Page 1 of 15 Memorial and Thoughts of a Man with Great Ideas Pharis Williams James O. Shannon Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545 Warren R. Maines Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM 87185 David Mathes CEO and Founder, Spacelines, Roseville CA 95661 Paul Murad Morningstar Applied Physics, LLC Pharis Edward Williams was from Missouri. During his lifetime, he possessed an amazing ability to conceive original technical ideas. He raised questions that others would ignore. This created a new perspective that would lead him to increasing knowledge and experience while in the Navy as well as in research laboratories. His Master of Nuclear Physics dissertation demonstrated this prevalent view. He proposed generalizations of the classical Thermodynamic Laws leading to the fundamental principles of what he termed The Dynamic Theory. In this theory, an important role is played by identifying an integrating factor that makes the energy exchange with the environment a total differential and leads to the definition of a mechanical entropy. Equilibrium and stability conditions for dynamic systems are derived and together with the principle of increasing entropy provide a geometrical structure from which the theories of relativity, Maxwell's electromagnetism, and quantum effects may be derived. By applying simplifying or restrictive assumptions to the main body of the theory, Pharis shows that the major fields of physics are contained within the extensions of this theory. In these extensions, new field quantities appear to become important for systems and technical disciplines. Thus, the Dynamic Theory that he created would unify the various branches of physics into one theoretical structure. Only the future can tell what will be the impact of Pharis dynamic theory contributions and how engineers and scientists can gain and find new insights. I. Introduction Pharis Edward Williams was a precocious pre-teen growing up in southern Missouri when he first discovered the magic of ideas contained in books at the local library. He read books voraciously, and absorbed the knowledge they contained. When he came across a topic new to him, he would ask his favorite uncle How do they know what the weather will be tomorrow? His uncle invariably would respond Look it up and see what you think. That Program Manager for Special Technologies (retired), International Technologies Division, LANL, Los Alamos, NM 87545. Manager, Energetic Systems Research & Development, Mail Stop 1134. CEO and Founder (retired), Spacelines, Roseville CA 95661. CEO, Morningstar Applied Physics, LLC, Vienna, Virginia, 22182, AIAA Associate Fellow. Page 2 of 15 routine of always questioning the source of knowledge would develop through the years to become a major part of Pharis personality. He questioned all statements with Why is that so? or What is your evidence for that belief? Pharis grew up in the hills of southern Missouri and was fond of relating Ozark hill philosophy. One of his favorite stories goes like this: A native Ozarkian was giving directions to a stranger who was trying to find a certain fishing hole. The directions went something like this: "See yonder road going down that holler? Well, go down thar 'bout five mile and you'll come to a fork in the road. Take the right hand fork. Now that's the wrong one but you take it anyways. After you've gone a piece, you'll come to a log across the road. Now you know you're on the wrong road. So go back and take the left hand fork. You can't miss it." His major concern with the various fields of science was that we were not heeding this valuable down-home philosophy. For many years, science had been coming across logs in the road of our favorite theories experimental results that did not fit the established model. Yet instead of returning to ground truththe fundamentals (where the forks diverged) we insisted on patching up our theories (cutting up the logs in the road) and continuing on. However, Pharis always looked at everything from a different perspective than most people. He insisted that we should take the other fork and return to fundamentals by first establishing a simple set of physical laws that could apply to all fields. If we could formulate a set of unassailable principles, he thought we might find that we could derive the foundations of the various branches of physics by making simplifying assumptions. The sections that follow will give you a feel for his unique approach to the study of physics foundations. This paper is not intended to be a rigorous dissertation of Pharis Williams work. Rather, we will present here an overview of the Dynamic Theory and resultant concepts and predictions. For those readers who are not yet calcified by years of immersion in What we now know we challenge you to study Pharis work in papers and books. His two most recent books are referenced in the End Notes and form the basis of this paper. II. Discussion Pharis started his career as an enlisted man in the Navy. He went to Officer Candidate School to gain a commission and retired at the rank of Lieutenant Commander. During this time period and later portions of his career, he covered several important milestones in his life. We would like to share some of these experiences to demonstrate the type of personality of this unique Maverick as well as the kinds of contributions he made. A. The Popcorn Project The questioning approach that Pharis developed as a child would result in later years in his examination of the source of the US Navys documented statement of the yield of a certain special weapon. Since he was teaching students at the Navys Nuclear Weapon Training Center he considered the proof of the Navys yield to be of extreme importance. Using a hand-held calculator that his wife, Jeri, had given him, Pharis decided to prove to himself that the Navy publication was correct. Starting from first principlesE = mc Pharis derived the expected yield of