On a number of physical problems, a comparison is made of the effectiveness of the methods of cognition of quantum theory and the classical methods of Newton. The well-known statements of physicists about their excellent knowledge of classical methods turned out to be untrue. The theory of nonlinear oscillations, operating with Newton's classical methods, has shown how to solve physical problems that do not lend themselves to the methods of new physics - quantum theory and the theory of relativity.
On a number of physical problems, a comparison is made of the effectiveness of the methods of cognition of quantum theory and the classical methods of Newton. The well-known statements of physicists about their excellent knowledge of classical methods turned out to be untrue. The theory of nonlinear oscillations, operating with Newton's classical methods, has shown how to solve physical problems that do not lend themselves to the methods of new physics - quantum theory and the theory of relativity.
Failures in solving a number of physical problems associated with the structure of the microworld began due to two fundamental mistakes made in the old classical physics, when interpreting the results of the experiments of Oersted (1821) and Fizeau (1851). Because of them, it was not possible to develop a detailed understanding of the true structure of the atom; this was due to the inability of physicists to eliminate the indicated fundamental errors. Blaming the “classical” Newtonian methods for this failure, physicists proceeded to build a “new” physics - quantum theory and theories of relativity. Without realizing this, they brought into the new physics old fundamental errors that entered the paradigms of the new physics and made them inadequate. This is illustrated with specific examples.
Modern knowledge about the structure of the microworld turned out to be inferior due to two fundamental errors made as far back as the century before last when interpreting the results of the experiments of Oersted (1821) and Fizeau (1851). Refusing, due to these errors, to take into account the ether and magnetic interactions between microobjects, physics was not able to use Newton's “classical” formalism to study the microworld and turned to a quantum worldview. Despite the stream of self-praise and Nobel prizes, quantum theory failed to achieve a full, detailed understanding of the structure of the atomic nucleus, unexcited atom, photon, excited atom, electron, neutron, proton, ... In 1979, experimental evidence was published in the Central Russian Physical Academic Journal of the absence of undivided energy quanta in Nature [1]. The theory of nonlinear oscillations, operating on the classical methods of Newton, tells how it corrects the mentioned physical misunderstandings..
Due to the idea of atomism, there were discovered atoms, nucleons, and electrons. The atomic theory incorporated seeds of the idea of infinite divisibility of matter aimed at perceiving the structure of the entire material world. The next step in that perceiving should have been the recognition of ether discovered in Fizeau’s experiment. However, physicists did not recognize the discovery. The neglect of ether in physical theories resulted in physicists’ failure to use the methods of “classic”, Newtonian physics to gain a detailed understanding of atomic structure, and to build a “classic” microworld theory. As consequence, there emerged the quantum hypothesis that became a basis for the quantum physics of microworld. As the quantum hypothesis appeared to be in irreconcilable contradiction with the idea of infinite divisibility of matter, because of the neglect of ether, the quantum physics failed to understand the real structure of electrons and nucleons, even though all the necessary and ample experimental facts there had been obtained on microobject accelerators. Instead of objective ideas of the structure of electrons and nucleons or further development of knowledge regarding the structure of matter, there appeared fake concepts of quarks, myons, pions, bosons, etc., that do not exist in the real material world Experimental evidence as to the lack of indivisible quanta in nature [1] seemed to have fixed the intolerable situation but quantum physicists did not “notice” that.
At the beginning of the XX-th century, after a glorious history of about two centuries, the Newton’s classical physics enters into a great conceptual crisis, marked by the famous findings, which have subsequently represented the fundamentals of the quantum theory. They have thrown out the visions of the classical physics on the main laws of Universe development, the role of the human being and of knowledge in its functioning. Therefore, the quantum theory, confusing the traditional picture of its origin and evolution, gave birth to multiple conceptual issues related not only to physics, but disposing of obvious philosophical, ontological, cognitive and, more recently, economic aspects...
The well known theoretical physicist and editor of the Journal of Mathematical Physics has written a handy book, with eight chapters devoted to the broader knowledge of and reflection about physical theories, notably quantum theory. After thinking about what is a physical theory, he addresses the problem of the state in quantum theory (a very central chapter of the book), the power of mathematics, the field - particle issue (the author pleads for the superiority of the field concept - the book is very indebted to Julian Schwinger's ideas), symmetry in physics, the problem of causality and probability, the five different arrows of time (from cause-effect ordering to the cosmological arrow), and finally turns to the presently quite often discussed relation of the quantum-mechanical description to reality. After one has learned that the author is not approaching the questions from a sharper historical point of view, and that he shares the prejudices of a mathematical physicist toward experiment, one thoroughly enjoys his elegant, competent and deep treatment. This reviewer wishes that every graduate student of physics should, at an early stage, read Newton's book (which could be done either at a stroke or piecewise) because it presents the essence of a great deal of modern physical theory in both a condensed and leisurely digestible form.