On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and

European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.22 No.4 (2008), pp.584-601 © EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2008 http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.htm On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen Department of Chemistry, College of Science University of Baghdad, Jadriyah, Baghdad, Iraq Amman, Jordan, retired in August 2007, previously Professor of Quantum and Nuclear Chemistry E-mail: nucleardata@gmail.com Abstract The concept of conversion between mass and energy is discussed in chemical and nuclear reactions to show it is incorrect and the annihilation reactions of electron-positron are pseudo processes. A primitive nuclear model is suggested to focus on two main things, the outer shells of the nucleus, which called electromagnetic belt and the inner nuclear shells as a new hybrid model of Shell Model in addition to Quark Model. The nuclear fusion reactions are discussed and showed to pass the fifth state of matter called nuclear transparency then finally to the sixth state of matter of black hole. The quantization of light by Planck is argued to be of waveform and not particle form represented by photons. These discrete packets of energy are called frequentons. A new non-relativistic mass-energy equivalence is derived as E=mbc, where b is a derived universal constant and equal to 0.624942 x 108 m/s which gives to E M = 1.87354 x1016 J / Kg or 1AMU= 194.177 MeV. The ratio of mbc/mc2 is equal to (194.177) / (931.49) = 0.209 which gave 41.7 MeV for the Total Kinetic Energy (TKE) of fission fragments of 29.4-37.8 MeV rather than 200 MeV given by E=mc2. Other non-relativistic quantum equations are derived for high speed charged particles such as P=mb, b=λυ, λ=h/mb, E=mvb and E=mb2. Keywords: E=mc2, E=mbc, Novel Mass-Energy Equivalence, Photon-Frequenton, new fifth and sixth states for matter, charged particle velocity constant, B. 1. Introduction The physical concepts of mass and energy and their relation to the universe were continually changed through the history since the philosophers of the Greek, Arab and china. But the most acceptable definitions for mass and energy were translated into formula since Leibniz over the period 1676-1689. The mass concept is usually related to the energy. The mass is a fundamental concept in chemistry and it is a central concept of classical mechanics and related subjects. Although inertial mass (f=ma), passive gravitational mass (f=Mg) and active gravitational mass are conceptually distinct, no experiment has ever clearly demonstrated any difference between them. The concept of energy and its transformations is extremely useful in explaining and predicting most natural phenomena. Energy transformations in the universe over time are characterized by various kinds of potential energy which On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics 585 has been available since the Big Bang, later being released (i.e. transformed to more active types of energy such as kinetic or radiant energy), when a triggering mechanism is available. In the duration from 19th century to 20th century the concepts became more realistic for both issues and a lot of scientists shared in crystallization of the concepts to understand deeply the secret of the universe. In the early 20th century the scientists started investigation the atom structure after the discovery of the electron, theorized by G. Johnstone Stoney (1874) and discovered by J.J. Thomson (1897), the proton theorized by William Prout (1815) and discovered by Ernest Rutherford (1919) and the neutron discovered by James Chadwick (1932). The theoretical and experimental researches on the energy, atom, waves and particles led to the branch of fundamental sciences that deals with atomic and subatomic systems which we today call quantum mechanics. It is the basic mathematical framework of many fields of physics and chemistry, including condensed matter physics, solid-state physics, atomic physics, molecular physics, computational chemistry, quantum chemistry, particle physics, nuclear physics, quantum chromodynamics and quantum gravity. The foundations of quantum mechanics were established during the first half of the 20th century by Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Ernest Rutherford, Niels Bohr, Louis de Broglie, Max Born, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, John von Neumann, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli and others. The theoretical and experimental works in nuclear physics result in formation of Standard Model (1970 to 1973) (Agrawal et al, 1998; Bromley, 2000; Kane, 1987). Although the Standard Model well describes the elementary particles and composite particles, but it is still considered as a provisional theory rather than a truly fundamental one. Many physicists find this model to be unsatisfactory due to its many undermined parameters, many fundamental particles, the nonobservation of the Higgs boson and other more theoretical considerations such as the hierarchy problem. Therefore some new speculative theories beyond the Standard Model extruded attempts to remedy these deficiencies. According to Preon Theory -coined by Jogesh Pati and Abdus Salam in 1974- (Pati and Salam, 1974; Dugne et al, 2002), there are one or more orders of particles more fundamental than those found in the Standard Model called preons, which are derived from "prequarks" which look like “particle zoo model” that came before it. The interest in preons has vanished since the simplest models were experimentally ruled out in the 1980s. The Grand unification Theory attempts to combine the electroweak interaction with the strong interaction into a single 'grand unified theory' (GUT) (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2008). GUT predicts that at extremely high energies (above 1014 GeV), the electromagnetic, weak nuclear, and strong nuclear forces are fused into a single unified field (Parker, B 1993; Hawking S., 1988). Such a force would be spontaneously broken into the three forces by a Higgs-like mechanism. However, the nonobservation of proton decay made it less important. The Supersymmetry tried to extend the Standard Model by adding an additional class of symmetries to the Lagrangian. These symmetries exchange fermionic particles with bosonic ones. In other words, in a supersymmetric theory, for every type of boson there exists a corresponding type of fermion, and vice-versa. Such symmetry predicts the existence of supersymmetric particles, abbreviated as sparticles, which include the sleptons, squarks, neutralinos and charginos. But these particles are so heavy that they need more experiments to be verified, (Baer and Xerxes, 2006). As of 2008 there is no direct evidence that supersymmetry is a symmetry of nature (Martin, 1999; Lykken, 1996; Drees, 1996; Bilal, 2001; Arygres, 2001). String Theory is an incomplete mathematical approach to theoretical physics, whose building blocks are one-dimensional extended objects called strings, rather than the zero-dimensional point particles that form the basis for the standard model of particle physics, (Arygres, 2001; Cooper et al, 1995; Junker, 1996). The string theory, mainly M-theory out of five string theories, suggest that all "particles" that make up matter and energy are comprised of strings, measuring at the Planck length 586 ( Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen meter), that exist in an 11-dimensional universe to prevent tears in the "fabric" of space using the uncertainty principle, whereas our own existence is merely a 4-brane, inside which exist the 3 space dimensions and the 1 time dimension that we observe, (Schwartz, 