Announcement of New Physics

Scientific research has the task to gain knowledge about the reality of the universe and to describe and explain the reality by systematic mechanisms and general rules. Reality has to be unique, irrefutable and concrete describable.

B1.2 Basic Tasks for Physics

Physics has the task to gain knowledge about the reality of non-living matter, so that all physical interactions and states can be clearly described according to irrefutable general physical rules and completely explained by referring to the most general rules, which are called fundamental laws of nature.

B1.3 The “scientific Method” to gain physical Reality

Already in the 17^th century philosophers like Rene Descartes have defined the required method to gain knowledge of the most general physical laws, which describe the reality of all physical interactions and physical states and explain these by the most general laws.

The basis for this is that exclusively unbiased observations are allowed for deriving physical laws.

Observations are signals of biological or technical sensors (detectors).

Unbiased observations are all observations, which are done without any assumptions like interpretations, hypotheses or theories.

If observations allow more than one solution for reality, the corresponding different descriptions and explanations are called theories or hyptheses. In this case additional specific observations have to be done, until reality can be unequivocally assigned to a single unique statement or law.

B1.4 The Definitions of Antiscience and Pseudoscience

Antiscience is a scientific statement, which is not conform to an unequivocal observation. Antiscience is also, when an observation is done which refutes a theory and the theory is not deleted in scientific documentations.

The characteristics of pseudoscience are:

* There is no intention to fulfill the task of a natural science: Gain knowledge of physical reality, which means to do additional experimental observations to convert theories to physical reality.

* Statements are not clearly marked as physical reality or theories.

* Do statements about a physical issue, which are not observable or physically concrete describable, which means that the statement refers

* Do statements about a fictive or a matter-less phenomenon.

* Do statements of physical reality which are not explained by generally valid fundamental laws of nature. Laws of nature have to be consistent to all unequivocal observations.

* Do statements about matter without knowing the physical reality of matter.

B2 The basic Reasons, why Physics is no natural Science

B2.1N No Knowledge about Matter (N means included new chapters)

B2.1N.1 The great Importance of Matter and of the Knowledge of Matter

The universe consists exclusively out of matter. Matter consists of bound particles, which are objects. Everything, which can be observed in universe are impacts of matter, which occur by mutual collisions of objects. The strength of impacts are depending on the kinetic energy of colliding objects.

In current physics there is no basic knowledge of matter. Basic knowledge means that there has to be unequivocal physical description of matter, which can be called a scientifically sound definition. Because of the missing knowledge of matter it is impossible to explain scientifically any interaction in universe.

According to their own statements physical scientists are aware that about 95% of the matter in universe is unknown. The rest of 5% refers mainly to atomic matter which is described by several atomic models. Physicists have worked out several models because they realized that the first two models which are based on particles (1, orbiting electrons around atomic nuclei; 2. clouds of electrons around atomic nuclei) can be refuted by observations and by this are no reality. As physicists did not find the physical reality they argued that atoms are not physical reality and used instead of electrons abstract matter-less mathematical functions, which is the most pseudo-scientific theory concerning atomic matter. Scientific would be to admit that they have not any knowledge about matter.

The consequence of the missing knowledge about matter is, that it is not possible for physicists to gain scientific knowledge about the interactions in universe. The best physicist can do is to describe unbiased observations (= without using interpretations) and work out fictive theories to explain the interactions. By getting aware of the missing knowledge about matter, physical scientists should have fully concentrated their research work to gain knowledge of the physical reality about matter before they work out theories which have no chance to be reality.

All unbiased descriptions of observations are physical reality. But currently most descriptions of observations are spoiled by interpretations. It is the worst thing in physics to use biased observations to gain knowledge about physical reality.

B2.1N.2 Well known Example how to gain Knowledge of Reality

A typical example of a biased observation resulted to the statement that the sun circles around the earth. This example also shows the generation of further clearly wrong statements: The statement that planets do multiple additional circles during their orbits around sun.

Galileo Galilei has impressively demonstrated, that in order to gain knowledge about physical reality the “scientific method” has to be used: There have to be done additional observations about the described physical issue until the description is unambiguous. For this Galileo Galilei even constructed a strongly improved telescope and gained in addition knowledge about movements, so that he could refute the theory about planets doing additional circles. Only the unambiguous knowledge about physical reality is physical knowledge.

Physical theories are the contrary of physical knowledge.

Unfortunately Galileo Galilei was not only one of the first physicist but also one of the last physicist who did most statements exclusively by unambiguous unbiased observations.

B2.1N.3 Explanation of the disastrous Situation of Physics

There is an understandable reason why currently the waiting for additional clear results of experimentation is quasi impossible for physicists: As there is a strong concurrence for getting funding for research work, they have to publish already their fictive theories.

B2.1N.4 Summary of basic reason for Pseudoscience of Physics

* Most descriptions of interactions in universe are pseudoscience because thes are spoiled by unreal interpretations.

* Physical scientists did not realize that many statements have been refuted by their own experimental research work. Because of this the wrong statements were not eliminated from physics.

* Scientific physical research was strongly hindered by the dependency on public funding.

* Physical scientists had no chance to gain knowledge about the physical reality of the universe without the knowledge of the physical reality of matter.

* Physical scientists did not concentrate their research work to gain knowledge of the physical reality of matter before doing other research work.

B2.1N.5 The Detection of Reality of matter was hindered by Antiscience

The last extremely valuable finding of physical research concerning matter was achieved in the 1930s years, by which the knowledge was gained that all matter decays to electrons. But this reality by observations was replaced by absurd science fiction which was not based on any observation: Fundamental particles are virtual quarks and gluons instead of real electrons. This action can be clearly called the capitulation of physical research and the elimination of physics as a natural science and conversion of physics to a spiritual science by science-fiction. The natural science of physics was sacrificed in order to avoid admitting errors.

B2.1N.6 Daily Observations show the missing Knowledge of Matter

Physical research has to start by descriptions of the observations of matter, which has to be done without interpretations. The most important and most simple observations is:

Matter is a substance, which exerts a resistance when touching it.

The general observation is:

Objects exert a counter-force against impacts by collisions of other objects.

Many physicists are aware that this observation clearly refutes current atomic models and that this observation is one of the most non-understood observations of matter.

The ratio of the volume of an atomic nuclei to the volume of an atom 1: The already gained knowledge (reality) about atoms by observations is:

The diameter of an atom is about 100 thousand times larger than the diameter of an atomic nucleus. By this an atom occupies a 10 to the power of 15 times larger volume than the volume of an atomic nuclei. Also a high number of electrons does not significantly contribute to the volume of an atomic nucleus. Thus by current physics in the volume of an atom is almost no matter. This is physical impossible as by this atomic matter would easily penetrate through other atomic matter without significant resistance.

Thus current atomic theory is extremely far away from reality as it does not explain the counter-force, which causes nearly 100% resistance against penetration with usual collision energy.

