lobal Journal of Science Frontier Research, A: Physics and Space Science, Volume 24 Issue 4

On the Incompatibility of the Laws of Energy and Pulse Conservation Valeriy Etkin Abstract- The discrepancy between the laws of conservation of impulse and its momentum to the nature of the evolution of the Universe is revealed. Based on a strict definition of the conserved quantity, the incompatibility of the laws of conservation of quantitative measures of carriers of various forms of energy with the law of its conservation is revealed. It is shown that in the general case of nonequilibrium multivariate systems, these laws give way to the principle of interconversion of pulses of translational, rotational, and oscillatory motion of various energy carriers. Experimental confirmation of the possibility of creating on this basis new types of ground and space propulsion systems is given. Keywords: conservation laws, impulse, momentum, form of motion, sources, evolution. I. I ntroduction t is believed that the laws of conservation of energy, mass, charge, momentum, and momentum form the foundation of modern natural science [1]. In this case, checking the reliability of this foundation becomes necessary at every new stage in the development of science, when doubts arise about the validity of at least one of them. Once again, such a need arose in connection with the advent of propulsion systems running in violation of Newton’s laws, as well as the discovery of the accelerated expansion of the Universe, showing a spontaneous increase for motion in it. This forces us to return again and again to the origins of the laws mentioned. This retrospective analysis takes us back to R. Descartes [2], whose worldview influenced the way of thinking of scientists of many later generations. His first law of nature said the conservation of momentum of the studied set of moving bodies. For each of the bodies in this collection, the amount of motion was determined by the product of the amount of matter in it M (later called its mass) by the modulus of its velocity υ , not only because vector algebra did not yet exist in those days, but because only then the total amount of motion did not depended on the direction of movement of these bodies and remained constant during the transformation of ordered (observable) movement into hidden (unobservable). Subsequently, this law led to the concept of energy as a general measure of all forms of motion and to the understanding of heat as a measure of hidden (chaotic) motion. At the same time, without considering the direction of movement, the concept of momentum M υ was clearly insufficient. Even G. Galileo, through his experiments with cylindrical bodies sliding and rolling down an inclined plane, showed that under the influence of the same “dead force” (gravity), sliding bodies buy a lower speed than sliding ones. This showed the dependence of the amount of motion on its direction. Much confirmation of this was provided by the study of indirect and inelastic impact, when the experimental results turned out to depend on the direction of the velocity, the point of application of the force and the nature of the interaction. As G. Leibniz showed [3], the conserved quantity in these cases is not the total amount of internal motion of the i-th bodies Σ i M i υ i , but their “living force” Σ i M i υ i 2 . The resulting dispute about the true measure of momentum could not be resolved by Newtonian mechanics [4]. It went ahead from the laws of motion of a material point devoid of spatial extension. Therefore, for her, not only the concept of internal, but also external rotational motion of a point did not make sense. This significantly simplified the study, making the “applied” force F = dP/dt the only reason for the change in momentum P = M υ , cutting the need to take into account the angular momentum. In this case, the constancy of the momentum in a closed system (F = 0) at once followed from the very definition of force, which was consistent with the views of Descartes. The concept of “force impulse” Fdt = dP or simply “impulse” P = M υ as a vector quantity began to be used only with the advent of vector algebra (W. Hamilton, 1845). This made it easier to distinguish between the concepts of “impulse” (vector) and “quantity of motion” (scalar), with the concept of “living force,” which was later replaced by the concept of “energy” (T. Jung, 1807). As a result, the incompatibility discovered by Leibniz in a number of experiments between two measures of motion Σ i M i υ i and Σ i M i υ i 2 was explained by the difference in the processes that conduct the transfer and transformation of mechanical energy. The position of G. Leibniz also strengthened, which later resulted in the law of conservation of the sum of potential En and kinetic Ek energy as successors to the concept of “dead” and “living” forces [1]. However, fierce discussions about the incompatibility of the law of conservation of energy with the laws of conservation of momentum and its angular momentum have not I Global Journal of Science Frontier Research ( A ) XXIV Issue IV Version I Year 2024 85 © 2024 Global Journals Author: D-r Techn.Sc., Prof., Integrative Reseaerch Institute (Israel), ORSID 0000-0003-2815-1284. e-mail: v_a_etkin@bezeqint.net