Didier Viel
I am an independent researcher specifically interested on the "natural philosophy" approach. Nowadays the "natural philosophy" is called "physics".I recently edited two books, the first one about the nature of time and the second one about a new gravitation theory derived from the ideas of Nicolas Fatio de Duillier in 1690!
The book "Time doesn't exist. And many other things (Big Bang, Black matter, Black hole,...)", explain why it doesn't exist and how to explain the" arrow of time".In this book, a black hole is in the sense of Einstein general relativity theory solution. Indeed, black(or grey) hole are observed in the universe.
The book "Quantum Gravitation and Inertia" gives a natural view of the two forces.
The book "Time doesn't exist. And many other things (Big Bang, Black matter, Black hole,...)", explain why it doesn't exist and how to explain the" arrow of time".In this book, a black hole is in the sense of Einstein general relativity theory solution. Indeed, black(or grey) hole are observed in the universe.
The book "Quantum Gravitation and Inertia" gives a natural view of the two forces.
less
Related Authors
Interests
Uploads
Papers by Didier Viel
Galileo
In Galileo time, to contradict church sciences was liable to imprisonment or death. Nowadays, you are being ostracized by academic science, but it is like dying for those who desires to pursue a career in the scientific world. In this paper, our contradiction is not on the fact that muons circulating in a circular ring don’t have their lifetime enhanced, but it is about the reason why it is so, on the basis of substantiated physical phenomena.
The muons enhanced lifetime has been shown in a series of experiments on a quantum parameter, in which an anomaly was detected, called the “muon (g-2) anomaly”. To get a better precision on the “muon (g-2) anomaly”, the experiment was done on muons stored in a circular ring. When it was evident, from these experiments, that muons when circulating at high velocity, had their lifetime increased, J. Bailey thought that this could be explained by Einstein SR time dilation \cite{Bailey}.
After analyzing the proclaimed validation of Einstein SR time dilation by these experiments, we will show that the observed enhanced muon lifetime can be due to the dynamic electrostatic field, necessary to contain the bunch of muons into its trajectory.
A way to discriminate between these two explanations is given in conclusion.
Niels Bohr satisfaction was concerning the statement he had made some years before, that a gyrating electron around a proton nuclei cannot emit radiation. In fact, if it were, the electron will fall down on the proton, which is not what is observed! This statement was in total contradiction to what Joseph Larmor had demonstrated mathematically in 1897. And when general relativity theory was adopted, Larmor's formula induced the "Paradox of radiation of charged particles in a gravitational field". With this Paradox, Bohr was hoping that resolving it will theoretically justify his statement.
The derivation of the radiation of an electrostatic field emitted by an electric charge moving with constant velocity, done by Oliver Heaviside, was puzzling since it suggested that the field propagates faster than light. The resolution of this issue shows that the wave propagates at the speed of light and that there is no aberration phenomenon when a charge is moving. This conclusion about the aberration of a moving charge can be extended, surprisingly, to any pushing gravity theory, like the one of Nicolas Fatio or Le Sage. But, more than that, the creation of a dynamic electric field leads us to pose the issue of the existence of an absolute universe, which has been denied by Mach and Einstein, for inertia.
Also, the radiation by electrons circulating in a circular ring at high constant velocity, like in a synchrotron facility, which radiation is observed everyday, is not so clear a situation to state if an uniformly accelerated charge does radiate or not.
By addressing these issues, we will demonstrate, following Feynman's proposal, that a charged particle can create a photonic radiation (and not a wave as too often said) only when the charged particle is subject to a variable acceleration. Therefore, since there is no radiation when an electron is uniformly accelerated, it resolves both the Paradox and the case of the Niels Bohr hydrogen atom model.
From this experiment, Einstein deduced that time and space are not absolute in the universe and depend on the velocity of the observer.
We will show that the conclusion about this experiment depends on the way the light beam propagates with respect to the two observers and demonstrate why Einstein is wrong.
In Richard Lewis recent post on academia \cite{Richard Lewis}, Einstein was advocating, in 1920, the necessity of an ether for its GR theory. But he did not bring any tangible answer on the nature of this ether, and confused it, as often, with Maxwell luminiferous ether.
Also in Einstein GR, to bend space-time, it is necessary that all bodies have a mass, as in Newton’s formulas.
This paper presents a way of explaining how the "mass" can be given to bodies, starting from Nicolas Fatio de Duillier original idea about aether that we will revisit with modern physics.
We assume that Nicolas Fatio particles are the same as Stephan Hawkings gravitons particles of quantum mechanics which he says are the intermediaries giving "mass" to celestial bodies (A Brief History of Time \cite{Hawkings}).
