"We hope that the present fluctuationsof thinking are only Indication of an upheaval of old beliefs which in the endwill lead to something better than the mess of formulas which today surroundsour subject."
25.Up to this point, I have been discussing the mechanical utilization of thebasic building entity of all matter: the "gyroscopic-action-entity.” Iwill now conceptually relate the behavior of this "gyroscopic-action-entity" to QUANTUM MECHANICS.
[NOTE:I will now be discussing other important concepts concerning the nature of thegyroscopic particle. I must add that there are those who may feel that I shouldhave published these other concepts in a separate book rather than combinetheir exposition with a presentation describing the nature of my energymachine. I disagree with anyone who may feel this way. The universal nature ofthe gyroscopic particles (more generally referred to as"gyroscopic-action- entities") which I have discovered is of fargreater significance than one, simple application of their utilization, i.e.,my energy machine. By combining these two intellectual areas, I wish tostimulate the mind of the reader to think beyond the limitations of thoughtimposed by the study of one technical application. I would prefer that thereader give more careful consideration to understanding a universal principle:the principle inherent in the nature and action of the gyroscopic particle!]
A. I will quote several passages from awell-written book entitled The Nature of Physics by Peter J. Brancazio ofBrooklyn College, City University of New York [published by MacMillanPublishing Company, Inc., New York, 1975). From page 585:
''Thediscovery that material particles exhibit wave characteristics adds a newdimension to the problem of wave-particle duality. The classical descriptionsof light as a wave and matter as composed of solid particles no longer seemvalid -for both matter and light have been found to display wave and particlecharacteristics. How can we provide a coherent explanation for these extremelypuzzling discoveries? One way to resolve the problem of wave-particle dualityis to assume that one or the other is more fundamental. There are two possiblealternatives:
"(1)light and matter are ultimately composed of particles. Their wave propertiesderive from the group behavior of a large number of interacting particles.[This approach, it will be recalled, was unsuccessfully adopted by Einstein inan attempt to explain the behavior of light.]
"(2)Light and matter are ultimately composed of waves. The particle properties arethen derivative. One could hypothesize that 'particles' are reallyconcentrations of waves or perhaps stable condensations in an underlying fluidor field.
"Unfortunately,neither of these alternative hypotheses has been developed with any greatsuccess. Most modern-day physicists generally believe that neither particlesnor waves are more fundamental, but rather that they are two manifestations ofsome as-yet-unidentified (and possibly unidentifiable) entity.
"Ifthe beginning student has trouble understanding how an entity can possess bothwave and particle attributes at the same time, he or she may be comforted tolearn that most experienced physicists are just as disturbed by this problem.”
Quotingfrom The Nature of Physics, page 604:
引自The Nature of Physics，604页：
''Einsteinfirmly believed that underlying the quantum theory -perhaps on a sub quantumlevel -there had to be fully deterministic laws. In a letter to Max Bornwritten in 1926, Einstein summarized his position:
'Quantummechanics is very impressive. But an inner voice tells me that it is not thereal thing. The theory has much to offer ... but I am convinced that God doesnot throw dice. '
"Atthe present time, nearly fifty years after the birth of quantum mechanics, theargument has not been settled. There is no evidence whatsoever that adeterministic sub quantum level exists. Nor is there any convincing evidence tosupport the orthodox interpretation. For example, no experiments have ever beenperformed on a single atom or electron to test the orthodox contention that thewave function describes the properties of a single particle rather than a groupof particles. Although the orthodox interpretation is generally accepted, thereremain a few who, like Einstein, believe that the mathematical formalism ofquantum mechanics is not the final answer. This attitude has been mosteloquently described by Erwin Schrodinger:
'Manymaintain that no objective picture of reality is possible. However, theoptimists among us (of whom I consider myself one) look upon this view as aphilosophical extravagance born of despair. We hope that the presentfluctuations of thinking are only indications of an upheaval of old beliefs whichin the end will lead to something better than the mess of formulas which todaysurrounds our subject. '"
B. My work pays tribute to those thinkingindividuals such as Einstein, Schrodinger, Faraday, Maxwell, Newton, andothers. The sensitive and inquisitive mind will see that my work moreaccurately brings together the work of these impressive contributors for theadvancement of the human species. The effect of such intellectual"bringing together" is to generate a new "oneness" which ismore impressive and beneficial than the work of any single, great innovatoralone.
Letme begin by pointing out that the mathematical consequences of the Diracequation stipulates that the energy terms applied to a fourth quantum numberhaving two values, ( + 1/2) and ( - 1/2), are identical to thespin-quantum-number Ms which assigns to the electron an intrinsicspin and states that magnetism is a result of electron spin within thematerial. On the other hand, it has still been taught that a magnetic fieldcontains no kinetic energy -only potential energy -and that the "lines offorce" surrounding a magnet are imaginary. [This erroneous concept hasbeen taught in spite of the brilliant insights of Faraday and Maxwell!]
让我从指出一些事实开始，狄拉克方程数学结果规定能量级施加到第四量子数（？）有两个值，( + 1/2) 和 ( - 1/2)，和自旋量子数Ms一致，确定电子内自旋并声明磁性是电子自旋带动内部物质的结果。另一方面，依然被告知磁场不包含机械能-只有潜在能量-并且磁体周围的“力线”是想像的。[这个错误的观念已经被教授，尽管法拉第和麦克斯韦已经洞悉。]
注：1928年英国物理学家狄拉克（Paul Adrien MauriceDirac）提出了一个电子运动的相对论性量子力学方程，即狄拉克方程。利用这个方程研究氢原子能级分布时，考虑有自旋角动量的电子作高速运动时的相对论性效应，给出了氢原子能级的精细结构，与实验符合得很好。从这个方程还可自动导出电子的自旋量子数应为1/2，以及电子自旋磁矩与自旋角动量之比的朗德g因子为轨道角动量情形时朗德g因子的2倍。电子的这些性质都是过去从分析实验结果中总结出来的，并没有理论的来源和解释。狄拉克方程却自动地导出这些重要基本性质，是理论上的重大进展。
Youwill discover in this Book that the essence of Magnetism, Electricity, Gravity,Inertia, Planetary Motion, Thermodynamics, and a New Source of Energy andMatter are all mechanically explained by the nature of a"gyroscopic-action-type-particle." It was long after I had developedmy concepts that I discovered my "mechanical” explanation correlatedprecisely with Dime's concept of mathematical spin. The reader should find iteasy to advance from quantum mechanics to the mechanical essence of all matterconsisting of the gyroscopic-action-entity which I present in this Book.
"... the essence of Magnetism, Electricity, Gravity, Inertia,Planetary Motion, Thermodynamics, and a New Source of Energy and Matter are allmechanically explained by the nature of a 'gyroscopic, action-typeparticle.'"
Agyroscopic action is the "mechanical” essence of a ''spin. '' I will nowpresent many (seemingly unrelated) scientific facts which I examined years ago forthe purpose of testing the truth of my Hypothesis and ascertaining if myHypothesis could explain other scientific observations for which there was no"mechanical" understanding.
D.If we do not have a unified, "mechanical” understanding of the essence ofall matter, then what we physically "see" as an outsider to mattercan be very deceiving.