Above observations refute the three current atomic models. In order to exert a counter-force atoms have to consist mainly of a huge rigid and relative stable structure which binds the atomic nuclei in a specific way to molecules. Without this structure the “empty” space between atoms is so huge, that atomic matter would easily move through other atomic matter.

Although most physicists are or should be aware that none of their atomic models is reality, they did not improve the model in order to comply to the observation of the resistance of matter.

Only few physicists mention above discrepancy. The reason is, that this is criticism against current physics.

By the acceptance that current physical theories of atomic models are physics, although it is known that the theories are refuted by observations, physics accepted even to be an antiscience.

B2.1N.7 Observations about Structure of Atoms

Also the physical reality of the structure of atoms has to be evaluated by unbiased observations. The first task is to define the rigid structure of an atom. Only a rigid structure explains the force of resistance of atoms against pressure. It is well known that smaller parts of a bound particle can be generated by high energetic collisions against the atom, because by high energetic collisions bondings of the particle breaks, followed by an emission of the decay products.

Many observations of decay reactions of atoms clearly show huge amounts of emitted photons, which mostly have a wide range of different kinetic energies from infrared up to gamma-ray. Observed heat exclusively refers to low- energetic infrared photons and observed light exclusively refers to emitted visible photons. Examples of reactions, by which bound photons of an atom decay to photons are:

* All chemical reactions which generate heat and/or light, including explosions.

* Continuous generation and emission of photons in atmosphere of sun and other stars. The origin of these photons are hydrogen-molecules of sun.

* Decay of molecules in air observed by lightnings and activated by collisions of cosmic particles.

* Decay of molecules, activated by high energetic collisions of photons (= Laser-cutting).

* Decay of molecules, activated by high-energetic collisions of electrons (= plasma-cutting).

Comment to plasma cutting:

- The term plasma refers to atoms, which have lost most of their photons by decays. Thus plasma is a product of plasma cutting and no educt)

* Decay of asteroids, when entering the earth atmosphere.

These examples show that all atoms can generate heat by decay. This is important knowledge concerning heat generation.

B2.1N.8 Conclusions about basic Structure of Atoms

The conclusion of above observations is that the missing matter of atoms refer to huge structures of bound photons.

In SURe- New Physics all structures of particles have been evaluated, as these are unambiguously determined by fundamental Laws of Nature.

Therefore it is known that each photon has three bonding options, which lead to rings of hexagons which are bound to each other in a row. The complete structure is called photon chain. Each specific nucleus has a specific number of bonding positions, on which a photon chain can be generated. This reaction occurs “automatically” at usual temperatures by omnipresent photons.

These photon chains bind to photon chains of other atoms to molecules and molecules bind by photon-chains to other molecules, by which solid matter is generated.

By the knowledge of structure of all atoms the characteristics of all atoms are known.

Of course one characteristic of atomic matter is that by its rigid structure atomic matter exerts a counter-force against collisions or pressure.

There are no free moving electrons in or around an atom.

B2.1N.9 Other Bondings with lower Stabilities

The general Rule is that by decrease of temperature additional bondings are generated and increase of temperatur cause incresed breakinngs of bondings.

Bondigs with lower stability are two dimensional bondings, Two dimensional bondings can be stabilized by buildung of pipe like structures.

But weak bondings can also occur by attached layers of bondings.

B2.1N.10 Reality of Structures of atomic Nuclei

The fusion process of protons leads of to a huge structure of bound protons called protonium. Protonium decays by supernova- reaction to all kind of atomic nuclei and also simple molecules. Atomic nuclei do not consists of protons and neutrons. Current atomic masses are wrong and still have to be determined.

The most important structures of atomic elements have been determined by SURe – New Physics. Determination of all atomic structures is just a matter of time These will be listed later with picture of structure in SURe- New Physics Vol. PARTICLE MECHANICS.

Structures explain all characteristics of atomic isotopes.

B2.1N.11 SURe of Matter and Antimatter

By radioactive decays of atoms the knowledge is gained, that by decay of atoms also electrons and positrons are generated and emitted. These reactions are activated by collisions of cosmic photons. By the fundamental law of energy conservation the generation of particles by spontaneous decay are forbidden.

The only possible explanation of electrons and postrons is that these are in reality spin energies. Spin energies have the characteristics to behave like fundamental magnets. Like it is the case for a magnet, electrons and positrons bind only by one side and are repulsed by the other side. The sides can be changed by turning. By this the knowledge is gained that electrons and positrons behave like matter and antimatter, but are identical particles. Thus there is only one fundamental particle which can be defined as electron. The term positron is exclusively used to express that the electron has a contrry magnetic orientation in reference to another electron. Thus a bound particle always consists of electrons with the same orientation. When there is a particle with same orientations of electrons but to the other side, then the corresponding particles are matter and antimatter. As bonding is a preferred interaction and the orientation of electronic spins remain the same by decays. This can lead to a preferred orientation of particles.

But in many cases there is an equal distribution between matter and antimatter. Matter and antimatter is separated by binding & decay interactions to the different sides of magnetic fields, which cause deflections of half of the particles to one side and the other half to the contrary side. This explains the Zeeman-effect or the Stern-Gerlach experiment.

B2.1N.12 SURe of the Forces of Matter

The fundamental explanation for all observed forces in universe is based on the definition of matter:

Everything in universe refer to matter and matter is equivalent to bound spin- energies. Single spin energies are equivalent to an electron.

All active forces in universe refer to the only active force in universe, which is the force of electrons to achieve their lowest possible spin-energies by superposition of opposite rotating spin energies.

The only passive force in universe is the force that for any interactions in universe the total energy stays permanently stable. The total energies of interacting bodies like particles refers to the sum of spin-energies of electrons + the sum of vibration energies of all bondings of electrons.

The structure of atoms do only partly explain the counter-force of atomic matter and other forces of matter. The basic explanation refers to the two Fundamental Laws of Nature, which are equivalent to above definitions of the two fundamental forces.

Remark:

The decision in physical institutions to stop research in order to gain knowledge of the physical reality of atomic matter and the general reality of matter can be regarded as capitulation of physics to be a natural science and the termination of physical research.

Overall the disastrous breakdown of physical research and physics is caused by declaring physically impossible and refuted theories as physics instead of eliminating these.

B2.2N.1 Missing Explanations or random Movements of Molecules

Another basic observation which has not been scientifically explained is:

Molecules in gases and liquids do random movements.

It is also well known, that changing directions of movements of matter requires a force (equivalent to energy).

Again it is ignored that there are no scientific explanations, why molecules of gases and liquids change their moving directions although no energy is added to the system. Again there is not any interest to do physical research to find a scientific mechanism to answer this question. A mechanism refers to specific successive mechanical interactions.

Explanation by SURe – New Physics:

Again the only valid explanation is provided by the two Fundamental Laws of Nature (= Weltformel).

Changes of movements occur without addition of energy by following mechanism:

1. Collision of two molecules.

2. Binding of the two molecules by which the kinetic energy of the molecules is transferred to vibration energy of bonding.