It is also shown that the "mass" of a body is not a real entity, but is an emerging phenomenon. This idea has already been suggested by Erick Verlinde in another context \cite{Verlinde}. Here, the emergence of "mass" is given by the interaction of the aether particles with matter atomic nuclei.
Furthermore, Nicolas Fatio’s theory is able to show not only the origin of the gravitational force, but also the origin of the inertial force. The origin of inertia comes from an induction phenomena between Nicolas Fatio's aether and matter atomic nuclei.
This paper uses Nicolas Fatio's medium own word, aether, to describe gravitation and inertia. It has nothing to do with Lorentz or Maxwell luminiferous ether that has been disproved by academic scientific community after the Michelson and Morley experiment.
Everyone knows how Einstein found his way to his relativity theory. Far fewer people have the knowledge of existence of Young-Sea Huang relativity theory. In this paper we will compare these two relativity theories with Einstein Thought Experiments.
Since the reader may not be aware of the conceptual theory of Young-Sea Huang relativity, it is recommended to first read the documents in reference.
It is shown that the misinterpretations about Fizeau and Michelson and Morley experiments can both be explained, in a simple way, using only Arago results on light propagation. These correct interpretations do not condemn the existence of aether but cast doubt on Einstein SR.
Drafts by Didier Viel
Julian Schwinger, Nobel prize in physics (1965)
The electric charges of the proton and the neutron, constituents of atoms nuclei, are explained in quantum mechanics in the so called “standard model” and this explanation is rather strange, with a combination of “quarks” having charges which are not an integer, and can change from one to another during radioactive transformation.
It is a fact that quarks are deduced from experimental data, like scattering of a proton by high energy electrons, but they can’t be observed as a free object: "Basically, you can't see an isolated quark because the color force does not let them go, and the energy required to separate them produces quark-antiquark pairs long before they are far enough apart to observe separately”!
In this paper, we will construct a model for the electric charges of proton and neutron with the presence of “electron-positron pair” inside the components of an atom nuclei, neutron and proton. In modern physics, whereas the existence of “electron-positron pair” is known since the sixties, still few scientists have explored the potential of such an existence. There were however attempts to explain some situations in quantum mechanics, and to describe the vacuum (ether) as a sea of “electron-positron pairs”.
We will present and validate this model with all the disintegration phenomenon observed, and even the disintegration of a proton inside an atom, which is not totally explained in the “standard model”.
This question of the real nature of time is a headache for philosophers and a real nightmare for physicists. Even today, there is no clear answer to that question. A great number of physicists claims that time doesn't exist, but it seems to be only a belief without a demonstration of its non-existence.
However, does "time" really exist? Why do we have the sensation of an "arrow of time", while the equations of physics are reversible with the variable "time"?
I am showing in this paper why time is not a real entity.
It is shown, using simple physics and datas from the author of the famous experiment on time dilation of atmospheric muons, that there is in fact no time dilation.
We show why there is no time dilation for muons entering the Earth atmosphere, using datas given by the authors of the experiment.
Galileo
In Galileo time, to contradict church sciences was liable to imprisonment or death. Nowadays, you are being ostracized by academic science, but it is like dying for those who desires to pursue a career in the scientific world. In this paper, our contradiction is not on the fact that muons circulating in a circular ring don’t have their lifetime enhanced, but it is about the reason why it is so, on the basis of substantiated physical phenomena.
The muons enhanced lifetime has been shown in a series of experiments on a quantum parameter, in which an anomaly was detected, called the “muon (g-2) anomaly”. To get a better precision on the “muon (g-2) anomaly”, the experiment was done on muons stored in a circular ring. When it was evident, from these experiments, that muons when circulating at high velocity, had their lifetime increased, J. Bailey thought that this could be explained by Einstein SR time dilation \cite{Bailey}.
After analyzing the proclaimed validation of Einstein SR time dilation by these experiments, we will show that the observed enhanced muon lifetime can be due to the dynamic electrostatic field, necessary to contain the bunch of muons into its trajectory.
A way to discriminate between these two explanations is given in conclusion.
Niels Bohr satisfaction was concerning the statement he had made some years before, that a gyrating electron around a proton nuclei cannot emit radiation. In fact, if it were, the electron will fall down on the proton, which is not what is observed! This statement was in total contradiction to what Joseph Larmor had demonstrated mathematically in 1897. And when general relativity theory was adopted, Larmor's formula induced the "Paradox of radiation of charged particles in a gravitational field". With this Paradox, Bohr was hoping that resolving it will theoretically justify his statement.
The derivation of the radiation of an electrostatic field emitted by an electric charge moving with constant velocity, done by Oliver Heaviside, was puzzling since it suggested that the field propagates faster than light. The resolution of this issue shows that the wave propagates at the speed of light and that there is no aberration phenomenon when a charge is moving. This conclusion about the aberration of a moving charge can be extended, surprisingly, to any pushing gravity theory, like the one of Nicolas Fatio or Le Sage. But, more than that, the creation of a dynamic electric field leads us to pose the issue of the existence of an absolute universe, which has been denied by Mach and Einstein, for inertia.
