By Prof. L.Kaliambos (Λ. Καλιαμπός) Τ. Ε. Institute of Larissa (Greece) 

Feb. 2013



This article was announced to many universities around the world (Febr 2013).

Writing in Google scholar “Kaliambos” one can see 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" (Olympia, 1993) which invalidates Maxwell’s fields and Special Relativity.

Especially my dipole photons are based on the Faraday experiment (1845) and on the Compton effect (1923) according to which the absorption of the photon contributes not only to the increase of the electron energy but also to the increase of the electron mass, while Einstein's massless quanta of Maxwell's wrong fields led to the incorrect explanation of the photoelectric effect and to the invalid Einstein's relativity which violates not only the two conservation laws of mass and energy but also the principle of relativity deduced from Newton's laws.

One can also find my paper "Nuclear structureis governed by the fundamental laws of electomagnetism" presented at the 12th Hellenic nuclear physics society (NCSR "Demokritos",2002) and published in Ind. J. Th. Phys. (2003). In that paper I formulated a large number of integral equations based on the well-established laws of electromagnetism, which lead to the coherent nuclear structure and invalidate Einstein's relativity. For example in the nuclear structure the neutron mass is 2.53 electrons heavier than the proton mass. So according to the conservation law of mass when the neutron changes into the proton we observe a mass defect, Δm = mass of 2.53 electrons, which is equal to the increasing mass ΔΜ = mass of 2.53 of the emitting electron. that is Δm = ΔΜ = 2.53 electrons.  

In other words the increasing mass of the emitting electron, ΔM = 2.53 electrons, is due not to the ralative motion of the emitting electron (which violates the conservation law of mass ) but to the absorption of the mass defect Δm = 2.53 electrons. It is of interest to note that in 1909 Bucherer measured such an increasing mass, ΔM = 2.53 electrons, but he believed that he confirmed the theory of special relativity, because the neutron was discovered much more later (1932).  

On the other hand the abandonment of laws led to wrong nuclear theories of the standard model. (See in “User Kaliambos” the above published papers along with our additional published paper “Spin-spin interactions of electrons and also of nucleons create atomic molecular and nuclear structures”presented also at the 16th Symposium of the Hellenic Nuclear Physics Society ). Note that the discovery of the electron spin (1925) showed a peripheral velocity greater than the speed of light ( u>>c ) which leads to the quantum mechanics of two-electron coupling. 


After the French-Tessman experiment (1963) showing the fallacy of Maxwell’s fields,( See my paper in User Kaliambos ) I revived the basic concepts of Newton’s great work like the principle of relativity deduced from his laws, the action at a distance of natural laws, and Newton’s particles of light, which predicted the bending of light near the sun. The first experiment which confirmed Newton’s action at a distance with instantaneous simultaneity was that of Cavendish ( 1798). Moreover in 1801 Von Soldner confirmed Newton’s prediction of bending of light based on the action at a distance by calculating the amount of deflection of a light ray by a star. However, though Newton in his particles predicted vibrations, the experiments of Young (1803) and the wave theory of Fresnel led to the false ether, and to the concept of field (1832) introduced by Faraday, who went on to fill all space around currents with fallacious stretched rubber bands called lines of force.  So among many physicists in 1856  Sir George Airy wrote that according to the  experiments of the laws of Coulomb (1785) and Ampere (1820) involving charges q and Q and currents I and i respectively given by 

Fe = KQq/r2 and Fm =( k2 I/r )

the forces acting at a distance are  simple and clear, while the Faraday fields are vague and complicated lines. For example in the Coulomb law the hypothetical field E cannot be a mediator of the electric force because for q = 1 we obtain the electric intensity E which represents the same force when q =1. Note that in the same year (1856) Weber showed experimentally that K/k = c2    ( See my paper CRISIS OF FIELDS AND RELATIVITY ).    

Nevertheless Maxwell in 1865 following the false ether  and the Faraday field concept developed his wrong theory of electromagnetic waves, which led to the wrong theories of relativity and to the force carriers mediating incorrectly the wrong strong and weak forces developed after the abandonment of the real electromagnetic laws. (See our INVALIDITY OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY ). 