1998; Troost, 2005; Witten, 2005). String theory is formulated in terms of an action principle, either the Nambu-Goto action (using the principles of Lagrangian mechanics) or the Polyakov action (using conformal field theory), which describes how strings move through space and time. These strings vibrate at different frequencies which determine mass, electric charge, color charge, and spin. A string can be open (a line) or closed in a loop. As a string moves through space it sweeps out a twodimensional surfaces f(τ,σ) called a world sheet. One particularly interesting prediction of string theory is the existence of extremely massive counterparts of ordinary particles due to vibrational excitations of the fundamental string. Another important prediction is the existence of a massless spin-2 particle behaving like the graviton. The main aim of the this theory is to treat the universe through the quantum mechanic and classical mechanic In present paper I would like to correct some ideas on mass-energy relationship, mass of radiation, nuclear processes, and quantization of light and to derive new formula for mass-energy equivalence in addition to some equation for non-relativistic elementary and composite particles that move in speed less than the speed of light. 2. The Mass-Energy Relationship The dualism behavior of mass and energy is very old idea since Thales of Miletus (Greek philosopher, 624 BC–ca. 546 BC) then Galileo (Italian) in 1638 (Singer, 1941) then in 1676 mathematically formulated by Gottfried Leibniz (German) (E=mv2), (Mackie’s, 1845) and others. In 1717 Isaac Newton (England) speculated that gross bodies and light are convertible into one another and he also modified the Leibniz equation to (E=1/2mv2) to conserve the momentum, (Newton, 1704). These ideas bred out two main imprecise concepts in physics that firstly, that mass and energy are convertible; secondly, the radiation has mass. 3. Are Mass and energy convertible? The scientists at that time were focused on the stars and planets and they thought that the energy emitted from stars is finally converted to the mass and vice versa to keep the eternity of the universe and they also thought that when body emits radiation it will loss some of its weight. These confused ideas grew up and were well crystallized as concepts of classical mechanics from 1800-1920. These concepts were clearly shown in the works of S. Tolver Preston in 1875 (E α ∆ mc2), (Preston,1875) Jules Henri Poincarè in 1900 (mv = (E/c2)c, (Poincare’, 1900)) Olinto De Pretto who speculated E=mc2 in 1903-1904, (Pretto, 1904; Bartocci, 1999) Fritz Hasenőhrl in 1904 (m= 4E/3c2), (Ohrl and Sitzungen, 1904; Ohrl, 1905) Einstein in 1905 (E=mc2, from speculative origin), (Einstein, 1905) and Max Planck in 1907 [(m-M)= E/c2], (Planck, 1907, 1908) and Einstein also in 1909 [(mM)=L/c2], (Einstein, 1909). Frederick Saddi and M. Henri Becquerel both have predicted that the energy of radiation is at the cost of mass (Soddy, 1904). In my perception, that this idea is incorrect. The mass and the energy are inconvertible. Since the Big Bang, the energy was stored mainly in two big reservoirs; 1- binding energies of quantized levels of atomic orbital and 2- binding energies of quantized levels of nuclei of the atoms. We daily use these stored energies in various chemical and nuclear reactions and there is no mass converted to energy or vice versa. The annihilation reactions of electron-positron are pseudo processes in addition to that if they occur they will break the laws of conservations. These reactions are misinterpreted by workers. These reactions represent elastic scattering and they could not happen at very low energies. In medium On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics 587 energies when they collide their electromagnetic fields will interfere in constructive way which results in producing radiation. When these particles are accelerated toward each others they will gain kinetic energies plus a high electromagnetic energy because these are moving charged particles. At collision, an elastic scattering occurs under the laws of conservations in addition to happening of two events, first a collision radiation due to the thermal impact of their high kinetic energies which stopped through a sudden clash, second, the interference of their electromagnetic fields which result in the emission of radiation appearing as a spark of light. What they gained through acceleration they will lose during impact. No mass-energy conversion. If these processes are real annihilation, then matter will be lost and the universe will be in a great disaster. 4. Energy from chemical reactions In the chemical reactions, it is absolutely clear that there is no loss in the mass of the material in any reaction. The process is based on breaking bonds and forming a new one. The difference in binding energies which stored in the atomic orbitals will be released in case of exothermal reactions. In case of endothermic reactions we have to supply energy to the electrons of the reactants to help them to undergo reaction. 5. Energy from Nuclear Reactions Of course, the nuclear visions of nucleus structure and its components is still the most obstacle stone in the deep understanding of how can we calculate the energy of nuclear reactions via the nuclear binding energies like the atomic orbitals. I guess that we need at least two decades more of hard works in nuclear science to collect more facts about the real structure of elementary particles (Fermions: Quarks/Leptons, Bosons etc.) and composite particles (Hadrons: Baryons / Hyperons / Nucleons, Mesons / Quarkonia) and in addition to other particles hypothetical elementary particles, hypothetical composite particles and Quasiparticles then to improve the optical model which uses optical laws in its calculation (Fernbach S. et al, 1949), shell model of Eugene Paul Wigner, Maria GoeppertMayer and J. Hans D. Jensen, which uses the Pauli principle to describe the structure of the nucleus in terms of energy levels (Cohen, 1971; Rohlf, 1994) and liquid drop model of Weizsäcker's formula and reach to an integrated model (Freedman and Young, 2004). Any how, the quark theory is still immature to explain the nuclear transformation of the proton and neutron in clear way. The fundamental particles that forming the neutron is still not clear. The quark theory tells us that the neutron is created from three quarks (two down and one up). But the mass of neutron is not fixed in different nuclei. For example the mass of the free neutron in atomic units, amu, is (1.008665 amu) and the mass of neutron in Deuterium is (1.0062767459 amu) and the mass of the neutron in Tritium is (1.0041121177 amu). The nuclear worker said that the decrease in neutron mass is converted into the binding energy in the host nucleus. Now, we may ask which part of quark of neutron will convert to energy to form the binding energy when the neutron gets inside the host nucleus. And which part of energy of the binding energy will convert to the mass to complete its free mass when it gets out? 6. Proposal for new nuclear model This crude nuclear model focus on two main things the outer shell of the nucleus, which I will call the electromagnetic belt, and the inner nuclear shells as a new hybrid model of Shell Model of MariaGeoppert-Mayer et al in addition to Quark Model of Gell-Mann (Georgi, Eidelman S. et al, 2004). This crude nuclear model supposes that the electromagnetic belt plays an important role in nucleus concept. In the present preliminary paper I will present the basic idea of this model and later, in a future paper, I 588 Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen will try to give detailed picture showing how the nuclear reaction energy