Contradictions between Maxwell theory and QM

Contradictions between Maxwell theory and QM

Below is an email from a professor of mathematics on  Contradictions between Maxwe ll theory and QM:



Victor, I see nothing wrong with for some one relationship with our God is
rather personal and for someone else it is rather social (communal). God
loves us all. So, we have to love each other to honor loving God. We must
remember that Christ told us to "love our enemies". This made me cry! This
made me strong.

As far as I can see, there is a disconnect, or even contradiction between
Maxwell and QM.

1. The so called Planck's quantization of light was a mathematical trick
to resolve the tension between the Maxwell's theory and the blackbody
radiation experiment.  Even Planck himself did not believe in it. He was
embarrassed to propose it.

2. This idea of quantized light wave combined with Einstein's relativity
theory created a mess which proves that fh = 1 for all frequency f.

3. Suntora showed that the reason why we had problem with the blackbody
radiation had nothing to do with Maxwell. It was that we assumed that the
light wave was  harmonic wave instead of monochromatic wave, which lead to
the puzzle of the blackbody radiation.

4. So the quantum theory of electromagnetic wave is false.

5. So the only decent conclusion we can draw on the issue of relation
between QM and Maxwell is that there is no reason to believe in QM. Even
at the level of em waves, QM and Maxwell do not agree.

6. This however does not exclude the issue of the inherent problem with
Maxwell's theory itself.

7    We have some disturbing irregularity in the development of the theory
of em wave emission. The issue started with Maxwell's modification of
Ampère's law to include a displacement current, which was not a standard
conduction current. It was the rate of change of electric field rather.
This change was purely mathematical and was not backed up by ontology.
Indeed, electric field is an abstract concept which violates the
action-reaction law (or equivalently the conservation of momentum law).
This provided the conservation of charge in case of the change of electric
field. The modified  Ampère's law is

∇×B=((4π)/c)J+(1/c)(∂/(∂t))E

where c=(1/(ε₀μ₀)). The problem here is that Maxwell obtained this
equation only under the assumption that the the charges involved move with
constant speed, no acceleration. But he used this reformed law under the
assumption that charges involved are moving with acceleration to derive
the em wave equation.
    This is precisely the same logical error as in the derivation of e=mc²
by Einstein discussed in the forgoing. His Special Theory of
Relativity Kinematics was built under the assumption that no mass
involved is moving with acceleration. Yet he obtained e=mc² under the
assumption that the masses involved are moving under acceleration.

8. Addition to 2.

To avoid the energy of photon

E=mc²=((m₀)/(√(1-(v/c)²)))c²

diverge by setting v=c, Einstein assumed that m₀, the rest mass of photon,
is zero. This makes the photon's energy to be 0/0. Considering that 0x=0
is an indefinite linear equation meaning that any number can be a solution
of this equation, Einstein assumed that 0/0 is any number and chose

0/0=hf.

With this convention, Einstein fully developed relativistic theory of
photons.
    It is unfortunate that mathematically 0/0  and indefinite 0x=0 are
different things. 0/0 involves division by 0 which is invalid on
mathematics while 0x=0 does not. This mathematical error immediately
yields the following physical contradiction at the relativistic
energy-momentum relation:

e=√((cp)²+(m₀)²c⁴)=cp=((m₀vc)/(√(1-((v/c))²)))=(0/0)cv=c²hf=hf.
From this we conclude that hf=1.

Akira Kanda
Toronto University

P.S. I will develop further  on this.

---

My response:

Dear Prof. Akira Kanda

Thanks for your comment on my personal contact with God. I agree that God revealed Himself in many ways, like watching the ocean wave, or just starring at the night sky.


Our paper on Maxwell -Dirac isomorphism is intended as counter-argument to so many claims by QM proponents that QM supersede classical physics.


We disagree. We submit instead that a viewpoint that QM founders borrowed extensively from classical physics, that we can prove that the celebrated Dirac equation is a result of transformation of Maxwell by virtue of Pauli matrice.


Humbly yours,


Victor

Dikirim dari ponsel cerdas Samsung Galaxy saya.