[socratus]

M. Planck in 1900 offered to examine the radiation emanating from
absolutely black body, as separate portions (quantum).
This value is described with a formula (h=Et) and has a title
of «the least quantum of action», “ internal impulse of particle”, “ spin”.
================================
First physicist, who enthusiastically met the theory of Planck,
the discovery of elementary quantum of action, was Einstein.
But very fast he found out its «latent imperfection» and
decided to consider the radiation problem in a new way.
And, 17.03.1905 in his work:
«About one heuristic point of view concerning
the origin and transformation of light »
he decided to discoverthe structure of quantum of light from a new point of view..
For the basic point of his argumentations, Einstein
took the constant of Boltzmann R/N = k
and coefficient (b) from the formula of radiation of Wien.
The product of these values makes quantum of light.
In the beginning, Einstein supposed that his theory of radiation
does not converge with the theory of radiation of Planck.
However, already in one year (in 1906)
he came to conviction that his formula of radiation is equivalent
to the formula of radiation of Planck.
As a result, the internal impulse (spin) of light quantum
can be described by two formulas:
1) Plank in 1900 wrote it down with the formula h = Et,
2) Einstein in 1905 wrote it down with formula h = kb.
The quantity of this particle, s impulse is h=1.
Under influence of this impulse the particle moves with speed c=1.
The particle has the form of a circle.
3) Another impulse (spin) in 1925 was found by
Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck .
Quantity of this impulse is described with a formula: ћ = h/ 2 π,
forcing a particle to rotate around his diameter.
This means that it particle does not move rectilinearly,
but rotates around the diameter (has the form of a sphere).
The rotation of these particle creates electrical waves.
=============================
Thus, Planck ,Einstein, Goudsmit, and Uhlenbeck each in his own way,
discovered that the micro particle should possess internal impulse.
But they did not particularly explain its origin.
And scientists do not understand deep qualitative distinction between
these two kinds of action.
I explain how this internal impulse of a particle originated.

[mkirkpatrick]

Well said,the whole of manifested existance,is one of spin which=the vortex,
and the vortex is very dear to me,I can identify with the rotation?Can you?
kind regards michael.

[socratus]

In 1687, the book "Mathematical beginnings of natural philosophy"
by Isaac Newton was printed out. This book has become the fundamental
scientific textbook. In the foreword to this book, Newton has written:
"All the difficulty of physics, as it will be seen, is in recognizing
forces of the nature by the phenomena of motion,
and then to explain other phenomena according to these forces".
"The First Newton's law" breaks on the spot
this well formulated logical thought.
It states:
"Any body, until it remains insulated,
saves its state of rest or rectilinear motion".
This law of motion is considered fundamental in classic physics.
However, it permanently causes critics of initial positions of mechanics.
Because in earthly conditions it is defaulted.
This law does not take into consideration influence of external forces
; it also says nothing about internal forces. The reason on which the body
is moving or rests is not clear. This law is abstract.
Newton perceived illusiveness of this law. His scientific slogan was:
"I do not invent hypotheses".
He said: "I shall not mix conjectures with reliability".
He aimed to build a building of science without hypotheses.
Therefore, he wanted to correct somehow, to change his formulation.
But all attempts were unsuccessful.
However, this law is useful and necessary to explain then accelerated motion.
For this reason, this postulate of Newton
was forced and wrongfully erected to a rank of the law.
And from a school bench the person learns this postulate
as the law (unproved supposition). Here we have the paradoxical situation.
The Bible begins with the unfounded statement
"In the Beginning there was a Word ",
and classic physics begins with the unfounded statement
" In the Beginning there was the First Newton's law ".
The science states that the origin of the World according
to the religious version is not reliable, and builds the scientific
foundations based on abstraction. As a result, both formulations
(religious and scientific) are unsatisfactory from the point of view of logic.
====================================
Newton,s dream was realized by Planck.
let us analyze the discovery of quantum of light by Planck.
M. Planck in 1900 offered to examine the radiation emanating from
absolutely black body (Vacuum radiation of Kirchhoff /Max Laue / ),
as separate portions (quantum).
If the quantum of light will penetrate inside this absolute black body
and will not reflect back, the radiation and heat will die.
That it will not happen, the ideal black body should reflect
(radiate) this quantum of light back. Then and only then,
this initial (natural) radiation of quantum of light is characterized
by the constant of Planck -h .
The quantity of this particle, s impulse is h=1.
Under influence of this impulse the particle moves with speed c=1.
The particle has the form of a circle.
This quantity is described with a formula (h=Et) and has a title of
“the least quantum of action”,“ internal impulse of particle”, “spin”.
================================
Einstein realized Newton,s dream in another way
For the basic point of his argumentations, Einstein
took the constant of Boltzmann R/N = k
and coefficient (b) from the formula of radiation of Wien.
The multiplication of these two quantities gives the formula
of “ internal impulse of particle”, “spin” h = kb.
================================
Quantum of light is a privileged particle.
Only the speed of a light quantum in Vacuum has
a maximal, constant, absolute quantity of c=1.
No other particle can travel with the speed c = 1.
If quantum of light flies always rectilinearly c=1, it is a mad one.
Is he really mad?
========================================
No.
Another impulse (spin) in 1925 was found by
Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck .
They came to a conclusion, that the particle should have other impulse.
Quantity of this impulse is described with a formula: ћ = h/ 2n,
forcing a particle to rotate around his diameter.
This means that it particle does not move rectilinearly,
but rotates around the diameter (has the form of a sphere).
The rotation of these particle creates electrical waves.