Also, the radiation by electrons circulating in a circular ring at high constant velocity, like in a synchrotron facility, which radiation is observed everyday, is not so clear a situation to state if an uniformly accelerated charge does radiate or not.
By addressing these issues, we will demonstrate, following Feynman's proposal, that a charged particle can create a photonic radiation (and not a wave as too often said) only when the charged particle is subject to a variable acceleration. Therefore, since there is no radiation when an electron is uniformly accelerated, it resolves both the Paradox and the case of the Niels Bohr hydrogen atom model.
From this experiment, Einstein deduced that time and space are not absolute in the universe and depend on the velocity of the observer.
We will show that the conclusion about this experiment depends on the way the light beam propagates with respect to the two observers and demonstrate why Einstein is wrong.
In Richard Lewis recent post on academia \cite{Richard Lewis}, Einstein was advocating, in 1920, the necessity of an ether for its GR theory. But he did not bring any tangible answer on the nature of this ether, and confused it, as often, with Maxwell luminiferous ether.
Also in Einstein GR, to bend space-time, it is necessary that all bodies have a mass, as in Newton’s formulas.
This paper presents a way of explaining how the "mass" can be given to bodies, starting from Nicolas Fatio de Duillier original idea about aether that we will revisit with modern physics.
We assume that Nicolas Fatio particles are the same as Stephan Hawkings gravitons particles of quantum mechanics which he says are the intermediaries giving "mass" to celestial bodies (A Brief History of Time \cite{Hawkings}).
It is also shown that the "mass" of a body is not a real entity, but is an emerging phenomenon. This idea has already been suggested by Erick Verlinde in another context \cite{Verlinde}. Here, the emergence of "mass" is given by the interaction of the aether particles with matter atomic nuclei.
Furthermore, Nicolas Fatio’s theory is able to show not only the origin of the gravitational force, but also the origin of the inertial force. The origin of inertia comes from an induction phenomena between Nicolas Fatio's aether and matter atomic nuclei.
This paper uses Nicolas Fatio's medium own word, aether, to describe gravitation and inertia. It has nothing to do with Lorentz or Maxwell luminiferous ether that has been disproved by academic scientific community after the Michelson and Morley experiment.
Everyone knows how Einstein found his way to his relativity theory. Far fewer people have the knowledge of existence of Young-Sea Huang relativity theory. In this paper we will compare these two relativity theories with Einstein Thought Experiments.
Since the reader may not be aware of the conceptual theory of Young-Sea Huang relativity, it is recommended to first read the documents in reference.
It is shown that the misinterpretations about Fizeau and Michelson and Morley experiments can both be explained, in a simple way, using only Arago results on light propagation. These correct interpretations do not condemn the existence of aether but cast doubt on Einstein SR.
Julian Schwinger, Nobel prize in physics (1965)
The electric charges of the proton and the neutron, constituents of atoms nuclei, are explained in quantum mechanics in the so called “standard model” and this explanation is rather strange, with a combination of “quarks” having charges which are not an integer, and can change from one to another during radioactive transformation.
It is a fact that quarks are deduced from experimental data, like scattering of a proton by high energy electrons, but they can’t be observed as a free object: "Basically, you can't see an isolated quark because the color force does not let them go, and the energy required to separate them produces quark-antiquark pairs long before they are far enough apart to observe separately”!
In this paper, we will construct a model for the electric charges of proton and neutron with the presence of “electron-positron pair” inside the components of an atom nuclei, neutron and proton. In modern physics, whereas the existence of “electron-positron pair” is known since the sixties, still few scientists have explored the potential of such an existence. There were however attempts to explain some situations in quantum mechanics, and to describe the vacuum (ether) as a sea of “electron-positron pairs”.
We will present and validate this model with all the disintegration phenomenon observed, and even the disintegration of a proton inside an atom, which is not totally explained in the “standard model”.
This question of the real nature of time is a headache for philosophers and a real nightmare for physicists. Even today, there is no clear answer to that question. A great number of physicists claims that time doesn't exist, but it seems to be only a belief without a demonstration of its non-existence.
However, does "time" really exist? Why do we have the sensation of an "arrow of time", while the equations of physics are reversible with the variable "time"?
I am showing in this paper why time is not a real entity.
It is shown, using simple physics and datas from the author of the famous experiment on time dilation of atmospheric muons, that there is in fact no time dilation.
We show why there is no time dilation for muons entering the Earth atmosphere, using datas given by the authors of the experiment.