Meanwhile in 1832 Faraday confirmed Newton’s principle of relativity in his induction law, because the magnetic resultant, emf, is the same due to the relative motion of magnets and conductors, no matter what material is moving. Note that Faraday summarizes his results in the following paragraph: "All these results show that the power of inducing electric current is circumferentially excited by a magnetic resultant.." Also the experiments showed that his induction law is consistent with the magnetic force of the Ampere law. That is, the experiments of the so-called motional emf confirm the interaction at a distance and invalidate the field concept. However Maxwell not only used the wrong concept  of the displacement current but also violated the principle of relativity by suggesting the propagation of a fallacious electric field when the magnet moves with respect to the conductor. The same false ideas used also by Einstein in his introduction of the false special relativity, which violate the principle of relativity in the induction law. (See my paper EINSTEIN'S WRONG ASSUMPTIONS IN SPECIAL RELATIVITY ).

On the other hand the Michelson - Morley experiment (1887), in fact, confirmed not the Cartesian ether, but Newton's action at a distance, and the principle of relativity deduced from his laws according to which his particles of light behave like particles having mass. For example when a light source on a moving train emits Newton's particles of light, or our dipole photons, all observers on the moving train will measure the same speed of light by measuring the same mass m and frequency ν, while an observer on the ground of earth according to Newtons second law

F = dp/dt = d(mc)/dt = dm(c)/dt  or  FdS = dW = (dmc)c

will measure a different mass dm and frequency dν. He will measure also a bending of light because of an acceleration parallel to gravity. That is, it invalidates Einstein's second postulation.  In contrast, the Lorentz transformation, based not only on the fallacious ether but also on an additional strange hypothesis of a length contraction of the Michelson interferometer , led to the false special relativity. Note that Einstein replaced the ether by the Faraday vacuum assumed to transmit the wrong Maxwell's fields. Thus in his general relativity (1916) he introduced the fallacious gravitational wave under a wrong non-Euclidian geometry of vacuum, which have never been observed, while in 1924 he re-introduced the fallacious ether. Thus, despite the confusion about the ether he believed that his wrong relativity is a general law which was able to modify the natural laws ( Read in Grolier Encyclopedia a summary of relativity written by Einstein in 1955 before his death).

It is indeed unfortunate that modern physicists believe that Maxwell’s and Einstein’s theories are not wrong hypotheses but  fundamental laws. In “Laws of science-WIKIPEDIA” one reads the following incorrect words: “Newton’s laws are  low-limit solutions to relativityandPre-Maxwell laws are not fundamental, since they can be derived from Maxwell’s equations”. Under this condition we examined carefully the geometry of the magnetic forces in order to clear carefully the action at a distance.


It is well-known that the gravitational and electric forces work with a simple Eucledian geometry along a straight line, whereas for calculating the magnetic force on moving point charges the math  seems  more complicated. For this reason in 1832, Faraday for interpreting his induction law introduced the wrong concept of field which led to the fallacious fields of Maxwell, Higgs, etc. ( See my paper INVALIDITY OF HIGGS BOSON ). Note that special fundamental physics prizes based not on natural laws but on contradicting theories have been awarded to St. Hawking and to seven scientists who led the effort to discover a Higgs-like particle at CERN.

In general, when two positive point charges Q and q (separated by a distance r) move with velocities u and υ respectively, the vector Fm  on the moving q is given by applying  the Biot-Savart law : 

F=  (kQusinφ/r2)qυsinθ = Bqυsinθ

Here φ is the angle between the vectors u and r, and θ is the angle between the vector υ and the vector B. In a detailed analysis of this problem we see that the vector u and the distance r form a plane (ur) with a perpendicular line (vector B) at q. However according to the Ampere law involving forces acting at a distance we may represent the plane (ur) by a simple xy plane where Q is at the point of the intersection of axes with the vector u pointing to +x. In this case the above expression can be written as  

F=  kQusinφqυcosα/r

Here sinφ gives the projection of r on the y axis, while υcosα is the projection of υ on the xy plane. Now it is well-known that according to the experiments the vector Fm is perpendicular to both υ and υcosa. So it lies in the xy plane and points always to the right direction with respect to the vector υcosα, when the r is projected on +y. Whereas the projection on –y gives a vector Fm (on moving q), pointing always to the left direction with respect to the vector υcosα. In the same way we can determine the Fm on the moving Q by starting with the plane (υr). That is, to calculate the quantity and the direction of Facting at a distance the introduction of B by Faraday is unnecessary, because we use the two real planes of the Euclidean geometry formed by the velocities with respect to the r. Whereas Einstein in his General relativity suggested a strange non- Euclidean geometry for gravity though the gravitational forces have the same geometry of electric ones. Such a Euclidean geometry of electromagnetism led us to study the mutual electromagnetic forces of a moving dipole. A pair of equal and opposite point charges (+q , -q ) separated by a distance r is called a dipole. When it moves at a velocity u perpendicular to r, the applications of the laws of electromagnetism (without using the concept of the Faraday fields) give an attractive electric force Fe and a repulsive magnetic force Fm . Here Feand Fm are given by simple relations because Q = - q, and sinφ = cosα = 1. Thus we write