3. By binding in addition the spin axes are adjusted to identical orientation.

4. Averaging of vibration energies incl. directions of vibrations over all bondings.

* Comment: 2.-4. is done because of first Fundamental Law of Nature, which means in order to achieve lowest sum of spin energies.

5. By increasing vibration energy the new bonding breaks again.

6. The vibration energy of bonding is transferred back to kinetic energies of separated gas molecules, by which the two gas molecules are catapulted to opposite directions.

7. Result: The total energy of the system of molecules stays constant.

B2.2N.2 Missing Explanations of Averaging of Temperatures

Another unexplained observation of particles of matter is that different temperatures of particles always interact in a way that temperatures are equalized between particles.

Again physicists ignore that there is no scientific explanation for this observed characteristics of matter.

Explanation by SURe/ New Physics:

Definition of heat is average kinetic energies of a bulk of omnipresent photons. By the same mechanism as described in last chapter there is an averaging of kinetic energies of omnipresent photons. By bonding & decay mechanism of omnipresent photons with atomic matter, atomic matter also interact towards receiving equal kinetic energies, which do not refer to heat.

When matter is in thermal equilibrium with heat there is just a correlation of kinetic energy of atomic matter to heat of omnipresent photons.

B2.2N.3 No Understanding of Reflection of Particles

First required correction has to be done by elimination of the term momentum of a particle. The physically correct term is kinetic energy of a particle. The correct formula for kinetic energy is E(kin) = m * v. The wrong formula E(kin) = ½ mv² refers to an experiment from 18^th century, where v was erroneously calculated to be proportional to altitude of a free-falling body. All later experiments clearly prove that the real formula for kinetic energy is E(kin) = m*v.

The second error is, that by a collision of a particle to a wall, the kinetic energy of the colliding particle is exerted two times to the wall (by collision and by emission).

SURe – Physical Reality of reflection:

By reflection there occurs no overall transfer of kinetic energy to the wall. There is following mechanism for reflection:

* By collision of a molecule to a rigid wall the kinetic energy causes that the particle is penetrated by superposition into the matter of the wall.

* In case of a reflection the total spin energies are increased by the penetration (=superposition), which causes an opposite force to the direction of movement by penetration.

* Finally the movement of the penetrating particle is forced to the outside area.

* There the colliding particle has the same kinetic energy as before collision. Only the moving direction has been changed, which is done without additional kinetic energy.

Remarks:

- On irregular surfaces there occur irregular reflections which are called scattering.

- Reflections are also called elastic collisions. Currently the term elastic collision is used to explain random movements, but a synonym is just a synonym but no explanation. This is a typical fake (deception) of current physics to create an illusion of an explanation by inventing a new term.

- The collision of a particle results to a momentarily impact (=force = pressure) to the collided matter. After leaving the area of penetration/ superposition the particle and collided matter exert no mutual forces any more.

- Reflection on a quasi fixed body does not lead to increased kinetic energies of the collided body.

- Other reflections lead to a change of kinetic energy of both particles by 50% of collision energy.

- There are wrong formulas for elastic collisions, which are only in very specific cases valid, because for these the wrong formula for kinetic energy has been used.

- Sometimes it is argued that elastic collisions are done by vibrations, but vibrating movements cannot cause that colliding particles do very specific changes of directions of movement. In addition vibrations is a theory which never has been observed. Vibration also need forces which are not defined. Thus vibrations are another basic physical issue without an explanation.

B2.1.3 Wrong Explanations of Vibrations

Currently there are totally wrong statements for vibrations. Statements about vibrations have been done although there is not any direct observation of vibrations of atoms or molecules. Physically impossible explanations are much worse than no explanations, because these lead to other wrong statements. This has been the case by the statement that CO2 does more changes of vibrations than other molecules. This resulted to the catastrophe of the completely wrong greenhouse theory.

The reality is that the increase of CO2 has strongly mitigated the global warming. Without the extreme CO2- increase the global warming would have occurred much quicker. Detailed explanations are in SURe – New Physics volume C = SURe of Climate and Thermodynamics.

Because of the missing explanations of random movements and vibrations, nearly complete physics cannot be scientifically be explained. Energies and forces are basic physical phenomenons, for which scientific explanations are required to understand physics. Without understanding of energies and forces the universe cannot be scientifically described and understood. All interactions in universe works by energies and forces. Thus the physical reality of forces and energies should be determined prior to all other physical research. It makes no sense to do other research, because without knowing the reality of forces and energies, no reality of other physical observations can be defined and explained.

B2.1 No Research of basic unexplained Observations

B2.1.1 Missing Explanation of random Movements and Vibrations

Physicist have found out that a closed systems of gas molecules or molecules in a fluid do random movements. It is not recognized or ignored that there are no scientific explanations, why there are accelerated movements although no energy is added to the system. It is well known that a change of movement direction is an interaction which requires a force and/or an energy. Current explanation is that the random movements are caused by elastic collisions, but that is no explanation because elastic collisions are not scientifically explained. There are even wrong formulas for elastic collisions, as for these the wrong formula for kinetic energy has been used.

Sometimes it is argued that elastic collisions are done by vibrations, but vibrating movements cannot cause that colliding particles do very specific changes of directions of movement. In addition vibrations is a theory which never has been observed. Vibration also need forces which are not defined. Thus vibrations are another basic physical issue without an explanation.

Because of the missing explanations of random movements and vibrations, nearly complete physics cannot be scientifically be explained. Energies and forces are basic physical phenomenons, for which scientific explanations are required to understand physics. Without understanding of energies and forces the universe cannot be scientifically described and understood. All interactions in universe works by energies and forces. Thus the physical reality of forces and energies should be determined prior to all other physical research. It makes no sense to do other research, because without knowing the reality of forces and energies, no reality of other physical observations can be defined and explained.

B2.1.2 Explanation of Vibrations and Movements by SURe

The first task of physics besides doing unbiased observations is to find the physical laws by which a hypothetical system of electrons which are resting in several layers at the bottom of a closed box will do vibrations and random movements all over the space of the box after relative short time.

SURe -New Physics has defined the only possible mechanism how vibrations and movements occur:

* When electrons touch each other, these are forced to reduce their internal energies, which are spin energies.

Comments:

Also in current physics there are corresponding theories, that electrons do spin movements and that electrons intend to get minimal energy, although according current physics this is valid for electrons in atoms.

SURe has found out that there are no unbound electrons in an atom, but that the theory of the force to minimal energy is a fundamental law of Nature and therefore cannot be explained by more general physical laws.

The reduction of spin energies can exclusively be done by the superposition of opposite spin energies, which means by superposition of opposite rotations of electrons. Two rotating electrons have a minimal spin energy when these superpose somewhat further than to the spin axes. The two spin axes are always adjusted to parallel position This interaction is called bonding. There are no other bondings in universe than by superposition of electrons to minimal spin energy.

* The movement of bonded electrons to minimal spin energies do not stop abruptly at the position of minimal spin energy but continues by which the spin energy increases again.