nuclear weapons to be at least 150% of the official documented yield. That Navy publication was used to establish operational doctrine for the use of such devices. In response to this unexpected result, he and his commander called the attention of high level US Navy commanders to this finding. After years of intense back-and-forth communications, a meeting was called in Albuquerque, NM to have this young Mustang Lieutenant defend his conclusions. The meeting was packed with high-level Navy officials and scientists from the three major nuclear weapons laboratoriesthose scientists who had made the official calculations. While one scientist was at the dais holding forth in opposition to Pharis claims, Pharis was hard at work on his hand-held calculator. The room grew very quiet and the senior Admiral asked Pharis: Lieutenant, what is so important on that gadget that you cannot pay attention to what this scientist is saying? Pharis looked up and said Well Admiral, if this feller is even 10 percent wrong, we have a bigger problem than I thought. Pharis later explained that these errors could cause a major disaster related to how the Navy intended to use and store these weapons. One young mustang Lieutenant had held the day against all the gathered opposition from the Navy brass and the nuclear weapons laboratory scientists. Page 3 of 15 From that conference, the US Navy initiated an expensive program called Popcorn to solve the problems that Pharis had exposed. You may read about this program in the archives of the London Daily Mail. Otherwise, we suspect that there are classified files regarding this program somewhere in government archives. B. Development of the Dynamic Theory Following his duties at the Navys Nuclear Weapons Training Center, Pharis attended the Naval Postgraduate School at Monterey, CA. While there, he began to question the basis of all physics. He reasoned that if the best minds of the Navy and science had made such fundamental and critically important errors in calculating the yield of weapons and the consequences of storage methods, the basis of physics itself might be faulty. Pharis review of the current state of science revealed that there are several different branches of physics, each with a different set of fundamental laws or postulates. Although he could see how the distinctions between these physics disciplines could arise, he refused to accept that nature shared the same divisions. He firmly believed that all natural phenomena should be explained by a single set of fundamental laws. As a result, he turned to Thermodynamics, a field of science that had never been seriously challenged, and developed his three fundamental laws. A simple statement of these laws is as follows: 1. The First Law The First Law is a generalization of the statement of the conservation of energy in a thermodynamic system such where the left hand side represents the change in heat and Q indicates a path dependent process, U is the system energy, P is pressure, dv is the change in volume, F is the force applied to the system, and x, y, z are the three space dimensions. Since there are five terms in the equation, we will need five independent equations in order to solve it. Equation (1) generalized for mechanical systems can be written as: where again U is system internal energy, W is work on the system done by forces that are functions of velocity (u) and coordinates (q) and can be expressed as: Since we need five independent equations to solve these equalities, we must postulate five dimensions. 2. The Second Law The Second Law uses the statement of the second law of thermodynamics by Greek mathematician Caratheodory such that: In the neighborhood (however close) of any equilibrium state of a system of any number of dynamic coordinates, there exist states that cannot be reached by reversible E-conservative (E = 0) processes or Thus there are points or states around any given state that cannot be reached without exchanging energy between the system and its surroundings. From this Pharis states that solution paths for the First Law cannot cross. If the paths were allowed to cross that would mean a system could proceed from an initial equilibrium state to two different final states along reversible E-conservative paths. The prohibition of this process denies perpetual motion. In addition, Pharis states that there will always exist a function (path independent) which, when used to multiply the First Law, will form a new system property that he calls mechanical entropy. By taking these first two laws together, Pharis determines the existence of an integrating factor, which when multiplied by the change in exchange energy (E) changes the path-dependent First Law into a path-independent statement about the change in mechanical entropy (henceforth entropy). Thus the change in the exchange of energy is path dependent while the change in entropy is path independent. That relationship may be expressed as: Page 4 of 15 and 1/(u) is the integrating factor or (u) is the integrating denominator and f() is a function of a family of curves in phase space representing reversible E-conservative processes. Pharis continues with this line of development to show that there exists an absolute or limiting velocity. There is one such limiting velocity already known to us from Einsteins theory which has been repeatedly held to be true. Pharis takes these two limiting velocities to be the samecthe speed of light. 