Autodynamics

Infobox Pseudoscience
topics=
* particle physics
claims=The Lorentz transformation equations used in mainstream science are formulated incorrectly, causing special relativity and general relativity equations to be invalid.
origyear=ca. 1945
origprop=
* Ricardo Carezani
currentprop=
* David de Hilster

Autodynamics was proposed by Ricardo Carezani in the early 1940s as a replacement for Einstein's theories of special relativity and general relativity. Autodynamics is considered to be pseudoscience and directly contradicts the principle of Galilean relativity, a theory accepted for nearly four centuries and implicitly understood for far longer.

Main tenets of autodynamics

The primary claim of Autodynamics is that the equations of the Lorentz transformation are incorrectly formulated to describe relativistic effects, which would invalidate special relativity, general relativity, and Maxwell's equations. The effect of the revised equations proposed in Autodynamics is to cause particle mass to "decrease" with particle velocity, being exchanged with kinetic energy (with mass being zero and kinetic energy being equal to the rest mass at "c"). This exchange between mass and energy is the proposed mechanism underlying most of the derived conclusions of Autodynamics.

Ancillary claims of Autodynamics include:
*the nonexistence of the neutrino,
*the existence of additional particles that have not been observed by mainstream physicists (including the "picograviton" and the "electromuon"),
*the existence of additional decay modes for muons and interaction modes for energetic atomic nuclei.

tatus of autodynamics

Autodynamics is wholly rejected by the mainstream scientific community. Since Carezani's original publication, no papers on autodynamics have appeared in the scientific literature, though some have been published in "alternative" journals such as "Physics Essays". A 1999 article in the popular magazine Wiredcite news | first=Kristen | last=Philipkoski | coauthors= | title=Shedding Light in the Dark | date=1999-07-13 | publisher= | url =http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/1999/07/20663 | work =Wired | pages = | accessdate = 2008-02-07 | language = ] quotes Pierre Noyes, a professor at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center as stating "most scientists consider Autodynamics little more than a 'crackpot theory'". Despite this, Noyes et al. performed an experiment in an attempt to compare the predictions of SR and AD, and concluded that the values calculated by SR were significantly closer to what was observed. [D.R. Walz, H.P. Noyes, and R.L. Carezani, Phys. Rev. A 29:2110-2113 (1984), Calorimetric Test of Special Relativity ] Carezani later argued that the experiment was not relevant for comparing the two theories by pointing out that AD applies specifically to decay cases, yet the electrons in the Noyes experiment received energy from the external medium (klystron EM field). ["See endnote 2 of": Ricardo Carezani, The Muon Decay muon+ -> e+ e+ e+ and Autodynamics, Physics Essays: Volume 5, no. 1, March 1992] According to Lee Smolin, there has been "no serious attempt [by the autodynamics supporters] to make an argument or to discuss experimental data that refute their basic claims".

Special relativity, in its pure form, is proven to be mathematically consistent (see the Special relativity article). Alleged errors have been documented in the on-line literature that attempts to support autodynamics, including:

*a Lorentz contraction is incorrectly applied to the "distance between" a stationary observer and a moving object. [ [http://www.autodynamics.org/main/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=7&MMN_position=19:16 Article on Frames Derivation] ]
*the claim that reference frames are "unnecessary" and "cannot be measured" is incorrect. [http://www.autodynamics.org/main/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=13&MMN_position=18:16 Article on Galilean Simplification] ]
*a Lorentz length contraction is incorrectly described as an "extra velocity" and energy is incorrectly attributed to it leading circularly to the claim that special relativity does not conserve energy and momentum. [ [http://www.autodynamics.org/lorentz_wrong.html Article on Superfluous System] ]
*the above claim is further bolstered by autodynamics assumption that the neutrino does not exist, even though relativistic energy-momentum conservation has been tested extensively in neutrinoless phenomena!

Galilean invariance and autodynamics

The autodynamics velocity addition equation is: [ [http://www.autodynamics.org/main/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=18&MMN_position=22:16 Article on the Sum Velocity] ] :

where

For common experiences where , this reduces to:$v\_n=sqrt\{v\_1^2+v\_2^2+\; cdots\; +v\_\{n-1\}^2\}$

This fact marks a significant advantage Special Relativity has over autodynamics; at speeds much less than the speed of light, the Lorentz transformations reduce to the Galilean transformations, and Special Relativity predicts for the expected result::$v\_n=v\_1+v\_2+\; cdots\; +v\_\{n-1\}$

From this it is clear that autodynamics contradicts common experience. For example, if an object that was traveling at a velocity of 3 meters per second with respect to a stationary observer were to measure a third object moving in the same direction to have a velocity of an additional 4 meters per second, autodynamics would predict that the stationary observer would measure a velocity of approximately $sqrt\{3^2+4^2\}=5$ meters per second while special relativity would predict a velocity of approximately $3+4=7$ meters per second. Thus, this prediction of autodynamics is contradicted by simple velocity addition experiments (including such basic ones as those that occur when moving in common modes of transport such as automobiles, trains, and airplanes).

Footnotes

References

* [http://www.slac.stanford.edu/pubs/slacpubs/2000/slac-pub-2890.html A Calorimetric Test of Special Relativity] , by Dieter R. Walz, H. Pierre Noyes, and Ricardo L. Carezani

*cite journal | author=Carezani, Ricardo L. | title=Nucleus-Nucleus Collision And Autodynamics | journal=Physics Essays | year=1997 | volume=10 | pages=193–197 [http://www.autodynamicsuk.org/Nucleus-NucleusExpert.htm eprint version] from autodynamicsuk.org website.

External links

* [http://www.autodynamics.org/ The Society for the Advancement of Autodynamics (SAA)]
* [http://www.autodynamicsuk.org/ Quantum Mechanics Autodynamics United Kingdom]