* The movement to increasing energy is decelerated until it stops and an acceleration movement to opposite direction starts.

* The alternating movements continue permanently and are called vibrations. There are no other vibrations of particles. The generation or reinforcement of vibrations can be regarded as a transfer of spin-energy to vibration-energy.

* When further particles are bound to the bound electrons called electron-pair by New Physics, the vibration further increases until finally the vibration amplitude exceeds the radius of superposition sot hat the bound electron is catapulted out of the system of resting electrons and now does a fast linear movement. This process can be regarded to conversion of vibration energy to kinetic energy.

* More and more electrons are emitted by same mechanism out of the resting electrons.

* When two moving electrons collide, these can superpose (=bind) again.

* By additional collisions the vibration energy increases again and a decay occurs. By a break of bonding the split parts are emitted in opposite directions with 50% of the vibration energy.

* Overall above mechanisms result to a random movement of particles. Mostly break of a electron bonding occurs, when there are 5 bound electrons, as the particle with 4 bound electrons is the most stable particle. It is called photon.

* Overall a system of randomly moving omnipresent photons is generated out of electrons. Also photons do mutual binding and decay reactions.

B2.1.3 No Intention to gain knowledge of physical Reality

In current physics research is stopped already by describing a physical observation by theories. Most of the theories are physically impossible because of biased observations. Many physical theories are not observable because the statements refer not to physics but to matter-less ghost apparition and magics.

Theories are regarded as real physics. This has been manifested by defining a separate area of physics which is called theoretical physics.

Therefore there is no research to convert theories to physical reality by additional unbiased observations. When an additional observation is done, which refutes an accepted theory, this is not approved to be published as physics.

Because basic knowledge is wrong or missing basic physical issues cannot be scientifically described and explained like matter, energies, forces, heat, pressure, time, dimensions.

Results of scientific research by unbiased observations have been replaced by pure science fiction without any reason.

Overall physics has converted more and more from science to antiscience.

B2.2 Physics is based on wrong Interpretation

B2.2.1 Errors should not be regarded negatively

Wrong scientific statements because of wrongly interpreted observations often occur in scientific research. These are mostly no problem. But it is antiscience and a severe problem to hold on to the wrong interpretations although many other unbiased observations show the physical reality. This is the situation of current physics.

There are just few examples where it could be achieved to eliminate wrong statements and replace these by observed reality. The reason for this is a typical characteristic of mankind: No one wants to admit errors because people regard errors as loss of competence and respect and fear that. This attitude is something which urgently has to be changed, particular in science. Occasional errors have to be regarded as normality. Currently the negative attitude to errors in science is the greatest obstacle for progress of scientific research, as nobody can be sure whether scientific statements are only done because of avoiding to admit an error.

More than 90% of my physical studies refer to searching and correcting my own errors and over 90% of my written documents were eliminated again because of errors.

Before achieving the physical reality of a physical issue, multiple theories have to be revised or eliminated.

B2.2.2 Example: The Error of geocentric System

Well known example of an error by wrong interpretation which took extreme long time to correct because of not admitting the error:

Wrong interpretation by biased observation:

The sun orbits around the earth.

Unbiased observation:

The observed position of the sun moves over the sky from east to west.

By many additional unbiased observations physicists have found out the irrefutable physical reality: The earth does self rotation and moves nearly circular around the sun.

Why could physicist eliminate formerly well accepted theory and why is that not allowed anymore? Was it allowed, because the theory was mainly made-up by institution of church and not by a physical research institution?

B2.2.3 Example: The Error of electromagnetic Waves

In case of electromagnetic waves the elimination of a physically impossibles theory has not been achieved, although Albert Einstein has refuted the theory of electromagnetic waves by reliable observation, that these are particles, which are called photons.

But to make nobody angry it was decided that besides the real theory also the unreal theory is valid in physics:

1. Electromagnetic waves are emitted photons.

2. Electromagnetic waves which cannot be physically described or explained, because these are matter-less and by this are not observable. (Comment: all real waves can be described and explained by particles).

Thus electromagnetic waves are pseudoscience.

Because of the numerous physically impossible theories many physicists say that there is no reality in universe, therefore we have to invent theories. But there are also examples in current physics, which clearly show, that there is a unique reality. And it is often very easy to decide which theory is reality: It is the theory, which is based on unbiased reliable observations. As there are so many unbiased observations, there are no other possibilities and it can clearly be stated that the physical reality of the science fiction of a electromagnetic wave is a photon.

SURe-New Physics is completely based on unbiased observations.

B2.3 Wrong Statements despite own Refutation

It is normal, that the first observations are biased by interpretations. In current physics nearly all statements are wrong interpretations of first observation. In all these cases physicists have done additional reliable observations, which clearly showed that the statements are wrong (no reality). Despite of the new knowledge physicists have not replaced the wrong statements by real statements. This is typical antiscience.

In SURe – New Physics nearly all wrong interpretations were replaced by physical reality. This could be achieved, because physicist have done lots of observations. By describing these without interpretations the physical reality could clearly be defined. Thus no single own observation was needed to eliminate all theories and convert these to reality. By this SURe is based on the experimental research work of physicists. Just two examples:

B2.3.1 Example of refuted Theory: Mass attraction

First wrong Interpretation: The exerted gravitational force of a celestial body increase by decreased distance to the celestial body.

Later reliable observations, which clearly refutes mass attraction:

- Lower attraction despite higher earth mass on equator; stronger attraction despite lower mass on poles. The decrease of gravitational force should clearly start at the surface of earth.

- Increase of attraction by increasing depth below earth surface, which is the same on poles and equator

- Not any shift of attraction to direction of large mountains or rocks.

- Water of oceans is stronger attracted by moon than by sun.

- Many orbits are not cyclic, which would be required by mass attraction. (But not any orbit is elliptical, which is another wrong interpretation).

B2.3.2 The Refutation that there is Gravitation in a Black Hole

By the Fundamental Laws of Nature (Weltformel) it is physically impossible that there is gravitation in a black hole. But in addition it can be well explained by the reality of gravitation that there is anti-gravitation around a black hole. This can be observed by the fact that there are no stars around a black hole. Gravitation starts increasing at the border to the galactic bulge. Anti-gravitation is the only scientific explanation of the galactic bulge.

It is fascinating that nature achieved to create a phenomenon which prevents that the black hole experience strong collisions which disturb the stability of gravitation in a galaxy. See SURe-New physics Vol. C COSMOS.

Even physicists have refuted the physically impossible theory of strong gravitation near a black hole. They have clearly observed that orbit velocities reduce by reduced distance to black hole which is equivalent to reduced gravity by reduced distance. “Fortunately” physicist have documented this extremely unusual finding before the theory of the existence of a super-massive black hole in the center of a galaxy. At that time physicists explained the observed decrease to zero gravity by the mass attraction of the bulk of stars of the galaxy going to zero in the center. This explanation shows the wrong understanding of mathematical vector additions by physicist. <scientists should know the force vectors of a group of celestial bodies can’t be added. Anyway it is not possible because the new reliable knowledge is that the mass of a black hole is much larger than the sum of all stars.