3. The Third Law The Third Law allows us to compare the entropy between two systems. It is stated as: The entropy of a system is constant when the integrating denominator is zero (the integrating factor is infinite). III. Results Pharis Williams decision to first seek a ground truth for all of physics by postulating three fundamental laws, which are widely accepted, led himthrough painstaking mathematicsto a wealth of results. Visual representation of these results can be seen in Table (1) and by study of the Dynamic Theory Logic Flow diagram, both of which are shown in the Appendix. A review of this chart and diagram will show that Pharis has developed a mathematical basis for the separate fields of physics from microscopic to cosmologic. Applying the three laws and imposing various restrictive assumptions, Pharis displays three dimensional thermodynamics, Einsteins Special Theory of Relativity (STR), the Maxwell Equations, a five dimensional (5-D) STR, and Expanded Maxwell Equations for 5-D manifolds. Going further, he finds Newtonian Mechanics for low velocity systems, and 4-D or 5-D Quantum Conditions for isentropic systems. He leaves unexplored what may result from non-isentropic systems. Additional restrictive assumptions lead to the Non-Singular Potential, photons, and Quantum Mechanics. Given conservation of mass, he finds Einsteins General Theory of Relativity. If the potentials are given he discovers Quantum Mechanics. Applying the Non-Singular Potential to two unlike particle systems at atomic separations, he presents a model for the atom. Pharis describes the Weak Force for unlike two particle systems with nuclear separations. Using the Non-Singular Potential for three particles, he describes the Strong Force. That is quite a menu of results for a southern Missouri boy who simply asks Why? Should we accept that the various fields of physics stand apart from each other because they were developed by different scientists over a span of centuries? Or should we take a fresh look at the whole structure of physics and propose that they can be derived from a simple set of fundamental concepts? Are we likely to be successful in unifying physics with a Theory of Everything or a Unified Field Theory if we simply take the piece-parts of current physics and tie them together at the top? Or should we look into the concept of a fundamental basis for all physics such as presented by Pharis Williams? The following sections will summarize some of the more interesting results of Pharis approach to physics. A. The Non-Singular Potential The Non-Singular electrostatic potential takes the following form: where the constant k is the Coulomb constant, r is he distance between particles, and is characteristic to the particle. In Fig. (1) we see a comparison between the standard coulomb potential force and the force created by the non-singular potential. The plot shows that the non-singular (or neo-coulomb) force is vir- tually indistinguishable from the Coulomb force for identical particles separated by greater than approximately 10. However, at a separation of exactly , the force is identically zero for the neo- coulomb force, but the Coulomb force has begun to rise toward infinity. In terms of the classical notion of nuclear forces, we would say that at separations greater than 10, the non-singular and coulomb nuclear force is negligible. The non-singular force Figure 1. Comparison of coulomb and neo-coulomb (non-singular) forces at short range. Page 5 of 15 becomes an attractive force for separations less than and tends toward zero as r approaches zero. Pharis continues by considering the forces created by two unlike particlesan electron and protonon each other as the distance between them changes. Consider the electron and proton to be placed on a horizontal surface separated by a distance, r, with the proton to the right of the electron. Thus, the long range attractive forces between these two particles will cause the proton to experience a force to the left while the electron will experience a force to the right. He then writes the force on the proton that is due to the positive charge of the proton being in the electron where the electron field involving the electron lambda has been accounted for. The force on the electron due to being in the proton field is given by: Figure (2) plots both these forces as a function of the separation, r, where, = 1 Fermi has been assumed. The electron-electron scattering data show that the electron-electron interaction behaves in a coulombic manner even when separations are approximately 0.01-0.1 Fermi. To be consistent with this data, we have assumed From this plot of the force on the proton and the force on the electron, we see that for separations less than about 10 Fermis the forces become extremely unsymmetrical. This immediately and visually demonstrates that the non-singular exponential force violates Newton's third law requiring that the force on the proton be equal in magnitude and opposite indirection to the force on the electron. The question arises whether or not a violation of Newton's third law has ever been seen as the result of an interaction between an electron and a proton? The answer, based on a neutron disintegration from which a proton and electron emerge, is definitely yes; Newton's third law was seen to be violated. To reinstate Newton's third law in neutron disintegration and all other beta decay, Pauli postulated the existence of the neutrino. Fermi later developed his theory of weak interactions, from which appeared the necessity to talk of a fourth force in nature. Pharis continues with this unique line of investigation to consider that the neutron may be a tightly bound electron-proton pair. Most will say this violates Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and other accepted concepts. Pharis deals with all these objections straightforwardly. The reader is invited to follow his logic and math to see what you think. However, an honest inquiry into these concepts requires that you stay within the limits of the Dynamic Theory. Simply dismissing his conclusions because they violate accepted theory is not an honest argument. B. Maxwell & Extended Maxwell Equations One of the most fascinating results of the Dynamic Theory is the development of the 5-D Maxwell Equations. Pharis states that the extension of geometry Weyl used to place electromagnetism on a geometrical basis allowed him to use his gauge principle to derive the