Physical theories are conventionally divided into applied (engineering) and fundamental (natural science).
Applied theories and experiments have contributed to the emergence of successful discoveries and inventions. On their basis, the brilliant successes of modern scientific and technological progress have been achieved, therefore, when they talk about the crisis in physics, they mean fundamental theories that should reflect the qualitative content of nature – the structure and principle of operation of objects and mechanisms of nature.
The founders of modern theoretical physics did not know what theories should be and how to get them. They were idealists and solved problems in an amateurish way:
when developing theories, they resorted to guesswork and fiction;
the theories reflected not the causes of gravity and repulsion, but the consequences;
replaced “bad” natural phenomena with imaginary supposedly equivalent phenomena and developed theories of these imaginary phenomena;
resorted to logical speculation – developed new theories based on previously developed ones;
dissected nature into parts according to the type of objects studied and methods of study, and built a physical picture of the world from incompatible components;
fit nature to theories.
Plus, physicists made mistakes when interpreting natural phenomena and the results of experiments.
The mathematicians who penetrated physics were at all amateurs (Claudius Ptolemy, Newton, Euler, Maxwell, Einstein, Planck, Landau, etc.). They called physical theories mathematical models, which did not reflect and could not reflect the structure of nature. It turned out to be easier to invent obscure formulas than to study nature, so physics was turned into applied mathematics (mathematical physics), and mathematical abstractions became the objects of study.
“They drew the right conclusions, but at the same time did not understand the physical reality behind them.” (EM Klyaus. Search and discoveries. – M .: Nauka, 1986.)
This lack of theories of mathematics was “corrected” by objectification (materialization) of mathematical abstractions:
called real objects “time”, four-dimensional space-time, three-dimensional space, energy, potential energy of a lifted body, magnetic lines of force, electric charges of elementary microparticles, etc .;
from the vector fields of gravitational forces “received” physical fields (up to 12 fields were created);
created waves (?) and quanta (?) of these fields;
from linked sinusoids and cosine waves “received” transverse electromagnetic waves (the logic is simple: when an electric sinusoid passes through zero, the magnetic cosine wave reaches its maximum, so the energy does not disappear, and the law of conservation of energy is allegedly not violated);
waves of the electromagnetic field were identified with imaginary microparticles – photons and electrons flying in a void (particle-wave dualism of microparticles);
etc.
Tamed philosophers called this blatant falsification of scientific knowledge “a new dialectic created by physicists themselves”, and physicists themselves (AB Migdal. Quantum physics) divided into Einstein’s dialectics, Bohr’s dialectics, etc.
The revolution in physics at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries was actually not a revolution, but patching holes, and was based on the erroneous ideas of Max Planck, Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr.
When Max Planck, the “father” of the quantum hypothesis, decided to correct his mistakes, it was already too late. Legions of physicists, eager for the glory of discoverers, have already rushed along the wrong path. He saw quanta everywhere, even in emptiness.
“The crisis, in which the physical worldview is today, surpasses all the previous ones in its depth and acuteness. The crisis is deepened by the fact that it came at a time when it seemed that physical science had reached the highest degree of perfection … The current state of theory, filled with gaps, became unbearable for every true theorist … When all this became clear, Planck wavered, confused … A situation unprecedented in the history of science has developed: having presented the world with a great hypothesis, its creator, fearful of the scale of the consequences, began in every possible way to oppose it to take root in science. ” (EM Klyaus. Search and discoveries. – M .: Nauka, 1986.)
“Planck sought to eliminate the gap between classical and quantum physics, or at least to build a bridge between them. He failed …” (Max von Laue).
Einstein “canceled” gravitation, borrowing this idea from Newton. (Newton tried to explain gravitation by the fact that the density of aether at the surface of the Earth is less than in space, so freely falling bodies seem to float up according to Archimedes’ law. soon realized that the density gradient of the void and the geodesic lines in the void are absurd. After that, he tried for thirty years to unite and bend the gravitational and electromagnetic fields, but did not achieve success: the mechanisms of gravitational and electromagnetic interactions remained inexplicable.
Niels Bohr, who fitted the planetary model of the atom to nature, could not explain the perpetual motion of electrons
… The replacement of electrons by electron clouds and electromagnetic waves did not lead to anything – it was not possible to apply this model to explain the structure of atoms, molecules and crystals.
In the second half of the 20th century, physics as a science of nature finally degraded and ended up in the hands of American mathematicians (about this – Lee Smolin Troubles with physics: the rise of string theory, the decline of science …).
There were troubles before. Due to the lack of information about nature, physics has been marking time for almost two millennia and, in fact, was in agony, including not without the help of the “Holy Inquisition.”
Celestial mechanics, astrophysics, geophysics, electrodynamics, quantum mechanics, chemical physics, etc. were developed on the basis of these “fundamental” theories. The obtained results of physics were transferred to nature, adjusting it to the theory.
Great physicists were pioneers and (some out of slyness, others out of thoughtlessness, others with the best intentions) were, in fact, falsifying scientific knowledge. As a result, they created their own imaginary world and presented this “physical reality” as the results of scientific knowledge of nature, while real phenomena remained unexplored.
Not all physicists accepted theories as true. This is evidenced by conflicting assessments of the results of science:
Academician SI Vavilov assessed the results of science in his book “Isaac Newton”: “Gravitation, together with many other things in the new physics, remains poorly understood in the usual sense of the word”;
in AB Migdal’s book “The Search for Truth” theories are presented as the highest achievement of the human mind;
in the book by Ya. B. Zeldovich and M. Yu. Khlopov “The Drama of Ideas in the Cognition of Nature” the authors seem to have hinted at their hard lot and reproached the “obstinate” Nature, which did not want to obey the developed theories;
in the book “QED – a strange theory of light and matter” the famous American theoretical physicist Richard Feynman debunked all theories, including his own, awarded the Nobel Prize: “Gravitation could not be associated with the laws of motion … It cannot be explained by any other phenomena … Quantum physics is monstrous confusion … No one understands why nature is arranged this way … There are no good theories to explain the structure of nature … “
more quotes from Feynman: “The electron is the theory that we use; it is so useful for understanding how nature works that we can almost call it real. ” “This vaunted theoretical physics is a complete hoax.”
P. S. “When a system of delusions is presented under the guise of a scientific theory, it is called pseudoscience” (AB Migdal. Is truth distinguishable from falsehood?).
Are comments superfluous?
Alas, representatives of the older generation of Soviet physicists (Ya. I. Frenkel, V. A Fock, I. Ye. Tamm, and others) were unable to distinguish false from truth. They compiled the pseudoscientific theories of Einstein, Bohr, Planck and Co. and sent their students down the wrong path.
,,,
According to Yuri Kuzichev