Finally there is an extreme large discrepancy concerning gravitational force.

This is another example where the physical reality of observation (zero gravitation) has been replaced by pure science fiction without any observation (extreme high gravitation). And again the reality is logically explained by Weltformel.

B2.3.3 Example of refuted Theory: The Error of a hot Sun

First wrong Interpretation: The Sun is extremely hot and has high temperatures of million Kelvin.

Further reliable observations, which clearly refuted high temperatures of sun:

- The sun has a stable form. Therefore it consists of solid matter. By increasing temperatures all matter converts from solid to plasma phase, mostly over fluid and gaseous phase. Already a fluid has no stable shape, but builds irregular clouds.

- Stars are build out of hydrogen clouds. It is known that hydrogen solidifies (=freezes) at temperature in space.

- It is known that stars are the only sources for the generation of atoms with higher atomic weights and that this occurs by binding of protons of hydrogen. It is also known that binding reactions require low temperatures like freezing, whereas high temperatures cause decays of particles.

- It is known that the emitted photons from sun are no heat but create heat by reactions with atomic matter. Otherwise there would be nearly no and no different waiting times before temperature rises and there would be nearly instantaneously an equilibrium temperature.

B2.4 Current Physics allows Theories

Theories are fictive, and thus science-fiction. Theories are contrary to reality, otherwise theories would be called reality. Positive is that current physics openly calls a large part of physics theoretical physics, which is also the case for chemistry. So they openly call most of physics science-fiction. Most of science-fiction is clearly physically impossible, and does nor meet criteria for physical reality.

To work out theories is a usual task of scientists. But after work out these have to be tested by unbiased observations. For this it has to be taken into account that a verification is no proof of physical reality, but a scientific refutation is a clear proof that the theory is no physical reality. So the task of physical research has to be the refutation of a theory because a verification is not useful.

B2.5 Scientists want to create something

Many scientist think that they have to do something creative like make-up theories in order to do a personal achievement which can be regarded as personal success. But this is a wrong attitude. Physical laws can’t be created by mankind. Physical laws have been created by nature, which can also be called supernatural force or god. The major task for scientists is to observe without thinking. The universe is like a large puzzle of a unknown picture and the pieces of the puzzle are covered and mixed. So physicists have to uncover the pieces by experiments, have a thorough look to these and find the right positions where these fit together. By a single puzzle piece it is nearly impossible to get knowledge of the complete picture. You only can do assumptions. Only when lots of pieces are put together you might get some knowledge, but when nearly all puzzle pieces have been arranged together it is possible to get clear knowledge of the full picture.

For me it was incredibly impressive to see how perfectly everything fits together and by regarding the complete picture I got the overwhelming impression and grateful feeling that each puzzle piece has been created for the benefit of mankind, which means that mankind can live and survive in universe.

B3 The desastrous conversion of Particle Physics to Antiscience

B3.1 Physics must be physical

Not only physics but all natural sciences must by physical, which means that everything in physics must be clearly describable with a concrete structure at a concrete although relative position at a specific time. This means that everything in universe consists of clearly describable matter (objects out of clearly describable particles, which have clearly describable states and do clearly describable interactions. The contrary would be spiritual science, which can’t be clearly described.

Everything which consists of matter with a describable structure is also reality and everything which is reality must have a describable structure. The structure of particles determine their interaction possibilities.

Thus to describe and explain the interactions in universe it is required to get knowledge about the structures of particles. Different particles are differentiated by different structures.

Thus the first issue of physical research would be to find out the structure of each particle. This has to be done before further research can be done. This shows the major problem of physics and the cause why nothing in universe can be scientifically explained.

For details see SURe- New Physics Vol. PARTICLE PHYSICS

B3.2 The Reality of Particles has already been detected in 1930s

The last basic scientific research in particle physics is about 90 years ago. Nearly complete particle physics of SURe – New Physics could be derived by the studies of air showers in these years. These were studies which identified the decay products of cosmic protons when these enter the earth atmosphere and collide to molecules of atmosphere. By checking the decay products in different altitudes it was possible to determine the successive decay particles. Reliable identified particles were from high to low atmosphere:

Neutrons – kaons – pions – photons – muons – electrons and positrons.

As reaction-chemist I could define the reaction equilibria by this information. In addition it could be done following conclusions:

* All all matter decays to electrons and positrons as smallest particles

* Electrons and positrons are the building bricks (fundamental particles) of all matter.

* Generation of the universe had to occur by pairs of electron- positron as matter and antimatter.

Also current theories could be verified:

* Electrons and positrons do spin rotations by which these behave like magnets which can bind or repell depending on touched sides.

* Like dipole magnets are identical bodies with different sides also electrons and positrons are identical particles with different sides.

* Like dipole magnets can bind to every other dipole magnet also electrons can bind to every other electron.

By possible bindings all structures and characteristic properties of all particles in universe could be determined.

The possibilities of bindings resulted clearly to the conclusion that there is just one single fundamental particle in universe otherwise there would be billions of different atomic elements and the universe would be chaotic without any general rules.

B3.3 Reality was converted to Antiscience in 1964

In 1964 the exceptional extremely valuable research results were replaced by pure science-fiction which was made up without any indication of an observation. The observed reality that protons consisits of 14 electrons, which can be verified by many experiments, were replaced by the antiscience of 3 quarks and many gluons. The theory of quarks is in addition pseudo-science because of the physically and chemically impossible statement that single quarks cannot be observed because of the theory of confinement. Neither quarks nor gluons have been observed despite of millions of collision experiments or other experiments.

B3.4 No Particle Research could be done in the last 60 years

Since accepting the physically impossible science-fiction of quarks and gluons to be physics, physicists were quasi prohibited to do particle research despite billions were funded to build particle colliders with the main task to detect something which does not exist. Of course physicists could not publish the reality of the results of collider experiments as these are just the particles which are observed many years earlier. The only difference is that in 1930s years these could be identified and at later no more.

By Fundamental Laws of Nature the generated particles by colliders can only be photons and the decay particles of photons, which are muons, electron-neutrinos (called electron pairs by SURe New Physics) and electrons. Another fact is that the emitted particles were since start of collider experiments over 60 years ago the same. Further decay than to electrons is not possible.

In physics any publication which differs from accepted theories are not approved, so the only possibility of physicist was to make-up new theories , how other non-existing particles can be detected like some bosons and the famous Higgs particle. It is like a nightmare how this act of distress was and had to be done by physicists. By getting knowledge how the apparent detection was performed, no scientist would believe, that the any particle has been detected. It is even very difficult to get information about this.

B3.5 Basic faults of Research caused an incredible Error

Every scientist would have done pre- tests like blind samples and observations of collisions depending on collision energy before doing the major tests. By this it would have been detected that the collision energy many magnitudes too high that particle-particle collision can occur because of penetration, and by a test with one beam the same collision particles would have been observed, but of course just half the number are generated. It is understandable that no researcher mentions these findings.

