October 9, 2018

Igor Bulyzhenkov interview in English

MN : When has it been your first contact with this presentation of these two Albanian researchers, Shpetim Nazarko and Arban Uka?

IB : I guess it was in Crete at an International Conference on Fundamental Physics and it was a very interesting presentation and I talked a lot with them after. It was difficult to pick up immediately their ideas, but I was prepared because I read before a similar work of our famous, I can’t say Italian or Russian, a famous researcher Bartini who was from airspace industry. He walked in Russia with tupolev.

MN : In which period ?

IG : During and after the second world war. He was a communist and left the Italy of Mussolini and then went to Russia. He was imprisoned, and he worked together with our most advanced designers, all the tupolev researchers. He made a very unique presentation of his physical view of the system of units. He tried to publish with the assistance of Pontecorvo, who was in Dubna at that time. His ideas were so advanced and not much people understood them, but later they were published in a short version in the ‘50s. We are looked into his ideas for many years and I have told my students that the one who explains to me in detail his ideas I will grant them some support. For the first time at the conference I saw very close ideas from these two Albanian researchers and I immediately realised a very close match to the research of Bartini and the research of Dr de Broglie. His late publications about the thermodynamics of isolated particles. His work was not even recognized even in France where he was the President of the National Academy of Science. What they did, they also introduced the internal energy of charges, they called it the unexposed energy. This is exactly the same what de Broglie called the internal energy, and Dr. Einstein also introduced the internal energy, MC2, this is not a constant, this is energy, therefore is variable, and during the motion this energy is changing. This is a very simple Lorentz transformation rule.

But in fact we all forgot about this and expected that MC2 should be constant, because the mass is constant, but no one thinks that this is a variable.

These two researchers told very clearly that theis is a variable, during the motion it chanhges, and it should change, and the total energy – the inside and the outside – should be constant. And I absolutely agree with this idea, that the energy is constant, and there are two parts the unexposed and the exposed. Later I thought about this and I even published in the journal Astrophysics and Space Science, a very close approximation of the system. There is only a terminology difference. I called it the inside energy and the ordered energy, or internal heat or chaos, and the external ordered energy. Once the body is moving, all the elements are not in chaotic motion, but are moving like a body in order. So this approach of what they submitted as well as Einstein, and de Broglie , they agve an idea that the relativity physics of Einstein is the physics of the internal chaos and ordered energy. So there is a competition between the gravitation or General Relativity is in fact the physics of thermodynamics, thermomechanics, Physics of chaos and order. Newtonian physics is not, Newtonian physics is different. In

Newtoninan physics particles are points, there is no internal structure, no internal variables, What Newton did he put all the energy contant of the particle only in exposed energy, but without internal one. He put two different degrees, two energy degrees into one. These two guys split these two, very smart, it should be two, internal and external, as in the terminology of De Broglie. Thermodynamics of an isolated particle which means that each particle, one particle, the electron say, has its internal energy Thermodynamics is the internal energy, the internal heat and during the morion chaos becomes less and the ordered part of the energy increases.

It is the future physics. De Broglie publieshed in 1964, and Bartini published in the ’50, he might have finished in 1947, Einstein was in 1907, when he first realized there is internal energy content, the atomic bomb. It is released. The idea is to use this internal energy in some order way.

Because the gravitation is not that you just drop a stone and it is going to the minimum of the potential.

The idea is that there are some losses of internal energy, some gains of external energy, and there is some balance of the constant energy of the motion. two bodies facilitate mutual motion and rotation of each other without violation of energy rules. The energy drives motion.

It is a good perspective. The idea is how to submit it properly so that the community understood. If you are far ahead of what we accepted, which we call the standat model. Unless it will be strong experimental evindence, and if you have strong support of your ideas. Einstein got support from Planck. Otherwise we might even not know of him. They need some kind some kind of support.

MN : You named very important contributors, you named Einstein, Bartini and de Broglie. What is the link between this simple and modest work with these personalities ?

IB : The work is closer to Bartini, and close to the work of de Broglie, og his late work, around 1962, even de Broglie has failed to promote his ideas to the university textbooks. It was at 1962 all on the shelves, and no one is reading. The traditional mentality is very resistant to new ideas.

MN : You spent a lot of time with my brother, with Shpetim. He is not an expert, he does not have titles…

IB : New ideas sometimes comes not from experts, bevause all the expert talk the same to each other, and all the physics is the conventional one. Once we are physicists we talk the same laguage. He is a chess player, and he is a very smart guy, and once he comes with new ideas that the motion of the body with an internal energy content, at first i was a bit surprised why I never thought in this way despite I clearly knew from science series that MC2 is energy, and if it eneegy it is variable, there are Lorentz transformations, but is variable, it is not constant. There is something wring with the Newtonian physics and we should

define where Newton was wrong, because in 1962 Thomas Kuhn, the philosopher, told that we can acept Einstein theory if Newton was wrong. Where Newton is wrong ? So these guys realised where Newton was wrong.

MN : What are the practical implication of this theory ? What is the way to legitimate this?

IB. This approach to the motion through the internal energy variable will assist in merging of quantum physics and classical one, because at the moment the equations of motion of the quantum particle which changes its frequency with the motion or the energy (same with frequency) is different from the Newtonian particle, but in their law of motion internal energy changes in the same way like a quantum particle loses energy (or frequency) with the motion, so there is a match between the classical motion and the quantum. So Einstain relativity theory might be more close to quantum motion than the classical one (than the Newton model). We made a mistake when we forced the Einstain’s theory to take references from Newton physics. It should be developed in its own way, there are no coherent antology in physics, the paradigm should be changed and Einstein’s physics is quite different from Newtonian one.

NM : And the practical application, do you see any ?

IB : You know practical in physics. At first it was the atomic bomb, the release of the internal energy. Here the application might be the extraction of the internal energy in some controlled way during motion and circular motion so the idea is how do you use the internal energy of the body to organize the propulsion of the bodies. So it is all behind the formulas if they will transcript it properly. At the moment no, they put all the ideas into one basket and no one could understand what has happened.

NM : Are you ready to cooperate with them ?

IB : It might be me, any smart physicist will be ready, but it should be organized in a proper way and there are no much sense (in my opinion) to just go from one conference to another, no one will support. Even here, a thousand of physicists and theoreticians like me come here to promote their own ideas, no one is looking around. To cooperate they are ready, but no one is interested to propose some other people ideas. The idea of them is to make some international call for cooperation, it should be few experimentalists. So I would propose them to formulate at least one testable prediction from the theory, what should be tested in practice, in order to falsify or to verify this

MN : Do you see any connection with what is asked from the unification ?

IB : They did not specify what they unified, they unify the Newtonian and the electromagnetic force. There are two more forces, they did not unify all four forces, maybe it is their next step. And even in what they are trying to discuss, at the moment I can’t say that they completed the unification. My guess it should be an advanced stage, they just put few ideas. In physics it is not just unification.

They made a proposal, it might be correct, it might not, they should test it first in a very clear experiment. It might be an expensive experiment, but should be tested first.