#492 AP book of science--- Corrections to many ideas in Feynman's 3 volume set Lectures on Physics

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Recently I was going through Feynman Lectures on Physics, his 3 volume set for information on Activation Energy and the Bohr model of the Atom.

I was struck by not only the huge errors but the smaller errors of his 3 volume set.

His Lectures were written in 1963 and now is 2026 or, 2026-1963 =63 years intervening and time for a wholescale correction.

Big errors like--- the true electron of Atoms is the Muon stuck inside a proton torus and doing the Faraday law-structure with the proton torus. While the 0.5MeV particle is the magnetic monopole. Every textbook in any and all sciences is obsolete if they have not yet admitted to that mistake.

But smaller errors in Feynman such as reading that Feynman uses the word amalgamate instead of the word "unification". Did he ever use the word unification of electricity with magnetism.

I am not going to correct page by page but over chapter by chapter.

I remember a silly statement by Feynman in reading the Double Slit Experiment where he says words to the effect--- there is no explanation possible for the results shown in the Double Slit Mystery.

Well, sorry to say Dr. Feynman, there is a explanation that makes the Double Slit Experiment evaporate into thin air. Your idea of a wave and all of Old Physics idea of a wave was an open ended arrow with head and tail.

^v^v^v^v--->

When you make the assumption that a particle-wave duality with the wave being an open ended arrow with head and tail--- then the Double Slit Experiment remains mired in quagmire mystery.

If, on the other hand, you envision a duality of Particle to Wire Circuit that the Double Slit Experiment no longer has any mystery. Quantum Mechanics becomes fully intelligible not only for the cosmos in full but for the microscopic regions.

In other words, Dr. Feynman, the mystery of the Double Slit Experiment was all because you thought the Wave as a open ended arrow is the dual of a particle.

This book must be written in winter time, as I see the heat of summer is not conducive to writing such a book. Winter when there is no work to do on the outside, and where most of the day can be devoted to writing.

AP, King of Science

#492 AP book of science--- Corrections to many ideas in Feynman's 3 volume set Lectures on Physics

[Archimedes Plutonium]

It is called the concordance book of Shakespeare. If you want to look up a saying by Shakespeare but forgot where it lies, you get out the concordance and find exactly where it was written. But in modern days, the Google search is a concordance of any AP writing. No need for a concordance of AP, just Google search.

But unfortunately search engines were not around in the 1960s to make a search of any saying to be found in Feynman's 3 volume Lectures on Physics. But never the less, many people have put Feynman books on the Internet. So I search for "amalgamation" with Feynman Lectures and up pops Volume 1 chapter 2.

2-2

"Some historic examples of amalgamation are the following. First, take heat and mechanics. When atoms are in motion, the more motion, the more heat the system contains, and so heat and all temperature effects can be represented by the laws of mechanics. Another tremendous amalgamation was the discovery of the relation between electricity, magnetism, and light, which were found to be different aspects of the same thing, which we call today the electromagnetic field. Another amalgamation is the unification of chemical phenomena, the various properties of various substances, and the behavior of atomic particles, which is in the quantum mechanics of chemistry."

"The question is, of course, is it going to be possible to amalgamate everything, and merely discover that this world represents different aspects of one thing?"

AP writes: The last sentence is answerable--- yes, the world in total is just one big atom of plutonium, a Plutonium Atom Totality.

But the question I have of Feynman is why on Earth does he use the term "amalgamation" when he could have used a logical term of "unification". He does mention "unification" in the above. Did Feynman think that unification is something different than amalgamation??? During the lifetime of Feynman, the Unification of the 4 Forces of Physics was never realized. Einstein spent 30 years of his life trying to unify the 4 forces and failed. Perhaps Feynman shyed away from using "unification" because the 4 forces had not been unified and he was embarrassed over this situation.

AP unified the 4 forces in early decade of 1990s by pointing out that the EM force is the only force with a "perfect particle", the photon and logically, thus, the conclusion is that strong-nuclear, weak-nuclear, gravity, had to be ------ different aspects-------- of the perfect force of EM. Feynman does mention "different aspects" above in his amalgamation. But then Feynman makes the mistake, another mistake of logic, when he talks about the Double Slit Experiment and pondering whether it is particle or wave or both, or neither. If instead of pondering the Double Slit Experiment as a mystery, Dr. Feynman needed to go back to his paragraph 2-2 and see that he wrote---  "different aspects of one thing". So that Feynman could have deduced that the Particle versus Wire-circuit are one and the same things only displaying one aspect at different times.

AP, King of Science