is based on pure binding energy, and not on converting some mass of baryons to binding energy, which is similar to electron atomic orbital energy. The primordial binding energies came from the big bang and later star nuclear reactions. We will discuss our sun fusion reaction as a sample: The nuclear shells have similar behaviour to the atomic electron shells in which the lower shells are of high energy (as in 2D, 3T, 4He) and the higher shells are of low energy (as in 235U, 239Pu). The electromagnetic belt of the small nuclei is more dens and more Coulumbic than in the larger one. I think that the profound understanding of unfathomable coulomb barrier surround the nucleus is very important. Why this coulomb barrier is strong in small nuclei and weak in bigger one? If it is really coulomb in nature then the uranium-235 nucleus, as an example, should have most strong barrier than helium-4. Some basic proposal points will be mentioned below I- I predict that the electromagnetic belt is formed of two layers; nuclear dust and coulomb barrier. The nuclear dust represents very small elementary particles that play a major role in controlling the conservation of mass (or momentum), energy, electric charge and spin of baryons and meson, in addition to conserve the color and flavor of quarks, during any nuclear process building or decay. This nuclear dust has muon-neutrino, tau-neutrino and other neutrinos in addition to having a new elementary particle (which may be called conservon) that keeps both neutron and proton to obey the conservation law. The mass of conservon is of integer multiple of neutrino mass. It is possibly to help in creation of other temporary elementary particles that carry the energy such as bosons and ghosts. These elementary particles conservons are responsible for keeping the mass of neutrons inside and out side the nuclei and are working during the nuclear process. II- I predict that the protons and neutrons are composed of more than 6 to 8 elementary particles. The sub-quarks and conservons are the main components of the protons and neutrons. I think that these sub-quarks are of high magnetic field and align strongly as a magnetic dipoles in such away that they build the quark in form of N-S dipoles. Their high magnetic properties might be responsible for the strong nuclear forces. I may call these magnetic sub-quarks as magnetons. III- I think it is better to say now, because the binding energy is quantized inside the nucleus based on certain mass of protons and the neutrons and both are composite particles, so the neutron should deposit a part of its mass in the high electromagnetic belt as conservon particles to get inside the nucleus and receive it when it gets out. The electromagnetic belt is also regulating the gluon of the strong nuclear force which controls the required mass of the baryon to get in and out. In this mechanism, no mass converts to the binding energy. The gluon forces will create binding energy of nucleons when they enter the nucleus. The origin of the binding energy is derived from the gluon forces rather than from converting some mass of hadrons during the entrance. The energy of the projectile will help in formation of its binding energy. IV- In my perception that, the forces between protons do not follow the coulomb law perfectly because it is based on point charges and I suspect Gauss law also, which is more general form of Coulomb law, to work in such high charges in size of few fm. On the other hand, if we say that the neutron plays a role in attenuating (screening) this large Coulomb force this would decrease the net charges of the nucleus toward the outer electrons. The nucleus is a strange world and any law inside it, is somehow different than the outside law. I may explain the results of the experiments of particle physics done by scientist for the created and detected new particles during energetic collisions of other particles, as is done in particle accelerators, are coming from this belt and not from the nuclei otherwise the nuclei will be smashed or get into spallation process unless we talk about the nucleus as an open system. V- I think, in the core of the sun or any star, this electromagnetic belt of small nuclei became less dense in a region of high electromagnetic, pressure and temperature above 10 million 0K. In these circumstances the electromagnetic belt becomes loose (of very low barrier) and the protons and neutrons in their nuclei are more free to undergo the fusion reactions in equilibrium state (or reversible nuclear reaction) but the reaction will move toward the stable nuclei of magic number when these On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics 589 reaction occurred at region place little far from the sun core (i.e. in the circumferences of the core region) which release high energies. This phase may be representing a fifth state of matter beyond plasma (meta-plasma in which the electrons are free) in which protons and neutrons are moving more freely in their nuclei. This phase may be called “Nuclear Transparency” which endures extra super high temperature and pressure and electromagnetic field. In such Nuclear Transparency phase there is good probability to build the more stable nuclei of magic number in the sun core such as Fe, Ni, O, Si, S, Mg, C, Ne, Ca, and Cr and even higher nuclides (actinides). The fifth state may be responsible for the state of hydrostatic equilibrium, neither contracting nor expanding over time. VI- In the deep core of the sun and stars, the nuclei become completely bare of electromagnetic belt and the nucleons become free of their nuclei after passing the Nuclear Transparency phase. In this region the nucleons of all types analyses to their elementary particles and magnetic sub-quarks, magnetons, and start getting cold because no heat can pass or be emitted due to absence of the atomic orbitals and become more dense than the nuclei density and of high magnetic property and they bind each other through a very strong nuclear forces. This region may be born in the core of the sun and it moves up toward the surface as “cold” mass so called a sunspot. These sunspots collect together through a million of years to form a black hole state and this state of matter may be called the sixth state of matter. The black hole is the original region for creation of elements and then the compounds in the universe. When the star gets old it starts losing its gases and the plasma region will evaporate leaving the cold and magnetic black hole alone. The number of black holes is an indicative for the age of the star. The end life of any star is a black hole. If a big mass of hydrogen gas will strike the black hole it will ignite it again to create a new star and so on. This phase -Black hole- is beyond the meta- Nuclear Transparency and looks like the results announced by CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research) that they discovered a "new state of matter" in 2000” which called quark-gluon plasma, it is a phase of quantum chromodynamics, which exists at extremely high temperature and/or density and consists of (almost) free quarks and gluons which are the basic building blocks of matter. I can say the CERN quark-gluon plasma state is a transition state between Nuclear Transparency and the black hole sixth state of matter. VII- I suggest to the workers in nuclear research laboratories, to try to get a controlling fusion reaction, through main three setting 1- high force of electromagnetic field; 2- high pressure; 3- flash of high temperature, on Deuterium and Tritium nuclei to make their electromagnetic belt more loose in term of picoseconds to reach the Nuclear Transparency phase and get a controlled fusion reaction through controlling the force