Stuewer's Bluff to try to save Einstein's
Quantum theory
Roger J Anderton
[email protected]
There appears to have been a terrible mistake – Einstein was
awarded a Nobel prize for his quantum theory explaining the
photoelectric effect. BUT there appears to be no justification for
the theory. i.e. the prize was awarded by mistake. Roger Stuewer
leaps to Einstein's defence and presents what appears to be a Bluff.
If this were a game of poker then Stuewer's Bluff would be called.
But its not a game of poker and Stuewer's Bluff stands as the
defence of Einstein.
Roger Stuewer [1] has a long list of impressive titles: “Fellow, American Council of
Learned Societies; Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science;....
[etc]”
Let us look at the relevant article by him: “Non-Einsteinian interpretations of the
photoelectric effect” [2], where he presents us with a “Bluff”. .
Stuewer after seeming to decide that the photoelectric effect can be interpreted by
other theories than Einstein's quantum theory. (I.e referring to Einstein's 1905 paper
on the photoelectric effect.) An issue that dates back to early times when Einstein
first proposed his explanation, there were other explanations as contenders.
Stuewer then flash forwards to 1968 and says: “I met Professor Peter Franken at the
Sommerfeld Conference in Munich and learned from him that it is possible, even
today, to account for the main features of the photoelectric effect along nonEinsteinian lines, that is, without assuming light quanta or photons to be incident on
the atom.”
i.e. the claim is that even in 1968 this is more than 40 years after Einstein got the
Nobel prize in 1921 for his explanation, it is still not the only possible explanation for
the photoelectric effect.
That means Einstein won his Nobel prize in 1921 by a mistake. In 1968 they still had
no evidence that Einstein's explanation was the one and only correct explanation.
They did not know it in 1968, and they could not have known it in 1921.
I suspect that things have not changed since then, hence it would mean Einstein won
his prize by a mistake even by today's standards.
However Steuwer now leaps to Einstein's defence.
He says: "And certainly nothing is more artificial than concentrating on one
experiment to the exclusion of all other phenomena: the photon concept, like all
fruitful concepts, derives its validity from an interlocking theoretical and
experimental matrix."
And the relevant question I would ask is "how?" -- how does it give an interlocking
and experimental matrix? -- the article does not answer, and cites nothing to where
one could find such an answer.
If there is nothing other than this in some other paper, then the author is making a
claim and giving no justification i.e. he's bluffing.
Further - Einstein got his Nobel prize for explaining the photoelectric effect, there
was nothing about explaining an "interlocking theoretical and experimental matrix" -meaning nothing about explaining a set of different experiments, it was just for
explaining one experiment. --- As Far as I know . (AFAIK) AND it is not being
explicitly stated (as far as I know) to physics students et al that Einstein's quantum
theory was (and is still) only one of several different possible theories to explain the
photoelectric effect. Nobelprize.org [3] says it was for photoelectric effect, nothing
about Stuewer's “an interlocking and experimental matrix”. The way that the
scientific method would work is if some maths were able to explain some physical
effect then it would be expanded on later with more maths to try to fit it into a bigger
context of what Stuewer's calls “an interlocking and experimental matrix”, but it
would not have been initially like that. Initially it would be explaining only one
effect, and if there were alternative explanations then those alternatives similarly
could be expanded into a bigger context later of “an interlocking and experimental
matrix.”
So given those provisos the whole thing is a Bluff – and Einstein was awarded a
Noble prize by mistake. And of course how the Nobel prize system is set- up all
winners now have to build upon that mistake. Thus Stuewer's Bluff acts as defence
and excuse so that the mainstream can carry on building upon that mistake.
If we look to further evidence we find many anomalies such as:
“As late as 1910, Planck refused to accept Einstein’s hypothesis that electromagnetic
radiation is quantized. Planck warned that one should not be so hasty in throwing out
the wave theory of light, after all the struggles to establish it and all its successes in
explaining and predicting so many phenomena. He still believed in the strict validity
of Maxwell’s equations for empty space, thus excluding the possibility of discrete
energy quanta in a vacuum.” [4]
Planck being the person whose idea Einstein was supposedly building upon. The
whole thing was some ghastly mistake where all the possibilities did not seem to be
considered, and properly catalogued as to why certain choices were made over other
choices, and it all now seems to be protected by a “bluff”.
If this were a game of poker then Stuewer's Bluff could be called. But this is the
game of physics where unjustified claims made in defence of Einstein are allowed to
stand.
Reading physics papers can become quite entertaining for spotting these
psychological tricks that these physicists use. Where the alternative would have to be
an admission that mistakes have been made, they try any excuse to cover up and keep
physics/science locked into the paradigm of the same old mistakes.
References
[1] Roger Stuewer at: https://www.physics.umn.edu/people/rstuewer.html
[2] Non-Einsteinian Interpretations of the Photoelectric Effect, Roger Stuewer
http://www.mcps.umn.edu/assets/pdf/5.11_Stuewer.pdf
[3] The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921, Nobelprize.org
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1921/
says: “The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921 was awarded to Albert Einstein "for his
services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the
photoelectric effect".Albert Einstein received his Nobel Prize one year later, in 1922.
During the selection process in 1921, the Nobel Committee for Physics decided that
none of the year's nominations met the criteria as outlined in the will of Alfred Nobel.
According to the Nobel Foundation's statutes, the Nobel Prize can in such a case be
reserved until the following year, and this statute was then applied. Albert Einstein
therefore received his Nobel Prize for 1921 one year later, in 1922.”
[4] How ideas became knowledge: The light-quantum hypothesis 1905–1935,
STEPHEN G. BRUSH
http://www.google.co.uk/url?
sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CC4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F
%2Fls.poly.edu%2F~jbain%2Fhistlight%2Freadings
%2F07Brush.pdf&ei=1jTOU4TTCIyB7QagjYFA&usg=AFQjCNEoL8BOMYrbWp3
nQXyGfDt7BqtvoA&bvm=bv.71198958,d.ZGU
c.RJAnderton22July2014