cada quien se especialice y concrete a lo que mas le guste, sin que con esto perjudique a los demás, sino al contrario.. Pero si al contrario, alguien que se interese en las mismas cosas de uno quiera boicotear un trabajo como el mío; tengo todo el derecho a defenderme y reclamar para que se me atienda como es debido.

Pero hay mucho mas que decir de esto. Si se niegan a reconocer mi trabajo, se están negando a que la ciencia progrese; se están negando a que la humanidad se beneficie con mis ideas. ¿Qué estas pueden estar equivocadas? No más que las de la física moderna, y sin embargo la ciencia ha progresado con dicha física, pues hasta con las equivocaciones se aprende; se está negando a que la gente preparada de los países tercermundistas cooperen al progreso de la ciencia; se les está negando la salud a muchos enfermos al no aprovechar las propiedades curativas de la electricidad; de las moléculas; se les está negando la oportunidad a ,los jóvenes para que cooperen al progreso de la ciencia; se le ha negado el valor que tuvo el trabajo de investigación de mi padre; se está formando un espíritu anti-galileico y decadente en pleno siglo XXI, debido al egoísmo de los que pueden hacer mucho y no hacen nada bueno, al contrario están obstruyendo el progreso de una manera semejante a como lo haría un delincuente que se apropia de lo que les ha costado mucho trabajo a las personas honradas; no se respeta a todos los que se dedican a la investigación etc. Con poco esfuerzo y buena voluntad de quienes tienen los medios se puede comprobar la utilidad de una idea que puede producir grandes beneficios para todos. Aún quitando todo lo que me afecta directamente a mi, no puedo aceptar tanta arbitrariedad. Para los que piensan que pueden apropiare se de mis ideas, quiero decirles que tengo maneras de comprobar mi prioridad.


Atentamente:

Manuel de Hoyos Robles








Sine Svanberg presidente del Comité Nóbel de Física
p/c. Cónsul de Suecia en Mpnterrey.

Por el periódico me enteré de que el premio Nóbel de física 2005 se adjudicó a los estadounidenses John L. Hall de la universidad de Colorado y Roy J.Glauber, investigador en Harvard y al alemán Theodor W. Haensch de Munich. Dicho premio se adjudicó por la determinación de la frecuencia de la luz con gran precisión. De acuerdo con la información dichos resultados fueron obtenidos por estudios muy profundos de la física cuántica aplicada experimentalmente.

Con respecto a todo esto, quiero manifestar que en enero del 2004 ya había elaborado el tema: How are Formed the Gravity and the Coulombs Fields, en el que de una manera fundamental y con una precisión tan grande como la exactitud conque actúa la gravedad determiné la frecuencia en que se producen las radiaciones electromagnéticas (internas y externas) en los vértices de las órbitas poligonales, que son las mismas en que se producen las radiaciones gravitatorias. Además determine algo mucho mas importante, que en los últimos 30 años de su vida Einstein no pudo hacerlo; o sea la relación que existe entre las fuerzas electromagnéticas y las gravitatorias.. Con esto quiero decir que el premio Nóbel de física del 2004 se debió de haberse adjudicado a mi.; o sea que la primacía fundamental (que es a mas importante) de todo esto me corresponde a mi de una manera incuestionable y completamente accesibles; por los datos tan determinantes que di; la experimental corresponderá a las personas mencionadas..

En todo esto hay varias cosas que se prestan a muy malas interpretaciones. Mis trabajos de investigación los he estado mandando por internet desde el principio de esta década a universidades de mucho prestigio, como Harvard, Colorado, Stockholm, Munich y no he tenido ninguna contestación; la física cuántica siempre ha aceptado una teoría ondulatoria de la luz, y considerado que esta es una constante universal, y con ninguna de estas características es posible llegar a las conclusiones de los mencionados galardonados; otra cosa que resulta muy rara y difícil de aceptar es que en 1963 se publicara algo tan fuera de la física cuántica en aquél entonces y que en todos estos años no resultara contradictoria con la física cuántica. Esto no lo digo tratando de desacreditar a nadie, al contrario, buscando lo mas correcto de todas las cosas. Borge Johansson de a Academia Real Sueca dijo que era “un típico premio a la física”. Sune Svanberg presidente del Comité Nóbel de Física, dijo que se puede calificar a Gauber de padre de la ótica cuántica, cuyas teorías allanaron el camino para los descubrimientos de Hall y haensch.

Quiero que me diga: ¿Por que nunca me contestaron cuando les mandaba mis trabajos de investigación.. Por que cuando les remito el correo electrónico utbi/dningsinfo@kth.se, aparece como recibido por lhulthéb? Hay muchas cosas que aclarar. Para abreviar algo que se tiene que saber a su debido tiempo; quiero saber donde se publicó el trabajo de Glauber en 1963, y si usted o el me pueden mandar una copia de dicho trabajo.

Monterrey, México, Oct 10 del 2005. Atentamente
Manuel de Hoyos Robles.




c.c. Lic. Vicente Fox Quesaca; Presidente de México
c.c. Lic. Natividad Gonzalez Parás, Gobernador de Nuevo Leon
c.c. Don Gonzalo Estrada Cruz, Director Diario A.B.C.

Leia Mais…