of the electromagnetic field taking into consideration of Lawson criterion (Lawson, 1957). The trials should go farther than tokamaks and stellarators technology (as in Torsatron, Heliotron and Helias). The weakness point in stellarator technology is the luck of high pressure. The used technology in magnetic confinement fusion and inertial confinement fusion are usually using only two of the three setting mentioned above that lessen their efficiency. But, generally, the magnetic field is more important than the pressure therefore, as I expect, the future of magnetic confinement fusion technology is more promising than the inertial confinement fusion. The magnetic field is very necessary to loosen the electromagnetic belts which help the nuclei to get into Nuclear Transparency to undergo fusion reactions. In conclusion, the nuclei in the universe have been built in the Nuclear Transparency phase and huge binding energies are saved in the nuclei and these energies librated during the nuclear processes and the conservons will keep the law of conservations. The same thing happens to nuclear fission and decay processes and no mass will convert to energy or vice versa. 590 Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen 7. The Nature of Electromagnetic Radiation1 The wave nature of electromagnetic radiation was first mathematically formulated by James Clerk Maxwell in 1861 the Scottish mathematician and theoretical physicist, ["On physical lines of force”], (Maxwell, 1861) and in 1865 [“A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field”] (Maxwell, 1865), and subsequently confirmed by the Germany physicist and mechanic Heinrich Hertz in 1887 (Hertz,1887). The electric and magnetic fields obey the properties of superposition such as refraction and diffraction. The main aspect of the nature of light is frequency. Electromagnetic radiation carries energy through frequency which may be important when it interacts with matter through interference. The great success of Max Planck in treating the black body radiation is due to his adaptation the idea of Boltzmann’s statistical interpretation of the second law of thermodynamic in 1877 that the wave consists of discrete packets of energy (Boltzmann, 1877). So, Planck treated the entropy of the spectrum of monochromatic energy as discrete packets of energy to simplify the treatment in similar manner of that of kinetic gas theory. He was deeply suspicious of his treatment and said that “My unavailing attempts to somehow reintegrate the action quantum into classical theory extended over several years and caused me much trouble”. Really, he did not quantize the energy because it is quantized in nature due to electron-nucleus structure but his treatment was completely correct due to the emitted fixed frequencies of the monochromatic light. Therefore, at that time he did not realize that he revealed a great fact on the atomic structure from quantization point of view. Unfortunately these suggested packets were misinterpreted by Einstein in 1909, as small zero mass particles which must have well-defined momenta and act in some respects as independent pointlike particles and called photons and confirmed that “the energy and momentum of light are concentrated in particles” (Einstein, 1909). Actually, Einstein was incorrect and these packets are still waves in nature. The gravitational redshift which based on the particle theory of light is also incorrect because the nuclear materials of stars are full of magnetic property that interferes with magnetic vector of light and not due to particulate property (photons) of light. This misinterpretation, by Einstein, (Einstein, 1911) also lead Compton (Compton, 1923) and De Broglie to misbelieve that the light is of dual character (De Broglie, 1924). As I think that, the source of any light whether from sun or from our artificial sources is no more than an emission spectra. In this process the electrons of the atoms and molecules absorb energy and became excited and jump to higher levels then they will get down emitting the electromagnetic radiation. These processes of jumping up and falling down will generate a series of waves (like heart pulses) and not continuous electromagnetic wave. The energy of these pulses is represented by their frequencies. Thus, these discrete packets of energy are still waveform in nature and I may call each of discrete packets of energy as " frequentons " to differentiate them from discrete packets of photons of particle nature. The same thing can be said for gamma which emitted from the nuclear energy levels as energy quanta (frequentons). Subsequently, the light does not need an energy carrier, like photons, but it transfers its energy to the matter through interference. We can say that “The energy of light that propagate as a ray, is not continuously distributed over steadily increasing spaces, but it consist of a finite number of energy quanta called frequentons which is absorbed and emitted as entities”. In the sun, the source of energy are the nuclear reactions which emit gamma rays in energy quanta based on the shell model (spin-orbit interaction model) that will strike the atoms of the gases that result in light. This light when entering our atmosphere will strike the electrons of all molecules of gases. Molecules can absorb and emit light through its electrons. Once a molecule has absorbed light 1 From a particle theory point of view, René Descartes (1596-1650) declared that light was a disturbance of the plenum, the continuous substance of which the universe was composed. Pierre Gassendi (1592-1655), an atomist, proposed a particle theory of light which was published posthumously in the 1660s. Isaac Newton studied Gassendi's work at an early age, and preferred his view to Descartes' theory of the plenum. He stated in his Hypothesis of Light of 1675 that light was composed of corpuscles (particles of matter). From a wave theory point of view, Robert Hooke published a wave theory of light in 1660s. Christiaan Huygens worked out his own wave theory of light in 1678, and published it in his Treatise on light in 1690. He proposed that light was emitted in all directions as a series of waves in a medium called the luminiferous ether. As waves are not affected by gravity, it was assumed that they slowed down upon entering a denser medium. On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics 591 (energy), the molecule can, rotate, translate, vibrate, and undergo electronic transition which leads to full a spectrum due to the electronic, vibrational and rotational energies of the molecules. 