[socratus]

From ancient times the man aspired to understand the reason
of movement. Gradually in physics there were two points
of view on the reason of movement.
1. In classical physics the reason of movement of bodies
owing to external influence is considered.
2. In quantum physics it was required to enter the term
"an internal impulse of a particle".
It is not me, who has entered into physics representation about
an internal pulse of a particle. This term is used in all textbooks and
books about physics. But spelling these words nobody represents
this process evidently.
I have simply decided to imagine, as this term, this impulse looks evidently.
And with the claims I ask you to address to physicists.
They, to be honest before themselves, should decide:
a) or to refuse the term "an internal impulse of a particle".
b) or to accept this term as a reality, and then it is necessary
to understand its origin.
If we refuse a terminology "an internal impulse of a particle",
we shall transform into the people unable to express their ideas.
If we accept this term as a reality, then it is necessary to reconsider
the sights on the world.

[socratus]

Many years ago man has accustomed some wild
animals (wolf, horse, cat, bull , etc.)
and has made them domestic ones.
But the man understands badly the four-footed friends.
In 1897 J. J. Thomson opened new particle - electron.
Gradually man has accustomed electron to work for him.
But the man does not understand what an electron is.

[socratus]

I like the idea that the electron and the photon are the same particle in different states. My version of this idea is in a paper "Superluminal quantum models of the electron and the photon" at www.superluminalquantum.org .
Richard Gauthier

[socratus]

"The First Newton's law" confirm:
"Any body, until it remains insulated,
saves its state of rest or rectilinear motion".
This law of motion is considered fundamental in classic physics.
However, it permanently causes critics of initial positions of mechanics.
Because in earthly conditions it is defaulted.
This law does not take into consideration influence of external forces
; it also says nothing about internal forces. The reason on which the body
is moving or rests is not clear. This law is abstract.
Newton perceived illusiveness of this law. His scientific slogan was:
"I do not invent hypotheses".
He said: "I shall not mix conjectures with reliability".
He aimed to build a building of science without hypotheses.
Therefore, he wanted to correct somehow, to change his formulation.
But all attempts were unsuccessful.
However, this law is useful and necessary to explain then accelerated motion.
For this reason, this postulate of Newton
was forced and wrongfully erected to a rank of the law.
And from a school bench the person learns this postulate
as the law (unproved supposition). Here we have the paradoxical situation.
The Bible begins with the unfounded statement
"In the Beginning there was a Word ",
and classic physics begins with the unfounded statement
" In the Beginning there was the First Newton's law ".
The science states that the origin of the World according
to the religious version is not reliable, and builds the scientific
foundations based on abstraction. As a result, both formulations
(religious and scientific) are unsatisfactory from the point of view of logic.

What is the origin of inertia?
==============
Some comments.
1.
That would have to be the initial force which acted upon the object –
i.e. the bow string, the sling shot, etc.....
or, if there was no differential force,
it's just the nature of the object to sit awhile and just rest in place - kind of like me.
2.
Thus...inertia can be briefly described as the nature of an object to resist changes
to its current state. (rotating, moving in a straight line, or stationary)
3.
An old professor of mine used to say
that anyone who can answer that question (the one you posed) would win a Nobel Prize.
So we can offer explanations in terms of energy, momentum,
or the Higgs Boson, but what it comes down to
is that Nature just behaves that way. Why? We're working on it...