B3.6 It is high Time to free Scientists from Remorse and Frustration

The victims of current physics are all scientists. For these it is not possible to get satisfaction by achieving useful findings by their high intellectual capabilities by which they can achieve great achievements for the life of mankind. Colliders for example offer lots of optimal possibilities to run tests to optimize the conditions in order to generate high amounts of extreme cheap energy analog to sun. The process of energy generation in sun atmosphere is nearly the same as in colliders: High energetic collisions to magnetic fields.

B4 The Verification of physically impossible Theories

B4.1 Extensive Research to verify physically impossible Theories

By my own research work with the intention to find out the reality of physically impossible theories I clearly recognized that it is very difficult to do unbiased thinking, because our brain is extremely goal-oriented. So I very often had to revise my first ideas because these were biased by interpretations. It took a long time until I have learned to avoid biased thinking

The same happens, when physicist give themselves the task to verify a theory. According to current physics the theories of relativity and quantum physics are the best tested theories. By Sure – New Physics all stated verifications are clearly identified to be invalid. The causes were mostly erroneous interpretations and fallacies. After corrections these often show to be refutation of the theory instead of verification.

In some cases it took a long time with numerous revisions of own theories to define the reality of the erroneous tests. Until I have found the reality of run time changes of atomic clocks I needed about 8 different theories within 4 years.

It is a very important requirement in scientific research to learn how to avoid biased thinking. The best is to do not any thinking by observation and just start thinking by finding out physical laws by which all unbiased observations can be explained.

Unbiased research can be supported by defining very general research tasks. The concrete research tasks of current physics is a strong factor for the disastrous situation of current physics. Tasks should never be described by “verification of ...”

B4.2 Example of biased Verification: Time Dilatation

Every scientist who has read the publication of Einstein should know, that according to Einstein exclusively a person who has a different movement than the clock observes a change of run times of a clock. But the atomic clock is observed by someone who has the same movement than the atomic clock. This reveals that every scientists who states that the changed run times of atomic clocks verify theory of relativity has no knowledge of theory of relativity.

On the other side physicist have the correct knowledge, that by principle of relativity observations have to be the same for all observers and thus independent from movements of observers. According to this, physicists have realized that the theory of relativity is wrong. Overall physicists verify the theory of relativity although they know that it is refuted by principle of relativity.

Of course the observed change of run times of atomic clocks are reality for all observers, which falsifies theory of relativity.

SURe- New Physics clearly show that time change of atomic clocks refer to an error of construction of atomic clocks and does not occur by other clocks. It is unscientific to think, that the time runs differently when a clock does not work properly. Time spans are definitely absolute.

B5 Mathematics is not very useful for Physics

B5.1 General Errors about Mathematics

Many people think, that by mathematics physics can be derived or verified. This is not the case. Reality is that at first observations have to be done to define physical laws and afterwards the defined laws can be described by mathematics.

By mathematics it is not possible to test whether a statement is reality or not.

A wrong statement can be transformed to another wrong statement by mathematics and a real statement can be transformed to another real statement.

B5.2 Everything in Universe is determined by Mathematics

As the two Fundamental Laws of Nature (Weltformel) can be expressed by mathematics and as all interactions can be described accurately by Weltformel, the results of all interactions can be calculated. This is possible for particles but in principle also for bodies. One of the easiest tasks is to calculate the results of all billiard strokes by knowing all positions of billiard balls and the position and kinetic energy vector of the stroke.

Thus in principle the final states of a group of particles can be calculated by the positions of particles and the exerted energies.

The problem is that it is nearly impossible to get knowledge of of all data needed for calculations of interactions. But you get a good impression to decide which interaction is possible and which not possible just by very rough calculations in mind.

B5.3 All mathematical formulas have to be conform to Weltformel

Most mathematics in physical publications is not valid, because it is not conform to the Two fundamental Laws of Nature. Nearly all complicated mathematics describes physical impossible theories. The universe does not work by complicated mathematics. Thus it is very easy in publications to get knowledge which chapters might be physical reality. Clearly not all chapters with mathematics.

B5.4 Mathematics is often used to do Fallacies

Fallacies are often hidden in mathematical argumentations. By this fallacies appear scientific and are difficult to be detected. No fallacy is needed, when already the strt equation of mathematics is a physical impossible theory. When correct mathematic is done a theory at the beginning cannot result to a physical reality at the end of calculation. It is also a theory.

B5.5 Mathematical Formulas are useful to express Correlations

Mathematical formula are just useful to describe correlations, which have been found by measurements. But for this you must take care, that the correlation is just valid for the specific test conditions. Thus many conditions have to be tested to verify that the formula is generally valid.

Also correlations refer to very simple mathematics. Mostly properties are proportional or inverse proportional.

Like all observations also formulas must be physically described and explained.

B6 Basic mathematical Errors result to wrong basic Physics

B6.1 Wrong Formula for Radiation of Heat

Most physicist should know the blatant errors of the calculations of heat radiation by the absurd Stefan-Boltzmann equation. Of course heat radiation is not a function of temperature, but a function of temperature difference of the body to surrounded atmosphere. Correct statements were presented by Planck and Kirchhoff, who found out that there is no heat transfer at all by equal temperatures. The use of the T to the fourth power formula is physically impossible and results to severe faults like the radiated heat from earth surface to space.

The formula was derived by measurements, which is normally the best way to find correlations. fault is a typical fault offor radiation from earth surface to surrounded air is an incredible scientific farce.

B6.2 Wrong Formulas for Gravity and Luminescence

Other mathematical disasters are the stated correlation of gravity and luminescence to inverse square distance. Both properties change not by area of a surface but by the area change of a surface. Whereas the area changes by square distance, the delta area changes linear by distance and not by square distance. A simple rule of mathematics should also be known by physicists.

As already mentioned mistakes are normality and usually no problem because these are mostla noticed, but to work over 100 years with obvious mathematical errors is antiscience. Physicists just wondered about the extremely high luminosity of far away stars, which were never observed for stars with average distance.

B6.3 The Errors of “relavistic” Formulas

The theories of relativity of Albert Einstein are physically impossible. Again the problem is that no physicists cares about the mathematically errors in his theories and the his statements survived over 100 years although thes are extreme unscientific which means absurd.

The error of Einstein is that he thought that movements are absolute. In later years nearly all people gained the knowledge that movements and speeds are relative. Thus it is not allowed to assign different or moving reference frames to a movement, which was the fault of Einstein. Of course the reference frame must be the same. By elimination of this error, all relativistic effects are eliminated. This shows that one single person, which does not understand a physical phenomenon can achieve that a complete area of physics becomes non-sense.

B6.4 The Error of constant Speed of Light

This error results by the same error of Einstein than his stements of relativistic effects. Also speed of light ia relative property. But the speed of light is a very special speed, as the reference frame is no object, but the propagation medium. It is well known by physicists that the light speed varies by propagation media. In water it is slower than in air and in air it is slower than in vacuum. Physicists also know that vacuum consists of billion of particles. These have been clearly defined by SURe-New Physics to be omnipresent photons. These have different densities, depending on altitude to any surface of celestial bodies. So light speeds are very different and in far space higher than in near space. Thus all formulas conaining C as constant light speed have to be eliminated, particular E = mc², for which there is not any scientific basis.