8. Notes on Photoelectric Effect The necessity for finding a concept of particle behavior for electromagnetic radiations was due to the explanation of photoelectric effect. When Einstein interpreted the photoelectric effect phenomenon using the particle concept in light, his work was accepted at that time in 1905 because the nucleus was not yet discovered until the work of Ernest Rutherford in 1911 and the fundamental picture of nucleus was completed in 1934 after the discovery of the neutron (Rutherford, 1904-1933). So, in 1905, there was unclear picture or vision about the atom and how the electrons are bound with the nucleus and moving in specific orbital of quantized nature that results in absorption and emission in specific frequencies based on Bohr model (Bohr, 1913). Other points to mention, are the zero mass photons could not transfer the energy as momentum through impact with the electrons in addition to that even Einstein who supposed the photons behave as particles but he has not to forget that the wave character would still work with light and could transfer its energy to the electrons through interference of their electromagnetic fields. The formula used by Einstein for photoelectric effect is still valid but in view of frequentons as follow: hf=Φ +EKmax • H is plank’s constant • f is the frequency of the incident frequenton • Φ=hfo is the work function (or W) 2 • EKmax =1/2m vm the maximum kinetic energy of ejected electrons • fo is the threshold frequency for the photoelectric effect to occur • m is the rest mass of the ejected electron, and 2 • vm is the velocity of the ejected electron In conclusion, Einstein was obliged to use quantized particles such as photons to interpret the photoelectric effect phenomenon because he did not realize at that time the electrons are quantized in their energies. The success of Einstein in his treatment was not attributed for photons proposal but for two main reasons, 1- The use of Max Planck conversion factor, h and 2- The real quantized nature of electrons (i.e. absorb and emit energy in quantized energies due to the quantized levels of energy). The use of Max Planck conversion factor, h, also lead to success of the Bohr and Schrödinger theoretical treatments (Bohr, 1913; Schrödinger, 1926) in spite of their using the weak basic concepts such Coulomb law which is correct to static point charge and not to the moving charged like electron, screening effects, exchange integral and others. Although, Schrödinger had made several approximations on his theoretical treatments but the final solutions gave inaccurate description to the final calculated orbital’s functions especially in the molecular system. In the thirties of twentieth century Slater treated the screening effect and effective Z (Slater, 1960) and Clementi and Raimondi in 1963(Clementi and Raimondi, 1963; 1967). Several basis sets have published later to describe the electrons in their orbits including such corrections. Now we can interpret this photoelectric effect phenomenon from the wave point of view, energy frequento, that the traveling electromagnetic wave, frequentons, incidents on atomic structure (even in crystal form) will induces oscillation in the atom and result in electrons excitation. If the frequency of incident frequenton equal or larger of that electron it will leave the atom with kinetic energy. This process will take place through the interference mechanism (i.e. obey superposition law the light electric and magnetic vectors with matter corresponding vectors of its electrons as simple vector addition). The simplest conception is that a light quantum frequenton transfer its entire energy to a single electron through interference. 592 Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen Finally, I can say that the electromagnetic spectrum is a pure wave and does not have dual character like electrons and any small charged particles. The quantum defects and other parameters (effective Z and N) were treated (Muhyedeen, AlThib and Derwish, 1993) and more accurate data than those of Slater and Clementi were calculated and extended to radon. 9. The Dual Character of Electrons-Like Particles As we discussed above, the electron is a pure charged particle and when it moves it will generate magnetic field perpendicular on the electric field. The resulted electromagnetic field is an inherent property and it will affect its behavior and gives the electron the wave nature. From this point of view, it will show a dual character. But this behavior does not mean it converts from a particle form to a wave form or vice versa. Possibly, only charged particles can show this property and obeyed De Broglie formula, λ=h/p. The process of generating the negative or positive charge to the electron depends on the wave configuration deduced from the net electromagnetic field. Of course, the electron diffraction pattern showed by Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer, in Bell Lab in 1927 (Davisson, 1937; 1965), was due to the inherent electromagnetic field of the electron and not to the electron mass itself. The Fresnel diffraction and specular reflection of neutral atoms could be related to their electron electromagnetic clouds (Oberst et al 2005; Goodman, 1996). I think that the atoms are look like spongy spherical balls in their behavior due to great electromagnetic field of their electrons and they show great elasticity and wave character through any impact. The new concept, submitted by De Broglie, of wave character of the electron led Erwin Schrödinger to overdo in wave nature of the electron and created the wave mechanic and described the electron by pure wave nature which resulted in some errors in the final calculations. Of course, Einstein in his late age, 1950, he believed with wave nature of the electron to confirm the deterministic character of the measurement and to defeat the probabilistic principles of Copenhagen of Bohr and Heisenberg, and forgot that the wave nature of the electron will spoil the photoelectric effect mechanism between the electron and the photon. I can say the idea that the electron is of pure wave nature is nonsense, because, if the electron nature is really pure wave without mass density then the material structure will depend on the nuclei of small size and the universe will be in different style. Furthermore, if the electron is wave, to whom the mass (me=9.109x10-31 Kg) belongs? Is it to the wave? In conclusion, the electron has a mass therefore it behaves as particle and it has an electromagnetic field thus it behaves as wave. 10. Notes on Compton’s Effect Arthur Compton was incorrect when he used the particle character of light, the photons; in his derivation in addition to that he used mec2 to describe the electron energy in the atom which does not describe well the electron energy, Eγ+Ee= Eγ/+Ee/, where Ee=mc2 (Compton, 1923). We can easily interpret the Compton’s effect through the reacting of the quantum of light (frequentons) with the dual character of the circulating electron through its mass and its inherent electromagnetic field, then the electron will absorb the energy of the incident frequenton through its electromagnetic field and it recoils while the other frequentons will interfere with the electromagnetic field and endure reflection based on the electromagnetic field of the electron direction. In this process we do not need the particle character of light represented by photons. So, neither the photoelectric effect nor the Compton’s effect need light photons to be understood or interpreted. Of course, other charged particle will show the same dual property. I prefer to rewrite the Compton’s equation using b constant, optimum speed for electrons, (see Section 14) instead of C velocity of light as follow: λ/-λ=h/(meb)(1-cosθ), and the corrected Compton wavelength will equal to 1.164x10-11m rather than 2.43x10-12m. On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics 593 11. Notes on Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle Since, the uncertainty of Heisenberg (Heisenberg, 1927) is based on the deflection of the electron by photon in Compton’s effect, therefore this principle become less accurate because of incorrect concept of the particular behavior of the photon. Heisenberg thought that at the time that the incident photon will immediately impact the electron and causes it to shift; he said that “the reflected photon will change the momentum of the atom by an uncertain amount inversely proportional to the accuracy of the position measurement”. But, as I explained in the previous paragraph that light does not have photons to impact and deflect the electron. In stead, I can say that when the frequenton interact with the electromagnetic field of the electron of the matter there is enough time to measure the position and the momentum of the electron and now we can talk about new concept of the certainty principle as follow: The origin of the uncertainty principle came from the theorem in Fourier analysis that the standard deviation of the square absolute value of a function, , times the standard deviation of the square absolute value of its Fourier transform, is at least <1/16π2> (Folland and Sitaram theorem 1.1, <1/16π2) =1, if we take the square root of both side we will get → = (1/4π). In the wave treatment, the uncertainty in the wave number, ύ, with position, x, of wave is a well-know formula, ∆x.