V.3 No 1

11

Comparison of characteristics of propagation velocities

Einstein, the author of the basic postulates of quantum theory, clearly understood this situation: "Perhaps it would be not so difficult to include the interference phenomena to the quantum theory, by the following reason: we may not suppose the radiation consisting of non-interacting quanta; this would not allow us to explain the phenomenon of interference" [9, p. 194]. None the less, knowing it 11 years before the paper by Bose appeared did not prevent Einstein to pull strings for this paper.

Though, even if we admit the photon interaction, we will not lift the problem. In this case, in accordance with (2) and (8), we yield

Thus, should the light actually consist of interacting quanta, the phenomenon of interference would be associated not with redistribution of the light intensity on the screen but with the abrupt increase of total light flow and related change of spectrum. Furthermore, there would remain an uncertain question, why photons interact only if two light beams were superimposed at some angle to each other, but do not scatter when parallel beams are added (for instance, in lenses, parabolic reflectors, half-silvered mirrors etc.). Should the photonic interaction took place, we will see below that they would scatter the same as electrons do.

It also follows from this discrepancy of the photon conception that on its basis we cannot describe the monochromatic wave. Really, if the entire energy was enclosed within the photon and they were large-distanced, the alternating EM field can be presented as a series of pulses. A broad spectral composition of monochromatic light contradicting the very definition of monochromaticism immediately follows from this. To eliminate this broad spectrum, we have to lengthen the photon and to shorten the between-the-photons intervals. But introducing such supposition, we have to remain in limits of quantum size - at least  10 ^-10  m. Hence, if X-ray photons can contain a wave period, already for visible light the photon will contain only a part of wave period. With it, in radio waves the photon would have to be a charged particle with some non-central one-directed field   (?!) whose vector is perpendicular to its motion (?!). In addition, there has to be some interior correlation of the particles flow, since the photon duration will be in this case negligibly small in comparison with the wave period, while the radio waves coherence is quite high. "If we exclude different technical faults and defects of the scheme and relate the time of coherence  _coh only to the fluctuations arising in the radio wave oscillator caused by, for instance, a schrott effect (because of the finite charge of electron), we yield for  _coh   the order of 100 hours, which corresponds to the length of coherence  _coh 3*10 ¹¹ km  " [7, p. 140]. This last contradicts the item 3 of Atsukovsky's list about an uncharged photon. Additionally, if the wave motion of the photon assemblage was determined by some external, as to photon, power, the radiation/absorption energy cannot be enclosed within photon. So we again contradict the basic definition of photon.

In this situation, the model of Atsukovsky only adds questions to the quantum theory.

First, according to the model presented in Fig. 1, quanta have to interact with each other.

Second, it is unclear, why the electron of atom has to absorb just one vortex, while a vortex can pass the energy partly? Why an atom cannot absorb several vortexes, connected in the Karman path?

Third, supposing the vortex paths of different polarisation are crossing in space, they will unavoidably interact with each other, just as they interact after Atsukovsky within each light flow. This contradicts the experimentally observed independence of trajectories of the crossing beams and the item 6 of the Atsukovsky's list.

Fourth, the Atsukovsky's figure is nice in a plane, but in an ideal liquid the thread of vortex cannot begin and finish inside the liquid, as well as the vortexes of Karman path finish at the surface of liquid. If it corresponded to the reality, it would provide some distinctive kind of the light beam and would make impossible the narrow-directed beams. With it we could say, "the closing of the helical vortex flows in the butts of vortex will cause the vortex motion doing not exceeding the limits of a near-photon space" [3, p. 189], only in case if we prematurely have experimentally proved the possibility of such vortex closing the threads of orthogonal vortex rotations, and the main, to show the stability of these creations. Again, in the Karman paths we do not observe such closing, and this path is an array of linear vortexes.

Fifth, if at such dense spacing of the "photons-vortexes" the beam intensity increased twice, trice etc., this will lead only to the beam broadening, not to the increased density of beam, since vortexes cannot so much compress. Should this broadening with the growing intensity of light took place, it would be revealed long ago. However in all experiments, with a wide variation of intensity, we do not observe such broadening.

And sixth, as we showed above, in order to retain its quantum size, the quantum of light has to contain a part smaller than a wave period. But with it the vortexes stability after Atsukovsky will be highly questionable.

Indeed, this brief survey of contradictions connected with the attempts to describe an EM wave basing on the photon conception is far from being complete. None the less, this is quite sufficient to conclude the full non-tenability of such approach. Only the wave process in material space is able to satisfy completely all regularities of experimentally observed phenomena of EM wave propagation and interaction with each other and with other material bodies.