Newton, Einstein and Archimedes Laws update or generalized: Interview

• Report rights infringement
• published: 30 Nov 2015
• views: 1896

English Script of the interview is available at : : www.AjayOnLine.us Below find script in parts Q.1 Sir , 7.29 billion people believe that 2265 years old Archimedes principle, 330 years old Newton’s Laws and 110 years old Einstein’s E=mc2 are correct. Then why did you update or generalize them? Ajay Sharma: I do not call the laws wrong or incorrect but definitely they are inadequate or incomplete in today’s context. So I have updated or modified them. When thousands or hundreds years ago , these laws were formed ,and at that time mathematical and experimental status was insignificant. So the laws were correct, at the time they were formulated. So in today’s context (mathematical and experimental status), they need to be updated or generalized. I am making the laws more meaningful. Q.2 Sir, let us believe that you are correct. Does scientific world agrees with you on update or generalization of basic laws? Ajay Sharma: My research papers have been published in internationally recognized journals from Europe /America. I have been invited by organizers of over 90 international conferences from abroad. My research is also published by scientists in the proceedings of the conference. Apart from this my two books Beyond Newton and Archimedes, and Beyond Einstein and E=mc2 are published from Cambridge, England. These are published at cost of publisher. My views are endorsed by scientists. I pray government that ….an open seminars be arranged on my research. I will answer questions of the experts in writing there and then. Tell me what else I can do? Newton’s Second Law of Motion Q.4 Sir, you are saying that ‘Newton’s Second Law of Motion’ i.e. F=ma had not been given by Newton. Then name the scientist who gave it and when? Ajay Sharma : Newton’s second laws of motion (F=ma) was given 48 years after death of Newton in 1775 by Swiss scientist Leonhard Euler. The live proof for my statement is at website of American Mathematical Association, Washington (. In the paper E479, at page no. 223 the equation F=ma is clearly written for 3 dimensions. The second law is based on the equation F=ma and is taught in 220 countries of the world as Newton’s second law. Yes, Newton published the second law of motion, in the Principia published in 1687 at page 19-20. Its equation and definition is entirely different what is being taught in textbooks. Newton’s definition as given in the Principia , has nothing to do with F=ma. On this topic I have given lectures in international conference in Texas, Austin, USA. My research paper is published in internationally recognized journals after recommendation of scientists. I have elaborated the issue in my two books Beyond Newton and Archimedes, and Beyond Einstein and E=mc2 Q.5 Newton’s Third Law of Motion is the most reputed law of the world, in physics, philosophy and daily life. According to this Action is equal to Reaction. How this law is wrong? Why did you generalize the same? Ajay Sharma : This law Action = Reaction ( unconditionally and universally for all bodies) is not wrong but definitely inadequate. The statement of the law simply involve ‘body’. The body may be of steel, wood, rubber wool and sponge. According to Third Law , for everybody (of steel, wood, rubber wool and sponge.) for same action the reaction must be the same. But practically this prediction is not experimentally obeyed. It does not differentiate between steel and sponge while they act or react. The biggest limitation of the law is that it ignores the ‘nature’ and ‘composition’ of body. The nature and composition of iron body is different from sponge and wool. Both the bodies should not governed by different laws as their nature and characteristics are different. Q.6 Sir , you have put forth updated or generalized form of law that the Action and Reaction are NOT always Equal. How will you demonstrate it experimentally? Ajay Sharma : Let us throw rubber and cloth balls on the wall such that action is same in both cases. According to Newton the reaction should be PRECISELY equal to action indiscriminately. But practically reaction is not equal to action. The rubber ball exhibits more reaction and cloth ball less. Thus rubber ball rebounds quickly than cloth ball. Thus this observation is not consistent with Third Law of Motion.