∆ύ =1/4π. If we used De Broglie to get ύ value as P/h, then we get (∆x.∆P) ≥ h/4π, which represents the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Now, we can surely say that the position and the momentum can certainly be exactly measured and the value of (∆x.∆P) = h/4π will give the exact value. 12. Does Radiation have Mass? Most scientists predict that the body loses some of its weight after radiation. Max Planck in 1907 reported after a deep investigation that "The inertia mass of body is altered by absorption or emission of heat energy. The increment of mass of body are equal to heat energy divided by square of speed of light [(m-M)=E/c2] (Plank, 1907; 1908). Einstein also in 1909 showed in his paper, The Development of Our Views on the Composition and Essence of Radiation, that the inertial mass of an object decreases by (L/c2) when that object emits radiation of energy L (Einstein,1909). Of course this concept again is incorrect because all types of energy have zero mass. The heated mass as long as it has been supplied by any energy source such as heating or electric potential it radiates an emission spectra in form of light or any frequency as an electromagnetic radiation, but it does not loss any mass. In other clear words, there is no mass loss during radiation. We can say that the absorbed energy will affect the density of the materials and followed Max Planck equation E=KPlanckT, but not its mass due its wave nature of the energy, where kPlanck is equal to 1.429*10-23 J/deg, and T is the temperature supplied to the material (in oK). 13. Non-Relativistic Quantum Mass-Energy Equivalence, E=mbc: I have introduced above that the concept of conversion of mass to energy or vice versa is incorrect. We need few decades to improve the theories that enable us to calculate the binding energy for these reactions, as we do for chemical reactions, through the optical model, shell model (Eugene Paul Wigner, Maria Goeppert-Mayer and J. Hans D. Jensen) and liquid drop model (Weizsäcker's formula). But for nuclear reactions, we usually use the speculative converting factor of Einstein’s massenergy equivalence formula E=mc² to do reaction calculations. In this regard, I would like to suggest a new conversion factor based on experimental principles, first, it is based on semi-empirical formula, second, it is based on wave quantized character (energy frequenton) and third, it is based on universal constants which reflect frequentons characters which called by Max Planck energy resonators. 594 Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen Starting from black body treatment of Max Planck (Planck, 1901), we realize that the emission of electromagnetic radiation from the black body is depend and on the temperature which also determines the frequency of the emitted radiation. If we used the two universal constantly of Max Planck (hPlanck= 6.62606896*10-34 J.sec), (kPlanck= 1.429*10-23 J/deg) (in oK) we can see that the energy can be given from these two constants; E=hPlanckν and E=kPlanckT. Please note that this constant is also known as Boltzmann2. The success of Max Planck treatment which results in finding the two constants hPlanck and kPlanck was based on three assumptions that the energy is quantized; the temperature is in Kelvin and the wavelength at its max value. These assumptions and in addition to some theorem and some experimental values led him to a historical success of black body radiation. Now, we have to use the same three assumptions to find the new converting factor (massenergy equivalence formula). If we start from the relation between the temperature of the black body radiation and the energy through the second constant KPlanck we will get the following equation: E=KPlanck Tblackbody (1) Here the value of Tblackbody should be one Kelvin. During the black body radiation treatment, this temperature is well related with the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation. The most genuine relation between Tblackbody and λmax is coming from Wien’s displacement law (Mehra,1982) which states that there is an inverse relationship between the wavelength of the peak of the emission of black body and its temperature as follow: λmax = Where: b Tbalckbody (2) λmax is the peak wavelength in meter T is the temperature of the blackbody in Kelvin’s (oK), and b is a constant of proportionality, called Wien’s displacement constant and equals 2.8977685(51)x10-3 meter* Kelvin 3; Hence we have; λmax or o 2.8977685 * 10 -3 m ∗ o K = T oK ( ) (3) T K = ( ) 2.8977685 * 10 -3 m ∗ o K λmax (4) Now, if substitute equation .4 into 1 at one Kelvin due to Max Planck assumptions, we get; 2 Of course, the KPlanck constant is calculated by Max Planck through his treatment of black body radiation when he used the entropy equation as appeared in his reprint in item 2 eq=3” §2. We now set the entropy SN of the system proportional to the logarithm of its probability W, within an arbitrary additive constant, so that the N resonators together have the energy EN: (#3) SN = k log W + constant And in item 11, in eq. no. 14 he related both h and k as appeared in his reprint” “(14) k4/h4 = 1.1682 *1015”. And in item 12, he related both h and k in another formula as appeared in his reprint” h/k=(4.9561*0.294)/3.1010=4.866x10-11 In the literature, this KB is called Boltzmann constant (which given by R/Na or It is the gas constant divided by the Avogadro constant), and this equation SN = k log W + constant is called Boltzmann equation. My comment is that, Planck reached this formula and calculated the k constant with h constant. Of courses, Planck mentioned in his paper that such expression used by L. Boltzmann for a similar idea. 3 Of course, the b is a constant of proportionality, called Wien’s displacement constant and equals 2.8977685(51) x10-3 meter* Kelvin, which can be given by (hc/k)/4.965114. If you use these constants (hc/k) directly and not from b constant, then you will get a similar formula, E=(1/4.965114)*mc2 or E=0.20846*mc2. On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics 595 E = K Planck * 2.8977685 * 10 -3 m λmax (5) Now, what we search is to find a mass-energy equivalence formula that relates between the mass of any particle and its energy and this may be done through the wavelength of the blackbody radiation which gives the emission spectra of the excited moving electrons. We can use the mass of any fundamental particles which move in high velocity and has a dual character such as electron. The sole relationship between m and λ is coming from De Broglie (De Broglie, 1924) expression which relates the wavelength and the momentum of these particles through Planck constant, hPlanck. So, we can write p = hPlanck / λmax (6) Or λmax = hPlanck P (7) The momentum of the high speed particle which moves near velocity of light can be given by the following equation; p=mc (8) Where: m is the mass of the particle, and; c is the velocity of light equals to 2.99792*108 m/s We now substitute the value of momentum P from equation 8 into the wavelength of the black body in equation 7; λmax = hPlanck mc (9) And by substituting the value of the wavelength by its corresponding momentum from equation 9 into equation no.5, we get; 2.8977685 * 10 -3 m E = K Planck * * mc