Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: possible experiment proving Malus law of superconduction and BCS a
fake #1185 New Physics #1305 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Replies: 4   Last Post: Jan 29, 2013 9:33 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 11,333
Registered: 3/31/08
2nd experiment that shows BCS a fake, but Malus law the true theory
#1186 New Physics #1306 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Posted: Jan 29, 2013 3:04 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

There may well be a very simple proof that the conductivity of
electricity in either normal conductors or superconductors is carried
out by the Malus law with photon messengers of electrons in the
In the last post, I offered a experiment that if we can observe
vortices in superconductors that the BCS theory would predict the
vortices throughout the circuit. The Malus theory would predict the
vortices to be bunched up near the generator source of current and
further on the circuit would be free of vortices.

Now after posting that, I thought there should be a more direct proof
of which is true-- Malus law or BCS theory. Before I discuss this
second experiment let me refresh in my own mind and the reader what
the BCS theory contends is going on. There is no better physics
textbook than the 1980s Halliday and Resnick because after 1988,
physics textbook started to fill their pages with the nonsense
fakeries of Big Bang, black-holes, quarks, strings, neutron stars and
other assorted nonsense. So the best physics textbook ended in 1988.

Halliday and Resnick's 1988, 3rd edition, Fundamentals of Physics

--- quoting from page 655 ---

Electrons normally repel each other so that some special mechanism is
needed to induce them to form a pair. A semiclassical picture that
helps in understanding this quantum BCS phenomenon is as follows: An
electron plows through the lattice, distorting it slightly and thus
leaving in its wake a very short-lived concentration of enhanced
positive charge. If a second electron is nearby at the right moment,
it may well be attracted to this region by the positive charge, thus
forming a pair with the first electron. It is known that the newly
discovered superconductors operate by means of Cooper pairs but, as of
1988, there is no universal agreement as to the mechanism by which
these pairs are formed.
--- end quote ---

Now as H&R describe the mechanism of BCS theory it suggests that the
thickness of the wire circuit should have a large difference between
BCS and Malus law theory.

If you recall, the best conductivity is short, fat, and cold wire.

Now, if we focus just on cross section area in the formula of
Resistance of R = rL/A where A is the cross section area. So the fat
wire is a better conductor than the skinny wire.

Now, let us ask if the BCS mechanism favors a fat wire over a skinny
wire and likewise ask the same question of the Malus law theory.

Well, from reading the above H&R of the Cooper pairing with its
dependence on concentrations of enhanced positive charge, that the
pairing of two electrons is not favored, but rather would be favored
in a skinny wire rather than a fat wire.

On the other hand, the Malus law of superconductivity where the photon
messengers pair up with a individual electron would be favored by a
larger cross section so as to take out each photon and pair it with a
electron in that cross section.
If the photons were crammed together in a smaller cross section, they
would be more tending to be a laser and more heat.

So I think the obvious fact that fat conductors are more conductive
than skinny conductors favors the Malus law of conductivity and
superconductivity, and not the BCS theory of superconductivity.

One of the huge problems of a fake theory in physics, is that the
believers of the fake theory never take any logical objections to
heart, but just ignore all objections. And worse yet, they never look
for logical inconsistencies, and only look to window-dress their
darling. So that when BCS was offered as a theory, no physicist ever
questioned whether that mechanism supports the equation R =rL/A or
contradicts that equation of fat wire or skinny wire.


Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from search-engine-
bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and
fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as seen here:


Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum 1994-2015. All Rights Reserved.