But of course even more unscientific is the statement of Einstein that light speed is also constant to a moving reference frame.

B6.5 Other mathematical Errors

Following errors of formula will be explained in later chapters

* kinetic energy

* physical work

B7 The scientific Disaster of Movement and Velocity

B7.1 Movement and Velocity are no Properties of Bodies

It is clearly known by most people and also stated in Wikipedia that movement is no characteristics of an object, but a relative property of an object to a position or another object. This means that the movement of an object cannot be determined. It can exclusively determined relative to a reference. The magnitude of relative movement is expressed by velocity.

A well known example is following:

The velocity of a car on Car transporter truckhas following velocities:

* 0 km/h relative to the truck

* about 50 km/h relative to earth surface

* up to 1600 km/h relative to surrounded omnipresent photons of earth, which refers to rotation speed of earth or “aether wind”

* about 107,000 km/h relative to surrounded omnipresent matter of sun, which refers to the orbit speed earth around sun or aether wind in outer space (measurable by CMB)

* about 800,000 km/h relative to surrounded omnipresent matter of the black hole of our galaxy, which refers to the orbit speed of sun. (measurable by CMB).

At least since gaining knowledge that the earth is rotating and that it is not the center of the universe, every physicist should know that the velocity is even much more clearly relative.

Thus it is extremely unscientific that no scientist mentions this well known discrepancy between movement and velocity.

It would have been a much more important to clarify this basic impossibilities of physics and mathematics before doing any other research work. The result is that nearly complete physics is wrong and has little to do with reality.

B7.2 The Error of different Meanings for Velocity and Speed

The misunderstanding of current physics shows following statement in Wikipedia:

“The scalar absolute value (magnitude) of velocity is called speed.”

It is not possible to make out of the relative vector of velocity a “scalar absolute value”. A scalar is no part of a vector. The two parts of a vector are “value” and “direction”.

It is also not possible to make out of a relative property an absolute property by another term, which in the case of speed and velocity are just synonyms with identical meaning. A relative property has no value at all because it is undefined. So there is neither a value of speed nor a value of velocity of an object. There is exclusively a value of the speed or velocity of an object relative to another object or position. By this you have as well the value of the difference and at the same time a direction. But you still do not know, which object is faster.

B7.3 The next Step of physical Impossibility: Kinetic Energy

As the velocity of an object characterizes a property of an object being a relative vector it results by basic mathematics to the fact that the energy of movement (=kinetic energy) of a body is also a relative vector. This means that also the kinetic energies of objects can’t be determined. Another fact is that by a difference it is not possible to define which bodies of the two has the higher energy.

B7.4 The Impossibility of E(kin) =1/2mv²

Every natural scientist should know that a relative property cannot be expressed by a quadratic term. This is physically and mathematically impossible.

How the error of the formula has occurred and the disastrous consequences which resulted to the fact that nearly complete physics is wrong, are explained in chapter C2.4.

B8 The scientific Explanation of Movement and Velocity

B8.1 The origin of Movement

Movement is one of the most important actions of particles.

The origin of movement are the vibrations of the bound electrons of a body:

* The usual magnitude of movement (= speed or velocity) is determined by the sum of amplitudes of vibrations of electrons of a bound object.

* Usual movements are deteriorated by mutual penetrations, which cause a decrease of overall propagation speed. This is explained later

* The direction of movement is determined by the direction of vibrations of electrons of electrons of a bound object.

Characteristics of vibration:

The only possible vibrations in universe refer to symmetric stretching vibrations of bound electrons.

Why do vibrations lead to movements?

When bodies collide and interact by building or breaking of bonds or when these do mutual superpositions by penetration these can get a non-symmetric vibration. In order to get a stable symmetric vibration the body is forced to do a movement change so that the spin energies get minimal energy.

Overall movements are forced by the two Fundamenal Laws of Nature.

B8.2 The scientific Definition of Speed and Velocity

Generally speed (=velocity) is the movement vector of an object 1 to another object 2 (reference object. At the same time object 2 has a speed with opposite direction to object 1. Thus both objects have same mutual speed values.

Exclusively mutual(relative) speed values can be determined.

The mutual speed of two objects refer to the difference of vibration energies of the two objects. The vibration energy of a body is an absolute property and a vector. It is not known by the mutual speed which of the objects has the stronger vibration energy. It is subject of further studies how and whether the vibration energy of a single object can be determined.

B8.3 The scientific Definition of Propagation Speed

Propagation speed (=propagation velocity) refers to the overall movement of an object witch is reduced compared to usual speed penetration of particles. Penetration requires additional time and thus decreases the usual speed of an object as long as penetration occurs.

Penetration does not affect overall vibration energy (theory) and not kinetic energy (reality).

Penetration of omnipresent photons is the explanation of the much lower propagation speeds of photons compared to the unaffected usual speed. It also explains why the kinetic energies of photons are do not correlate to kinetic energies but are nearly stabe. Penetration of omnipresent photons explain also why the propagation speed depends on density of of penetrated omnipresent photons. As the density of omnipresent photons significantly varies in universe, the propagation speed of light is continuously changing, which is clearly measurable.

Different densities of omnipresent photons also explain the measured changes of orbital velocities of celestial bodies despite constant kinetic energies. The periodic changes of orbital velocities explain the deviation of orbits from cyclic orbits, which are required by simple mathematics.

The statements of constant light speed and elliptical orbits are pure antiscience, because of refutation by clear observations.

B8.4 Scientific Definitions are valid for all Objects

Scientific definitions have to be valid for all objects in universe, which means from the smallest object, the electron, which is the only fundamental particle to the largest, which is a supermassive black hole (SMBH). Of course also photons are included. Specific differences have also to be explained also by generally valid laws.

B9 Errors and Reality about kinetic Energy

B9.1 The scientific Definition of kinetic Energy

Kinetic energy refers to the impact potential which an object has by collision with another body. By experimental observations the potential of impacts of an object could be determined to be proportional to the kinetic energy to the usual mutual speed v and the mass of the regarded object m.

The found proportionality can be expressed by the formula Ekin = m*v.

B9.2 The historic Error of the Formula Ekin = ½ mv²

The error if the formula occurred by a typical unscientific experimentation, which is based on a wrong interpretation.

Experiment from 1722 according to Wikipedia:

“By dropping weights from different heights into a block of clay, Willem 's Gravesande determined that their penetration depth was proportional to the square of their impact speed. Émilie du Châtelet recognized the implications of the experiment and published an explanation.[5]

Correct considerations are:

* Kinetic energy of an object refers to the impact potential to another object.

* The impact of an object can roughly be determined by the penetration depth of a block of clay.

Physically impossible is:

* Square speed has no physical meaning and thus does not exist.