hPlanck Or (10) 1.429 *10 -23 J/deg 2.8977685 * 10 -3 m E= * * mc 6.62606896 *10 -34 J.sec Or (11) (12) This equation may be rewrite as a general formula as E=(mb)c or as follow: E=mbc (13) b is universal constant and equals to 0.624942362 x 108 m/s which may represent the optimum speed for electrons or any light charged particle. Now, we can write the mass-energy equivalent as follow: E = 0.624942362 x108 * mc E = 0.624942362 x108 * c m E = 1.87354 x1016 J / Kg m (14) The mass-energy equivalence will gets its final value if we substitute for the velocity of light 2.99792*108 m/s, as follow: (15) 596 Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen For one atomic unit, amu, the mass-energy equivalent is calculated as follow: 1amu = (1.66054 *10-27 kg)* 1.87354*1016 J/kg 1amu = 3.111*10-11 J The equivalent energy to one amu in MeV is calculated as follow: 1 amu (in MeV) = 3.111*10-11 J * MeV/ 1.60218*10-13 J (16) (17) (18) Or 1 amu = (194.177) MeV (19) If we relate our value of the mass-energy equivalence in MeV with that of Einstein then we get the following; the ratio of mbc /mc2 is equal to (194.177 MeV/ 931.49 MeV) = 0.20846 Let us now test our mass-energy equivalent of (E/m) from our equation E=mbc in relation to the speculative equation of Einstein E=mc2 in the calculation of the energy released from nuclear fission where the Einstein equation E=mc2 overestimated the Q-value. In laboratory it is confirmed (Hambsch,1989; Thiereus, 1981) that using thermal neutrons the Total Kinetic Energy (TKE) of fission fragments (of the mass=3.55x10-28Kg) that results from of U235 and Pu-239 is 20-60MeV less than Q-value of reaction predicted by Einstein’s equation E=mc2 (200MeV for U-235). These observations are more than three decades old (Bakhoum, 2002). Some alternate suggestions have been made to explain the total kinetic energy of fission fragments by extending the successful Liquid-Drop Model of Bohr and Wheeler (Straede, 1987; Wilkins, 1976). Bakhoum has attempted to explain the same with Wave Mechanical equation E=mv2 (Bakhoum, 2002). Let the TKE of fission fragments is 175MeV (as experimentally it is observed less), instead of expected 200MeV. The Experimental Vlaue (Hambsch,1989;Thiereus, 1981) scaled-values 29.4-37.8 MeV From Our Equation E=mbc 41.7 MeV From E=mc2 (Einstein,1905) 200 MeV From E=mv2 From Gaussian graph (Bakhoum,2002) 175 MeV 14. Some Derived Equations for Non-Relativistic Particles As I expect, that the b constant is a universal value which represents the integrated or optimum velocity of all elemental particles can be emitted through all nuclear reactions or processes and no charged particle can exceed this value unless it is accelerated. Therefore, this constant can be used to calculate the momentum of the elemental particles such as electron, muon, tau lepton and hadrons as shown below: Since E=mbc, then the momentum, P can be derived by division by velocity of light: (E/c)=[(mbc)/c] then the momentum will be given as below; P=mb (1) We can now write a similar equation to De Broglie for non-relativistic equation as follow λ= h Bm (2) The B constant may represent the optimum velocity of the elementary particles, and can be used to relate the wavelength and the frequency of the elementary particles as below: b=λυ (3) This equation can be used for particles moving with velocities less than velocity of light and the energy can be calculated as follow: E=hb/λ (4) or E=mb2 (5) Which can be applied for heavy hadrons but less than alpha, and; E=mbc (6) On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics 597 which can be applied for light particles such as electron, muon and neutrino and others. Consequently, for the momentum, P, value for electron in excited atomic orbital or in Beta decay from nucleus can be calculated from the following: P=bme, me=9.109x10-31 Kg P=0.624942362 x 108 m/s x 9.109x10-31 Kg P=5.692599975458x 10-23 Kg m/s The wavelength of the electron of excited atomic orbital or Beta decay can be calculated from b constant. λ= υ= h = 1.164x10-11m Bm E MBC = =25.7736 x 10-18 Hz h h The frequency of the electron is given by: The energy of beta decay may be calculated from E=mbc directly as follow: E=mbc = 1.704375 x10-14 J or E= 0.107 MeV The remainder of the beta energy will appear as excess energy of the neutrino. The energy equation E=hυ=hb/λ can be used in particles physics for heavy particles more than alpha based on its speed. The speed should be near the b-value. For the heavy charged particles the formula E=mvb can be used in estimation of its velocity. 15. b-Constant Components Since the two components of the light or the electromagnetic ray, the magnetic constant, µo and electric constant, εo are related to the speed of light due to Maxwell formula as follow: c= 1 µ oε o , εo= 8.854187817 x 10-12 F/m, µo= 1.256637061 x 10-6 N/A2 Then we can write the same equation for the constant b,and calculate the magnetic component for the charged particle field. But here we can suppose that the value of electric constant, εo is fixed due to the fixed electronic constant but the value of the magnetic constant, µo will change and increase for these charged particles that result in strong interaction more than the electromagnetic spectrum. Thus, we get the new magnetic constant, µB as follow: B= 1 µ B x8.85418781710 −12 , then the new value of µB of the charged particle is equal to 3.265 x 10-6 N/A2. So, the ratio of the magnetic constant µB=3.265 x 10-6 N/A2 of the charged particle is larger than that of light µo=1.256637061 x 10-6 N/A2 by 2.56 and this give a special magnetic property to field of the charged particles. For example, the strong bonds in the chemical interactions are due to the strong interference of electromagnetic ray with the electromagnetic field of the electron. Of course, this concept is novel in field of electrodynamic quantum science. 16. Summary and Concluding Remarks I have discussed the idea of conversion of mass to energy and vice versa and I showed it is incorrect neither in the chemical nor in nuclear reactions. I proposed a primitive new nuclear model (still not mature model) to explain the nuclear reaction. This model proposes a new elementary particle called conservon. I also proposed the fifth and sixth states of matter. The fifth state represents the nuclear transparency in which the nuclear 598 Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen components are loosely bound and free to endure a nuclear reaction due to the weakness of the electromagnetic belt. The sixth state represent the black hole structure in which there are no nuclei identities but only elementary particles that combined with very strong nuclear forces. This state represents the basic building blocks of matter. I discussed the nature of light and I explained it is composed of wave discrete packets of "frequentons " to differentiate them from discrete packets of photons of particle nature. I concluded that light is not of dual character. I also explained both the photoelectric effect and Compton’s effect based on the new wave concept of light represented by frequentons. I maintained that moving charged particles are dual in nature due to their charge and its inherent electromagnetic field. I also maintained that the radiating body will not lose any mass. Finally, I derived a simple semi-empirical formula for non-relativistic mass-energy equivalence E=mbc, where b is universal constant in term of speed units and equals to 0.624942362 x 108 m/s. This constant is equal to 0.2085 of speed of light. In my opinion that this constant represents the optimum speed to be reached by the moving charged particles. If this fact is proved experimentally then the Lorentz factor will be of low values that in turn will decrease