PART I

INTRODUCTORY SUPPORTIVE EVIDENCES

Compton Effect

Arthur H. Compton in 1923 performed an experiment involving X-rays interacting with matter.  Based on the results of that experiment, physicists concluded that electromagnetic radiation is particle-like when it interacts with matter.  The experiment  used an X-ray source hitting a graphite plate.  X-rays emerging from the plate then traveled to a crystal which was used to measure the wavelength of the radiation. Compton found that two wavelengths emerged from the graphite plate.  Measurements made on other materials than graphite resulted in the same duality of wavelengths. The experiment is summarized in Eisberg's and Lerner's textbook. “Since it made no difference with what material the incident X-rays interacted, Compton realized that the interaction producing the X-rays of length a' did not involve atoms of the material.  Instead, he argued that the incident X-rays must be interacting with the individual electrons, the common constituent of all atoms.  Specifically, Compton assumed that what goes on involves a single photon interacting with a single electron.  The interaction can be described as the absorption by an electron of an incident photon of a certain frequency and wavelength, followed very quickly by the emission xsd from the electron of another photon of different frequency and wavelength in a different direction....In Compton's picture, a photon is treated quite literally as a particle. In scattering from an electron, a photon transfers energy to the electron just as a moving billiard ball transfers energy in scattering from an initially stationary billiard ball.  Hence after scattering a photon's energy is reduced from its initial value E = hv to a lower value E' = hv'” [1].

The Italian physicist, Amaldi outlined the results.  “He [Compton] observed that when a beam of X-rays crosses matter part of it is scattered in all directions and that the frequency of this scattered radiation is rather less than that of the incident radiation.  The Compton effect could not be explained in terms of classical theory” [2]. The Circular Model of the Atom with matter in positive and negative fields would have a similar effect of reducing the scattered photon's energy.

Compton's assumption that the atomic target is not the cause of the dual wavelength result of the experiment has to be questioned.  In light of the dual positive and negative nature of matter and fields in the Circular Model of the Atom, then all materials that make up an X-ray target would result in dual wavelengths.  If an X-ray, being electromagnetic in nature, were to interact with matter in an atom, those fields within the atom would give the duality of wavelengths that Compton found.

Even quantum textbook authors concede photons have transport aspects similar to classical waves. “It should also be emphasized that the phenomena of interference and diffraction show photons do not travel through a system from where they are emitted to where they are absorbed in the simple way classical particles do.  Instead, photons act as if they were guided by classical waves because photons travel through a system such as a diffraction apparatus in a way that is best described by the way that classical waves would propagate through the apparatus” [3].  Compton assumed that the graphite target's sub-particles were singular point particles and were not responsible for the scattering and attendant dual wavelengths. Dirac's positive and negative matter states within the atom is best described by the Circular Model of the Atom. Thus, Compton's experiment hasn't properly accounted for the positive and negative matter fields within the atoms of the graphite used as the target. These wrong conclusions and assumptions from this scattering experiment have led to a faulty boson theory.

[1] Eisberg, R. & Lerner, L, 1981. Physics Foundations and Applications. New York: McGraw Hill, p. 1445.

[2] Amaldi, G., 1966. The Nature of Matter: Physical Theory from Thales to Fermi. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, p. 133.

[3] Eisberg, R. & Resnick, R., 1985. Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei, and Particles. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, p. 50-51.

previous

next