Fe = Kq2/r2  and  Fm = kq2u2/r2

 Since Weber (1856) found that K/k = c2 we get 

Fe/Fm = c2/u2 . So for u = c, we see that  F= Fm

 That is, these simple applications of forces acting at a distance reveal that photons behave as  moving dipoles. However under the influence of Maxwell’s fallacious fields physicists believe that Newton’s, Coulomb’s, and Ampere’s laws of action at a distance describe the failure of gravity and of early electromagnetism. In “Action at a distance-WIKIPEDIA” one reads: “ The exploration and resolution of this problematic phenomenon led to significant developments in physics, from the concept of a field, to descriptions of quantum entanglement and the mediator particles of the standard model ”.

In fact, the concept of “Quantum Entanglement” was introduced, since experiments showed that a part of the transfer happens instantaneously, like the action at a distance. In 1935 Einstein was dissatisfied with this concept, because it seemed to violate his wrong ideas on the  transmission of information implicit in his invalid relativity. So Einstein later wrote: “Entanglement is a  spooky action at a distance”. Note that in our HISTORY OF RELATIVITY ” we noticed that the criticism of relativity based not on laws but on various hypotheses misleads the readers and does much to retard the progress of physics like the Kaku question “What if Einstein is wrong?” Similarly the article “A Quantum Threat to Special relativity” (SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN Feb. 18,2009) misleads the readers, because it is based not on laws but on the hypothesis of the quantum entanglement which, in fact, is the action at a distance of the fundamental laws of Newton, Coulomb, and Ampere.  


Following Newton’s great work we applied the natural laws when a photon of variable mass with opposite charges interacts with an electron of charge

Ey(-e)dy/ Bz(-e)dy = dw/ Fmdt = dw/dp 

Since Ey/Bz = c and dp = dmc we get 

dw/dm = c2 or hν/m = c2

 Here we clear that Newton’s d(mu) = dmc,  because c is constant.  This simple formula modifies Einstein’s theory of photon (1905) because the absorbed photon by an electron contributes not only to the increase of energy but also to the increase of mass according to our discovery of our Photon – Matter Transformation :

hν/m = ΔW/ΔM = c2

 It is of interest to note that Newton's action at a distance with instantaneous simultaneity leads to the Quantum Entanglement and to the length contraction and time dilation during the absorption of the photon mass under the quantum dynamics. In Ancient Olympia we showed that our dipole photons work with electric and magnetic forces which occur under an instantaneous simultaneity of Newton's action at a distance. But when a photon interacts with an electron according to the electromagnetic laws the magnetic force occurs after the electric force which produces the velocity of the electron dy/dt .That is, simultaneity occurs when dy/dt = 0. Thus this situation is solved under a lenght contraction (dy) and a time dilation (dy).

Surprisingly the dipole photon not only explains the electromagnetic properties of photons involving local time varying Ey and B produced by its charges but also it provides  gravitational properties due to its mass m. Recall that the energy hν without mass cannot exist. For example applying Newton’s second law when the simple gravitational force Fg  acts along the direction of the constant c we see that the energy dw is given by 

Fg ds= dw = (dp/dt)ds = (dmc/dt)ds = dmc2 or hν/m = c2

 which explains the gravitational red shift. Note that Einstein in the development of his general relativity did not use his relativistic equations but the simple Doppler effect of the Newtonian mechanics. 

This simple formulation of the variable mass and energy of photon is similar to Einstein’s equation. (See my paper UNIFIED FORCES SOLVE THE CRISIS OF PHYSICS ) However Einstein’s equation was incomplete, since his relativistic mass is based on the false hypothesis of motions relative to a randomly moving observer. In fact, the increase of mass of particles in accelerators is due to the absorption of non mechanical energies. Note that all non mechanical energies on our earth (responsible of our life) are the result of the absorption of photons during the well-known photosynthesis. In other words both special and general relativity cannot replace the natural laws (See my paper WRONG AND CORRECT THEORIES IN PHYSICS ). 

