Refutation of comment by Jadczyk et al

Transcription

1 Refuttion of Comment y Jdczyk et l 617 Jounl of Foundtions of Physics nd Chemisty, 11, vol. 1 (5) Refuttion of comment y Jdczyk et l M.W. Evns 1 *Alph Institute fo Advnced Studies (AIAS) ( Elementy eos in n Xiv document y Jdczyk et l. e coected in stightfowd mnne. The method used y these uthos is to delietely ttempt to contive "eos" whee none exist. Keywods: Refuttion of Jdczyk et l., coection of elementy eos. 1 Intoduction Recently [1] note ws posted on Xiv without the knowledge of the pesent utho, note tht yet gin ttempts to give the flse impession of mth emticl eos in ECE theoy [1] whee none exist. This conduct is co uption of the scientific method nd hs een ecognized s such y essen tilly the entie pofession []. Howeve it is impotnt to point out pecisely how this conduct is pepetted y ttempting to set up flse guments. A ede with knowledge of mthemtics ought to e le to follow this nd othe efuttions [3], so tht no shdow of dout is left s to the unscientific motivtion of this smll goup of people. It is inconceivle tht pofessionl mthemticins could poduce numeous tivil eos nd disseminte them thoughout the scientific wold, so it is ovewhelmingly likely tht this is n unethicl cmpign of pesonl nimosity. Legitimte efuttions of this con duct e ignoed y the pepettos, even though the efuttions hve een ccepted y the entie pofession []. The net esult is tht the pepettos must e ecognized fo wht they e, disciplined nd ignoed. A simple exmple of tivil eo which ws foced into pint is descied in ppendices nd 1 of ppe 89 of These ppendices show, using elementy mthemtics, tht the well known B Cyclic Theoem [1] educes to the sic cyclic eltions etween unit vectos in thee dimensionl spce. This sic cyclic eltion is Loentz invint. If vecto field is defined s the unit vecto k fo exmple, the complete vecto field is the nume 1 multiplied y k. Unde the genel coodinte tnsfomtion [4] the nume 1 is invint, i.e. 1 e-mil: EMyone@ol.com

2 618 M.W. Evns does not chnge. This implies tht the unit vecto k does not chnge unde the genel coodinte tnsfomtion ecuse the complete vecto field is invint s is well known [4]. So the B Cyclic Theoem is invint, Q.E.D. Despite this, ppe ws foced into "Physic Scipt" y one of the pepettos of this cmpign. The sme ppe is out to e foced into "Foundtions of Physics", so the deliete couption of coodinte tnsfomtion is to e douly pulished. This is pocess whee efeees nd editos did not do thei sic duty in science. The net esult is degenetion of the scientific method nd devlution of some scientific jounls to the point whee they ecome meningless nd must e ignoed. In othe wods it hs ecome cle tht they hve pulished cmpign of nimosity. Some detiled points of efuttion Thee e no eos of ny consequence in ECE theoy, which is stndd Ctn geomety, s defined [4] in numeous textooks. The methods of ECE hve een checked y collegues othe thn the pesent utho, nd whee elevnt, y compute lge. The theoy hs een comped with dt nd found to e get impovement on Mxwell Heviside field theoy. To sset othewise is y now futile, the theoy hs not een "dis-poven" in ny wy, mthemticlly o expeimentlly, nd hs gone fom stength to stength. The pepettos sset tht Ctn geomety is "undefined". This lone is enough to ouse suspicion, ecuse Ctn geomety is stndd textook mteil [4]. Thee is sic eo in Eq. (6), it hs een shown in ppe 88 of us tht the Binchi identity is, in indexless nottion [1]: D T : = R q (1) nd ( ) ( ) D D T : = D R q. () The tditionl second Binchi identity [4]: D R= (3) is specil cse of Eq. (). The uthos of this pseudo-mthemticl note now seem to ccept the fct tht: d R = R ω ω R c c c c (4)

3 is ewiting of Eq. (3) in the fom: Refuttion of Comment y Jdczyk et l 619 d R = j. (5) We must e gteful fo y of enlightenment. The second sic eo mde y the uthos is to sset tht Eq. (4) does not imply: c c d R = R ω ω R. (6) c c This eo hs ledy een efuted in ll detil in ppe 89 of ut hee the uthos ty to foce it once moe upon thei long suffeing scientific collegues. So hee thei eo is once moe coected. Fist wite out Eq. (4) in full: ( d R ) R c R c cµ v ρ ρ c µ v. = ω ω (7) µρ v The Hodge dul of R is defined s (4): 1 1 R µνρσ µ v= g R ρσ (8) whee 1 µµ 1... µ = g n µµ 1... µ n (9) is defined y (4): g = g µv. (1) Apply the Hodge dul (8) to oth sides of Eq. (4): ( ) ( ) ( ). d R = R ω ω R (11) Use the metic comptiility condition [4]: Dg v µ ρ = (1) to find tht:

4 6 M.W. Evns ( ). d R = d R (13) Theefoe: d R = R ω ω R (14) Q.E.D. So the pepettos of this nimosity cmpign hve tied nd filed to give the impession of n eo whee none exists. This is lwys thei method, which is why they should e oth ignoed nd disciplined y the pofession. The uthos cnnot even get the numeing of thei equtions ight, thee is gp etween (18) nd (). All thei emks concening the index hve ledy een efuted epetedly, notly in ppe 89 of We know fom feedck softwe tht ll the pesent utho's efuttions e ed intensely nd hve een ccepted y the entie pofession. It is vey stnge theefoe tht the pepettos of this nimosity cmpign e le to foce thei mchintions into pint. This mens tht the edito/efeee system is not woking, nd it is well known tht editos hve een hssed y the pepettos. Such coupted system is no longe eing ccepted y the pofession. This is clely indicted y the unpecedented pofessionl inteest in ove fou yes. The mening of the index ws fist mde cle s f ck s 199 [5], nd pulished mteil on the index is ville in ppoximtely 5 popely efeeed jounls (Omni Ope section of The Xiv uthos' witings out e delietely gled, s indeed is this entie nimosity cmpign. We e ppently told next tht the tditionl Binchi identity [4]: D R= (15) is not the sme s its own tenso fomultion: κ κ κ DR + DR + DR =. (16) σ µ vρ σ ρµν σ νρµ If thee e ny edes left who continue to tke these pepettos seiously, the pesent utho points out the textooks gin, the fom equtions of Ctn geomety ll hve thei tenso equivlents. The tenso fomultion (16) cn e ewitten s [4]: DG µ ρµ = (17) whee G ρμ is the Einstein tenso. The Einstein field eqution is then:

5 Refuttion of Comment y Jdczyk et l 61 D G = kd T µ µ ρµ ρµ (18) whee: T = T (19) ρµ µρ is the symmetic cnonicl enegy - momentum tenso of Noethe nd whee k is the Einstein constnt. Thus Eq. (18) cn eqully well e witten s: κ κ κ ( DR σ µ vρ + DR σ ρµ v + DR σ vρµ ) κ κ κ = k( DN σ µ vρ + DN σ ρµ v + DN σ vρµ ) () which is: D R = kd N (1) Q.E.D. We e next told tht "... the metic component g of the Minkowski metic is not constnt function (sic) of x i (sic)." On the conty, the Minkowski metic is: g µ v 1 1 = gµ v = 1 1 () nd so: g = 1. (3) This is nume, (i.e. 1), nd s such is independent of x i, component of complete vecto field. The pepettos hve gin contived n "eo" whee none exists. This is unethicl nd unpofessionl conduct. They hve disseminted litelly thousnds of e mils with such contivnces, so hve seiously coupted the scientific method. Finlly we e told tht thee exist no esonnce solutions to the eqution: d φ 1 dφ 1 ρ + φ=, d d (4)

6 6 M.W. Evns ( ) ( ) ρ=ρ cos κ. (5) On the conty, if we mke the chnge of vile [1]: ( ) κ = exp iκ R. (6) Eq. (.4) ecomes: ( ) iκr iκr ( e ( e )) d φ ρ +κ φ= Re cos, dr (7) which hs esonnce solutions, Q.E.D. Note tht the eqution of ECE tht leds to Eq. (4) is (1) φ φ φ ω + +ω + ω + = ρ (8) nd when the spin connection is defined s: 4 ω =ω 4βlog e (9) Eq. (8) tkes the fom: φ φ ρ + β +ω φ= (3) which is esonnce eqution, Q.E.D. So in conclusion, this Xiv note is mthemticl nonsense contived to give the impession of "eos" in ECE theoy whee none exist. This is seious couption of the scientific method nd pofessionl condemntion of the pepettos is needed.

7 Refuttion of Comment y Jdczyk et l 63 Refeences [1] M. W Evns, "Genelly Covint Unified Field Theoy" (Amis Acdemic, 5 to 9), volumes 1 to 5, consisting of ppes 1-89 on [] Feedck softwe, monitoed ove moe thn thee yes dily to geneting sevel million hits fom ll leding estlishments in physics. [3] Numeous detiled efuttions on notly ppe 89. [4] S. P. Coll, "Spce-time nd Geomety, n Intoduction to Genel Reltiv ity" (Addison Wesley, New Yok, 4, 1997 notes ville feely on the we), chpte thee. [5] M. W. Evns, Physic B, 18, 7, 37 (199).