the relativity idea of relative mass, time dilation, length contraction and other ideas of relativity. Finally, we can use this constant to relate the wavelength and the frequency of the elementary particles in such that b=λυ. Other non-relativistic quantum equation are derived for high speed charged particles such as p=mb, λ=h/mb, E=hb/λ, E=mb2, E=mvb and E=mbc. I believe that this b constant is not less importance in non- relativistic quantum mechanic than Planck constant h. Acknowledgement The author is highly indebted to Professor Dr. G. A. W. Derwish for his valuable and fruitful discussions, suggestion and comments. On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics 599 References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] Agrawal V., S.M. Barr, J.F. Donoghue, D. Seckel, 1998. "The anthropic principle and the mass scale of the Standard Model". Physical Review D 57 (9), pp. 5480 – 5492. Arygres P., 2001. “An Introduction to Global Supersymmetry” Baer H. and T. Xerxes, 2006. “Weak Scale Supersymmetry”, Cambridge University Press. Bakhoum, E. G., 2002. Physics Essays, 15, 1 (Preprint archive: physics/0206061). Bartocci, U. Albert Einstein e Olinto De Pretto, 1999. “la vera storia della formula pi`u famosa del mondo” (Ed. Andromeda, Bologna). Bilal A., 2001. “Introduction to Supersymmetry”. Boltzmann L., 1877. Proceedings of imperial Academy of Science, Vienna, (II) 76, pp. 428. Bohr N., 1913. “On the Constitution of Atoms and Molecules”, Philosophical Magazine, Series 6, 26. pp. 1-25. Bromley D. A., 2000. “Gauge Theory of Weak Interactions”, Springer. ISBN 3-540-67672-4 Clementi, E. and D.L. Raimondi, 1963. J. Chem. Phys., 38, pp. 2686. Clementi, E., D.L. Raimondi, and W.P. Reinhardt, 1967. J. Chem. Phys., 47, pp. 1300. Cohen, A. B., 1971. “Concepts of Nuclear Physics”, McGraw-Hill. Chap 4. Compton Arthur H., 1923. “ A Quantum Theory of the Scattering of X-Rays by Light Elements”, Physical Review. Cooper, F., A. Khare and U. Sukhatme, 1995. "Supersymmetry in Quantum Mechanics”. Phys. Rep. 251, pp. 267-85. Davisson C.,1965. "The Discovery of Electron Waves", Nobel Lectures, Physics 1922-1941. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing Company. Retrieved on 2007-09-17. Davisson C.,1937. Nobel Foundation. " The Nobel Prize in Physics 1937". Les Prix Nobel. Retrieved on 2007-09-17. Drees M., 1996. “An Introduction to Supersymmetry”. De Broglie L., 1924. “Recherches sur la théorie des quanta” (Researches on the quantum theory), Thesis, Paris. Dugne, J.-J.; Fredriksson, S.; and Hansson, J.; Preon Trinity, 2002. “A Schematic Model of Leptons, Quarks and Heavy Vector Bosons”, Europhys. Lett., 57, pp. 188. Eidelman S. et al, 2004. “Particle data group: the quark model”, Physics Letters B 592, pp. 1. Einstein, A., 1905. Annalen der Physik 18, pp. 639. Encyclopedia Britannica, 2008 Grand unified theory (GUT), Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica. Fernbach S., R. Serber, and T.B. Tayler, 1949. “The Scattering of High-Energy Neutrons by Nuclei”, Phys. Rev. 75, pp.1352. Freedman R. and, H.Young, 2004, “University Physics with Modern Physics”, 11th international edition, Sears and Zemansky, 1633-4. ISBN 0-8053-8768-4. Georgi H., “Lie algebras in particle physics”, Addison-Wesley Longman, ISBN 0-7382-0233-9. Goodman, J. W., 1996. “Introduction to Fourier optics”, New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07024254-2. Hambsch, F.J. et al., 1989. Nucl. Phys. A, 491, pp. 56. Hawking S., 1988. “A Brief History of Time”. Hertz H.R.,1887 May. "Ueber sehr schnelle electrische Schwingingungen", Annalen der Physik,2, 31, pp. 421. Hertz H.R.,1888 March. "Ueber Einwirkung einer geradlinigen electrische Schwingingung", Annalen der Physik, 2, 34, pp. 155. Hertz, H.R.,1888 May. "Ueber Ausbreitungsgeschwindigkeit der electrodynamische", Annalen der Physik, 2, 34, pp. 551. Heisenberg W., 1927. "Über den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik", Zeitschrift für Physik, 43, pp. 172-198. 600 [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] Bahjat R. J. Muhyedeen Junker, G., 1996. “Supersymmetric Methods in Quantum and Statistical Physics”, SpringerVerlag. Kane G. L., 1987. “Modern Elementary Particle Physics”, Perseus Books, ISBN 0-201-117495. Lykken J. D., 1996. “Introduction to Supersymmetry”. Lawson J. D. 1957. Proceedings of the Physical Society B, Vol. 70, pp. 6. Martin S., 1999. “A Supersymmetry Primer”. Maxwell J. M., 1861. “On Physical Lines of Force”. Maxwell J. M., 1865. “A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field”. Mehra, J. and H. Rechenberg, 1982. "The Historical Development of Quantum Theory", Volume 1 Chapter 1, Springer. Muhyedeen B. R. J., A. T. Al- Thib, and G. A. W. Derwish, 1993. Iraqi J. Chem., 11, 3. Newton, Sir Isaac, 1704. “Opticks”, pp. CVX, (reprinted by Dover Publications, Inc., New York, (1952). Ohrl H and Wien F. Sitzungen, 1904. F. Ann. der Phys. IIA, 113, pp. 1039; Ohrl H., 1905. F. Ann. der Phys. 16, pp. 589. Oberst H., D. Kouznetsov, K. Shimizu, J. Fujita, F. Shimizu, 2005. “Fresnel diffraction mirror for atomic wave”, Physical Review Letters, 94, pp. 013203. Parker B., 1993. “Overcoming some of the problems”, pp. 259-279. Pati, J. C. and A. Salam, 1974. “Lepton number as the fourth "color", Phys. Rev. D10, pp. 275289. Planck M. 1901. ”On the Law of Distribution of Energy in the Normal Spectrum”, Annalen der Physik, 4, pp. 553. Planck M., 1908. Ann. Phys. 26, pp. 1. Planck, M, 1907. Sitz. der preuss. Akad.Wiss., Physik. Math. Klasse 13 (June). Poincar´e J.H., 1900. Arch. neerland. sci., 2, 5, pp. 232. Poincar´e J.H., 1900. In Boscha, pp. 252. Preston S. T., 1875. “Physics of the Ether”, E. & F. N. Spon, London; see also, http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep6/ep6-bjerk1.htm Pretto O. De, 1904. “Ipotesi dell’etere nella vita dell’universo”, Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, Feb. 1904, tomo LXIII, parte II, pp. 439-500. Rohlf, J. W., 1994. “Modern Physics from a to Z0”, Wiley. Rutherford E., 1904. “ Radio-activity, 2nd ed. (1905), ISBN 978-1-60355-058-1 Rutherford E., 1906. “Radioactive Transformations”, ISBN 978-160355-054-3 Rutherford E., 1904. “Radiations from Radioactive Substances”. Rutherford E., 1926. “The Electrical Structure of Matter”. Rutherford E., 1933. “The Artificial Transmutation of the Elements”. Schrödinger E. 1926. "An Undulatory Theory of the Mechanics of Atoms and Molecules". Phys. Rev. 28, 6, pp. 1049–1070. doi:10.1103/ Phys Rev. 28. pp. 1049. Schrödinger E. 1926. Annalen der Physik, (Leipzig), Main paper Schwarz P., 1998. “The Official String Theory Web Site”. Retrieved on December 16, 2005, March, 2008. Singer C., 1941. “A Short History of Science to the Nineteenth Century, Clarendon Press, pp. 217. Soddy F, 1904. “Radioactivity: An Elementary Treatise from Standpoint of the Disintegration Theory” (“The Electrician “Printing and Publishing, London), Slater J. C., 1960. “Quantum Theory of Atomic Structure", Volumes I & II McGraw-Hill, N.Y. Straede C. et al, 1987. Nucl. Phys. A. 462, pp. 85. Thiereus H. et al, 1981. Phys. Rev. C, 23, pp. 2104. On a Heuristic Viewpoints Concerning the Mass, Energy and Light Concepts in Quantum Physics 601 [69] [70] [71] [72] Troost J., 2002. “Beyond String Theory”. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Theoretical Physics (TENA). Retrieved on December 16, 2005. – An ongoing project by a string physicist, working for the French CNRS. The Life of Godfrey William von Leibnitz Full text of John M. Mackie's 1845 biography of Leibniz from Google Books. Wilkins B. D et al, 1976. Phys. Rev. C. 14, pp.1832. Witten E., 1998. “Duality, Spacetime and Quantum Mechanics”, Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics. Retrieved on December 16, 2005.