* A mathematically formula has to be explainable. It can’t be explained that the impact correlates two times to the speed value.

* The impacting object has no determinable speed. The impact has to be a function of the differences of speeds of objects. This has to be independent from single speeds and by this allows no quadratic speeds, which would lead to different values by same speed difference.

In later years above experiment has been multiple times repeated by other people.

Every repetition clearly showed that the penetration is proportional to the impact speed and by this refuted the correlation to square speed.

It can be assumed that in 1722 it was not possible to measure the momentary speed shortly before the impact. So the experimenter surely has calculated the impact speed by the drop height (h) of the used object. So there is a high probability that he erroneously thought that the impact speed is proportional to h, which would explain the erroneous correlation to h.

In current physics it is well known that the by gravitational force a free-falling object experience a permanent acceleration so that the impact speed is proportional to h². By using the correct formula for the impact speed, also by the experiment of 1722 it would have been found that the penetration impact is proportional to v and not to v².

An error by doing research is normality, but it is blatant and extremely unscientific, when an obvious and known error is not corrected.

This shows the almighty power of physical fystem of research, which ha prohibited all vorrectiond of accepted physics.

B9.3 The Non-sense of the Factor 1/2

As kinetic energy is a relative property a factor does not make sense, as any faktor could be used, and there is no reason, why 1 is not used. There might be cases to use a normalization factor to get comparable values for different units of energy. But this would be necessary for example to calculate kinetic energy out of frequencies of photons. As photons are no electromagnetic waves and thus have wave frequencies, frequencies have urgently to be replaced by the real unit for kinetic energy, which is kg * (m/s).

B9.4 The wrong Formula has been “verified” by Mathematics

A perfect tool to do a fake verification of a physically and mathematically wrong for formula are by mathematical transformation. By this most people don’t recognize that the impossible theory itself or other physically impossible theories are used for transformations of mathematical equations. As the used transformations are mathematically mostly correct, it is not noticed that impossible statements are used to verify am impossible statement. This fake verification by using fallacies, mostly circular fallacies is normally regarded as one of the most severe errors by physicist. The reality is that nearly complete physics is based on fallacies.

In school pupils have to learn, how the formula ½ mv² can be derived by mathematics. In reality pupils learn how to verify physical non-sense by a using mathematics with a hidden fallacy, so that it is not easy to discover that nonsense is verified by nonsense.

It is outrages that physicists still state that ½ mv² is the formula for kinetic energy although this formula is physically and mathematically impossible. Physicists and particular engineers have to know that this formula gives wrong results and that they have to use Ekin = mv to get correct results.

B9.5 The unscientific Solution of prohibited Reality

Because in physics it is quasi prohibited to admit an error, physicists had to define another term for the real kinetic energy, for which the correct formula is assigned. The correct kinetic energy is called momentum. Thus all important calculations, for which the wrong formula would create problems or obviously show to be wrong, are done by momentum. To the general public still the wrong formula is presented, so nobody gets aware that physicists have done a fault. The wrong formula would be a normal fault of research, but not admitting an error, is an inexcusable severe fault.

The term momentum is not a good choice, because it is not meaningful. It should be eliminated and the truth should be mentioned.

It suits also to the current second definition of kinetic energy, which has to be corrected for full understanding: It is the minimum kinetic energy a body must have relative to another body so that this energy can be transferred to another body.

Of course for ½ mv² there are many experimental falsifications.

B9.6 The wrong Formula is clearly falsified by the meaningless Unit

An important rule for physical units is that these must have a physical meaning like square-meter which refers to an area. But it is not possible to describe the meaning of a square-velocity.

This is again an impressive demonstration of the urgent requirement, that physics has to be converted as soon as possible to SURe- New Physics.

Another used wrong and inappropriate unit for kinetic energy is frequency of an electromagnetic wave. This does not make sense at all, because electromagnetic waves are physically impossible and do not exist. This was already an experimental finding by Albert Einstein.

In addition it is well known that the energies of existing waves are proportional to amplitudes of waves and not to frequencies of waves.

Of course, when movements are relative, then a movement with a specific velocity is even more clearly relative is relative. But not any charaterizaion of

B10 The Error of Conservation of kinetic Energy

B10.1 The blatant Error that kinetic Energy can‘t be generated

Although the kinetic energy of a body is no absolute energy, it is the only energy of a body which can cause an impact to other bodies which is needed for all accelerations of movements in universe. Thus the generation of kinetic energy is fundamental to generate accelerated movements in universe.

B10.2 Energy Conservation refers to total Energy

The general energy conservation refers exclusively to total energy of all absolute energies. There are only two different absolute energies in universe which are vibration energy and spin energy of bound electrons.

Nearly every observation of physical interactions refer to a change of values of kinetic energy. These are all reactions of buildings or breaks of bonds:

* Each building of a bond consumes kinetic energy as kinetic energy is transferred to vibration energy.

* Each break of a bond generates kinetic energy as vibration energy is transferred to kinetic energy.

B10.3 The Explanation of the Error that Bindings generate Energy

The break of bonds requires high kinetic energy. Thus physicists draw the wrong conclusion that the building of bondings generates kinetic energy.

Experts of chemical kinetics know the reality: Every single reaction needs an activation energy in form of collisions by kinetic energy. The activation energy for decay reactions is very large. But the consumed activation energy is generated again by adding this energy to the kinetic energies of the generated decay particles.

Thus overall kinetic energy is generated.

B10.4 When is Energy Conservation valid for kinetic Energy

There are two situations of a physical system of two colliding bodies are valid:

* When the two bodies are reflected.

* When the two bodies bind and then built bond breaks again.

In both cases the bodies experience a generated kinetic energy, which is equal to the sum of kinetic energies before collisions, but the sum is divided 50% in opposite directions.

B10.5 The wrong Formula for elastic Collisions

Collisions according to previous chapter, that means without change of particles, are called elastic collisions.

When two bodies collide in this way and their masses and velocities are known before collisions, you can calculate masses and velocities after collisions. In order to solve a mathematical situation of two unknown properties you need at least two mathematical equations.

Currently it is stated that the first equation refers to the conservation of kinetic energy and the second equation refers to the conservation of momenta.

These equations clearly result to a formula, which is clearly wrong.

It is incredibly unscientific that physicist present the few very specific examples, where the wrong formula results to correct measured values, while hundreds of examples with wrong results are not mentioned. A formula has to be valid for all possible combinations of data before collisions. As soon as there is one example which is wrong the formula is wrong and/or there has to be a scientific explanation for this.

B10.6 The correct Formula for elastic Collisions

Of course exclusively the values of real kinetic energies can be used in a formula;

(m1 * v1) + (m2 * v2) before collision = (m1 * v1) + (m2 * v2) after collision.

The second equation just regards kinetic energies after the collision:

½ m1*v1 = - ½ m2 * v2 The second formula just refers to the momenta after the collision, which are set equal for both bodies with opposite signs and have to be added to the velocity vectors before collision.