According to Newton’s second law when a particle of mass M absorbs the photon mass m and increases its mass, also the increase of energy dW is given by

dW  = (dp/dt) ds = [d(Mu)/dt]ds = (dMu + duM)u 

because M and u are variable quantities due to the absorption of both energy and mass of photon.  It means that the mass of the particle increases under the absorption of the photon mass by applying Newton’s law, while Einstein believed (incorrectly) that Newton’s law is a limited case of his special and general relativity. Thus physicist believe that  natural laws are only approximations of Einstein’s special and general relativity.  In “Physical law- WIKIPEDIAone reads: “Newtonian mechanics is the low speed of special relativity… and.. the Newtonian gravitation law is a low-mass approximation of general relativity”. 

The first experiment which showed the increase of mass was that of Kaufmann (1902). Surprisingly he found that an electron has a variable mass M at a velocity u with respect to its constant mass Mo given by    

M2/Mo2 = c/(c2 – u2) or M/Mo = c/(c2- u2)0.5 = γ 

Indeed the differentiation of this relation gives 

dMc2 =  (dMu +duM)u = dW 

which leads to our discovery of the  Photon-Matter Transformation. Here we see that the constant mass Mbefore the photon absorption became a variable mass M due to the photon absorption. 

Kaufmann soon tried to interpret his results by using the so-called electromagnetic mass recognized by Thomson (1881) and other physicists. Especially Kaufmann assumed that there is no “real mechanical mass” but only the “apparent electromagnetic mass” which increases with a velocity. Of course such a useful interpretation could be able for revealing the photon mass which leads to the Photon-Matter Transformation under the quantum dynamics.   It is indeed unfortunate that Einstein did not follow the useful ideas of the electromagnetic mass but the wrong idea of the Lorentz ether. So he developed a wrong relativistic mass in motion relative to a moving observer, which violates the conservation laws of mass and energy.

In fact, all objects on the earth or on a train moving with a constant velocity (reference frame of the Galilean relativity principle) under the gravity (but in the absence of any absorption of photons) have always not a relativistic mass but a constant mass Mo. That is, in the Newtonian mechanics the conservation law of energy under the correct Galilean relativity is given by 

MogH = Mo u2/2 

Of course it is always correct, when the system is conservative, because all natural laws are the same in all inertial frames.  Whereas Einstein’s a stationary observer on the earth will measure incorrectly an increase of mass on the moving body according to the fallacious Lorentz transformation. 

Also for a photon when the velocity c is perpendicular to the force the photon accelerates with a constant mass mo  and the energy dw is given by 

Fgds = dw = (dp/dt)ds = (modu/dt)ds = moudu. 

That is,  in this case the photon mass mo  behaves like the constant mass  Mo of a particle.  Of course, this fact invalidates the second postulation of Einstein that the velocity of light is always constant and his concept of rest mass Mo . It also invalidates the Einstein massless photon of his general relativity. This is the bending of light which predicted by Newton. At the conclusion of his Opticks in 1704 Newton proposed the following query: “Do not bodies act upon Light at a distance, and by their action bend its Rays, and is not this action strongest at the least distance?” Note that such a prediction of the photon mass was confirmed not only by Soldner (1801) but also by Eddington (1919). Unfortunately under the influence of the fallacious Maxwell’s fields Einstein believed that the photon is a massless particle. So he could not accept a gravitational mass able to interact with the mass of stars. 

Under Einstein’s ideas in “Photon-WIKIPEDIA” (Experimental checks of photon mass) one reads this question:  “If the photon is not a strictly massless particle, it would not move at the exact speed of light in vacuum”

In fact, as we showed the speed c of a photon is due to its electric and magnetic forces, since the photons behave like dipoles moving at the speed c of light.  Consequently by applying the conservation law of mass the absorption of the photon variable mass increases the mass of a particle and leads to u<c. That is according to such traditional ideas a massless photon  could not contribute to the increase of mass of particles. 

On the other hand  the red shift is derived by using the gravitational forces of Newton on the real mass m of photon. For example when a photon moves along the level difference H like a falling body the energy is given by 

ΔW = Δmc or mgH = Δmc2

 Since Δm = hδν/c2 and m = hν/c2 we get 

Δm/m = gH/c2 = δν/ν 

Here one can see that this changing is similar to the opposite well-known gravitational red shift experiment performed by the Pound-Rebka  (1959).  Of course it is derived simply by the application of Newton’s second law and invalidates the idea that it is a result of Einstein’s invalid special relativity.

