By prof. LEFTERIS KALIAMBOS (Λευτέρης Καλιαμπός) T.E. Institute of Larissa, Greece

This paper was announced to many universities around the world ( February 2014 )

Historically, Descartes in his *Optics* (1637) definitely rejected the possibility that light consists of particles moving in vacuum because he believed that light is associated with a medium called “ether”. Although it had a considerable influence on the ideas of physicists Newton in his* Opticks* (1704) concluded that the Cartesian theory of light could not account for* polarization,* a property of light unknown to Descartes. This would be easy enough to understand if light is a stream of** rectangular particles moving in vacuum** but** **rather more difficult if light is a wave disturbance in a medium. In spite of Newton’s criticism, other seventeenth-century scientists such as Hooke and Huygens continued to think of light in terms of impulses in a medium. This was not yet the “wave theory” in the modern sense, because the periodic nature of the pulses had not yet been recognized; ironically it was Newton who suggested that light might have to be somehow assigned also periodic properties in order to account for the phenomena of colors. Newton also predicted that his **rectangular particles** have gravitational properties confirmed by soldner in 1801. Nevertheless later (1905) Einstein under his fallacious massless quanta of fields developed his invalid theories of relativity. (See my CONTRADICTING RELATIVITY THEORIES ).

Meanwhile in 1845 Faraday discovered the magnetic rotation of the plane of polarized light (Faraday effect). In other words Newton’s rectangular particles have not only mass with gravitational properties but also positive and negative charges like the opposite charges of an electric dipole providing the electromagnetic properties of light. Under this condition Faraday believed that gravitation and electromagnetism were somehow related, but he failed to find any connection, because in 1932 in order to explain his induction law introduced the fallacious concept of field. Faraday imagined that the space surrounding the magnet and the coil was in a state of tension like stretched rubber bands and he called these bands “lines of force”. Although Neumann in 1845 discovered that the induction law is consistent with the magnetic force of the Ampere law, Maxwell in 1865 developed his electromagnetic theory with wrong fields moving through a fallacious ether.

Today it is well-known that the ether was rejected by the famous experiment of the two American physicists Michelson and Morley (1887) in favor of Newton’s **rectangular particles** moving in vacuum. On the other hand in 1902 Kaufmann showed experimentally that the absorption of energy by an electron contributes not only to the increase of the electron energy ΔΕ but also to the increase of the electron mass ΔΜ. Although in 1903 the two American physicists Nichols and Hull showed experimentally that light consists of particles having not only energy E but also momentum p, given by the relation p = E/c, Einstein under his massless quanta of fields based on Maxwell’s waves believed that the increase of mass is due not to the absorption of light but to the relative motion of the electron with respect to a randomly moving observer. Such fallacious ideas of moving fields which led to the invalid relativity could not be explained by the work of Planck (1900), who discovered that E = hν. Under this discovery the American physicist Compton (1923) showed experimentally that p = hν/c . Then, since p = mc under the idea of Newton’s rectangular particles of light one could determine the mass m = hν/c^{2} . Especially Compton discovered that the frequency ν of X rays decreases by collision with electrons. So he showed that light consists of particles possessing both corpuscular and wave properties. It was therefore a confirmation of Newton’s corpuscles having wave properties. In the same way the two American physicists Davisson and Germer showed experimentally that also electrons produce waves. That is, one observes that matter as well as light possesses both wave and corpuscular properties.

It is of interest to note that later (1963) the basic postulation (displacement current) for the development of Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory was rejected by the experiment of the two American physicists French and Tessman, who showed that the application of Maxwell’s equation of displacement current involves misconceptions. Particularly during the motion in the ionized air in a capacitor the changing electric field of the discharged plates cannot produce any magnetic resultant.

Taking into account all these experiments showing that Newton’s **rectangular particles of light **have not only gravitational properties but also electromagnetic ones, I analyzed carefully the Faraday effect by adding equal positive and negative charges to Newton’s rectangular particles which behave like moving dipoles. In the Cartesian system xy a dipole with two opposite charges +q and –q could move with a velocity u < c along the x direction when the dipole axis r is parallel to y. In this simple case the applications of the Coulomb and Ampere laws give electric attraction F_{e} stronger that the magnetic repulsion F_{m} as

F_{e} = Kq2/r^{2 }and F_{m} = kq^{2}u^{2}/r^{2 }

Since Weber in 1856 showed experimentally that K/k = c^{2} one gets

F_{e} / F_{m }= c^{2} / u^{2}. That is F_{e} > F_{m}

However such a dipole at the speed (u =c ) operates with equal electric attractions and magnetic repulsions. This situation of course leads to the conclusion that the photon of Lewis (1926) interprets the Faraday effect. According to the laws of electromagnetism a magnetic field in the direction of y can exert a torque to any electric dipole moving along the x direction. Also such dipoles moving at c interact with an electron of charge (-e) in terms of varying E_{y} and B_{z }because of the spin of the dipole (dipolic photon). Such a situation also led to my discovery ofPhoton-Matter Interaction as

Ey(-e) dy = dw and Bz(-e) dy = F_{m}dt = dp = dmc.

Since the experiment of Weber leads to E_{y}/B_{z }= c one gets dw/dm = c^{2}

That is the absorption of a photon by an electron is given by

hν/m = ΔΕ/ΔΜ = c^{2}

Under these very important discoveries I presented at the international conference “Frontiers of fundamental physics (Olympia 1993) my paper Impact of Maxwell’s equation of displacement current on electromagnetic laws and comparison of the Maxwellian waves with our model of dipolic particles .

In that paper I showed that the invalid hypothesis of self-propagating fields in Maxwell’s theory is modified by my dipolic particles or dipolic photons in order to interpret both the gravitational and the electromagnetic properties of light discovered by Faraday. Also such a rotating dipole (spinning photon) can produce varying Ey and Bz like the self-propagating fields of Maxwell. In a simple transparent medium ( radiation in matter ) the electric attraction between the charges of the dipolic photon cause in matter some distortion of the atomic electronic cloud. Hence, under a dielectric permittivity the electric force is reduced and the dipolic photon moves at a velocity smaller than c. Furthermore I showed that in the induction law the motion of a magnet with respect to a coil gives always a magnetic force, while the fallacious electric field of Maxwell violates the principle of relativity. In other words, Einstein’s basic assumption of his special relativity that a moving magnet with respect to a coil produces electric field violates the principle of relativity. To conclude I emphasize that laws and experiments invalidate fields and relativity . Thus a clear answer to the photon-wave dilemma is given by the dipolic photon which reveals the dipole nature of photon. Note that a low frequency photon exposed to a magnetic field was split into a separate positive charge and a separate negative charge. See in Google The photon consists of a positive and a negative charge ). These charges were exposed to an electric field which changes its position. This position was measured using a charge meter described by Hans W Giertz (2010).