Finally in WIKIPEDIA we see also that Einstein proposed the gravitational waves confirmed by experiment, while in the “Gravitational wave-WIKIPEDIA” we see that various gravitational detectors exist but they remain unsuccessful in detecting such phenomena.


For the conservation law of mass developed by Anaximnder, in 1879 Lavoisier found that an equal quantity of matter exists both before and after the expariment. But since there was still room for doubt in 1872 the German chemist Lothar Meyer suggested that the rearrangement of atoms during chemical reactions might be accompanied by the absorption or emission of particles of "ether". However Maxwell's theory  and Einstein's massles photons did much to retard the progress of this idea, though the experiments revealed the mass defect.

In the generation of hydrogen atom during the transformation of the potential energy into the kinetic one of 27.2 eV the mass Mo of the electron remains constant but under the Bohr quantum jump it drops to a velocity around the proton with a kinetic energy of 13.6 eV. Note that during the quantum jump we observe a difference in energies as

ΔΕ = 27.2 - 13.6 = 13.6 eV

which turns into the energy hν =13.6 eV. Also we observe a mass defect ΔΜ which turns into the mass m of photon according to Matter–Photon Transformation

 ΔΕ/ΔΜ = hν/m = c

  That is, in atomic physics  when energy is removed from a system, mass is always removed along with energy. Here the energy ΔΕ is due to the fundamental charge-charge interaction which turns into the energy hν while the mass defect ΔΜ turns into the mass m of photon. In other words the electron decreases its mass, though it moves with a velocity around  proton in a laboratory with a stationary observer in it. So, all orbiting electrons in atoms invalidate dramatically the special relativity, according to which the mass of an electronmoving with respect to the nucleus increases.

Unfortunately Einstein using his incomplete equation ΔE = ΔΜc2believed that the kinetic energy ΔE with respect to an observer adds an inertia in an amount ΔE/c2. In other words he assumed that energy has mass. So he introduced false ideas of rest energy Mocand relativistic energy Mc2 given incorrectly by 

ΔE  = ΔΜc2 = (M – Mo)c2 =  Mc2 - Moc2

This equation of course includes the biggest errors in the history of physics which did much to retard the progress of physics, because Einstein underestimating the energies due to forces of natural laws suggested that even a mass of a motionless particle has energy called rest energy. Consequently the concepts of rest energy or relativistic energy are false ideas because the energy is due not to masses but to Coulomb’s charge-charge interaction. Therefore in the case of the hydrogen atom for the mass defect one writes incorrectly 

ΔΜc2 =( M– M)c2 = hν or Moc2 – Mc= hν =13.6 eV 

That is, Einstein believed that the energy of photon is due to the change in the rest energy of the system called Mass-Energy Equivalence, which is a false idea

In fact, the energy of photons is due not to the mass defect but to the energy of the Coulomb law because it gets a real mass after the mass defect. In the same way for the so-called annihilation of electron and positron Einstein’s incomplete equation is written as

2Mo c2 = 2hν   

which means  that the mass of the two particles is converted into the energy hν. Such a false   idea of course violates the two conservation laws of mass and energy developed by Anaximander and Heraclitus.  Unfortunately in “AnnihilationWIKIPEDIA (Electron-positron annihilation) we see these wrong ideas written as:  “..the mass of the two particles are converted entirely into energy”.'

In fact according to our discovery of the Matter- Photon Transformation we may write correctly 

ΔΕ/2Mo = 2hν/2m = c2    in reaction (e + e+ = γ +γ) 

According to this complete relation as in the case of Hydrogen the energy ΔΕ = 1.022 MeV of the fundamental charge-charge interaction of the two particles is transformed into the energy 2hν = 1.022 MeV οf 2γ. Similarly the mass 2Moof the particles is transformed into the mass 2m of the two photons in accordance with the two conservation laws of mass and energy. In other words all concepts of rest mass, rest energy, relativistic mass, and relativistic energy are fallacious ideas.

Note that when I presented at the 12th Symposium of the Hellenic Nuclear Physics Society my paper with a large number of integral equations which reveal the nuclear structure and showed that the nuclear binding energy is due not to the mass defect but to the energy of the charge-charge interaction the paper met much opposition by many old physicists. Especially one old physicist (student of Einstein) did not ask any question but said that all my equations are wrong, because they are not based on "Einstein's Law".

Nevertheless these simple examples tell us that the mass cannot be converted into energy, because the energy hν of photons is due (not to the rest mass or to the false rest energy of particles) but to the energy of charge-charge interaction. That is, Einstein’s Mass-Energy Equivalence is invalid. Note that the Dirac theory (1928) is based on the wrong relativistic energy E = Mc2 which was also derived by using simple mathematics as 

E  =  ( Mo2c4 + P2c)0.5

 It is indeed unfortunate that in “Mass-energy equivalence-WIKIPEDIAone can read confusing ideas about the rest mass or invariant mass, because it is believed that the energy of gamma ray is compared with the mass defect. Of course to avoid such confusions the above wrong article must be replaced by the “Photon-Matter Transformation” since   in our paper (2002) we showed that in all cases of atomic and nuclear physics the energy of generated photons is just the same energy of the fundamental charge-charge interaction.

Under his incomplete equation Einstein also introduced another wrong concept of Mass-Energy conservation. Einstein himself pointed out: “Pre-relativistic physics contains two conservation laws of fundamental importance, namely the law of conservation of energy and the law of conservation of mass; these two appear there as completely independent of each other. Through relativity they melt together into one principle”.Such a false idea did much to retard the progress of nuclear binding because it is believed that the nuclear binding of deuterium is due to the change in the false rest mass energies between the isolated nucleons and the stable deuterium. Under these difficulties in 2002 we showed that the binding energy is due to the electromagnetic interaction of the charged 9 quarks in proton and 12 charged quarks in neutron. Moreover in “Dark energy-WIKIPEDIA” one can see the false idea of a dark energy due to Einstein’s wrong mass-energy conservation. (See my article “OUR UNIVERSE”). 

Unfortunately, writing in Google “Limitations of Newton’s second law in special relativity” one can see that in the first four articles of WIKIPEDIA there are (incorrectly) such limitations, because Einstein believed that in all cases of motions relative to a randomly moving observer the mass of a particle increases according to the wrong Lorentz ideas. 


Another false idea of relativity which retarded the progress of physics is the idea that the peripheral velocity of spinning electrons, quarks, and neutrinos cannot overcome the speed of light. In our paper “Spin-spin interaction of electrons and also of nucleons create atomic molecular and nuclear structures”(2008) we showed that the coupling of two electrons in orbitals is due to the peripheral velocities of spinning electrons which are greater than c , since the photons cannot affect the peripheral velocity. Especially this situation explains the coupling of opposite spinning electrons for making the covalent bonds in molecules, and the binding of spinning quarks, since the magnetic attraction of opposite spin is stronger than the electric repulsion. (See in Google my scientific article “QUARKS, NEUTRINOS, NUCLEONS, AND NUCLEI”).

In User Kaliambos one can see our paper “Spin-spin.. structures” in which we showed that two electrons of mass m and of opposite spin interact  giving a repulsive electric force Fe and an attractive magnetic  force Fm whose the resultant force Fem is given by 

Fem = Fe  - Fm =  Ke2/r2  - (Ke2/r4)(9h2/16π2m2c2)

Of course for Fe = Fm one gets the equilibrium separation 

ro = 3h/4πmc = 0.5788/1012 m 

That is, for r<ro the two electrons behave like one particle and exert an attractive Fem with a motional emf of the induction law. After a detailed analysis of many two-electron atoms we concluded that it produces a vibration energy Ev given by

>Ev = 16.95Z - 4.1 

Thus, using the Bohr model the ground state energy E of the simple Helium atom is given by </p>

E = 2(-13.6)Z2 +(16.95Z  - 4.1) = -79  eV 

which is equal to the experimental result. Under this condition since the two electrons behave like one particle the Schrodinger equation is applied correctly for giving the same wave function as that of the one-electron atoms. Here the Pauli exclusion principle is just a qualitative approach because it cannot be applied in the structure of deuteron. Note that the discovery of the electron spin by Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit (1925) which involves peripheral velocity greater than the speed of light met opposition from many physicists including Pauli. The pressure was so great that Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit wanted to withdraw the paper they had submitted. However it was too late to do so, because their adviser P. Ehrenfest had already sent the paper for publication. He said: “You are both young enough to allow yourselves some foolishness! Be a little crazy”.  Later under the influence of Einstein’s relativity Pauli in 1946 said: “I strongly doubted the correctness of this idea (spin) because of its classical mechanical character”.   Of course such an idea did much to retard the progress of physics and led to the development of wrong theories. In “Helium atom –WIKIPEDIAone reads: “ However, various approximations , such as the Hartree-Fock method, can be used to estimate the ground state energy and wavefunction of the atom” ''