THE CONNECTION OF PHILOSOPHY AND PHYSICS THROUGH THE LAWS OF THE THEORY OF THE UNIVERSE Текст научной статьи по специальности «Физика»

4. изложите иначе идею о том, что...;

5. изобразите информацию о. графически;

6. предложите способ, позволяющий.

В конце данного этапа урока учащиеся приходят к выводу, что для решения вопроса о расположении электропроводки под слоем штукатурки или панелями необходимо использовать компас. Формулирую правило буравчика для определения направлений магнитных линий прямого проводника с током и правило правой руки для соленоида.

На пятом этапе урока «Первичное закрепление» (5 мин) учащиеся решают качественные задачи по теме (определение направления магнитных линий прямого проводника с током, соленоида) с обсуждением в парах и проговаривают новые правила в громкой речи. Также на этом этапе возможно создание краткого опорного конспекта по теме или алгоритма пользования правилом буравчика, правилом правой руки.

На шестом этапе «Самоанализ и самоконтроль» (8 мин) учащимся предлагается проверить усвоение темы. Проверку можно проводить в форме физического диктанта, решения кроссворда и т. д. с самопроверкой по эталону или взаимопроверкой по эталону. Критерии оценки при этом проговариваются учителем или выводятся на доску. Для осуществления обратной связи можно использовать систему карточек или интерактивную систему голосования Smart. Типичные ошибки и вопросы, вызвавшие затруднения, анализируются учителем.

На седьмом этапе урока «Рефлексия» (5 мин) подводятся итоги урока, при этом возможно использование различных способов: составление син-квейна по теме, заполнение «дерева успеха», использование опорных слов или фраз (сегодня я узнала..., было интересно., было трудно., я понял, что ., теперь я могу ., я приобрел., я научилась., у меня получилось., я смог., я попробую ., меня удивило ., урок дал мне для жизни ., мне захотелось ., оцените значимость. для . и т. д.).

На этом этапе выставляю оценки и задаю домашнее задание, комментируя его содержание. В

домашнее задание по изучаемой теме можно также внести творческую составляющую: подготовить презентацию «Магнитное поле Земли», «История развития компаса», «Полярное сияние»; подготовить сообщение о жизни Г.Х. Эрстеда, А.-М. Ампера; подготовить проектную работу «Влияние магнитного поля на жизнь и здоровье человека»; составить кроссворд по изучаемой теме; составить качественные задачи по теме и т. д.

Применение системно-деятельностного подхода на уроках физики требует большого труда учителя, вместе с тем опыт показывает, что использование данного метода полностью оправдано. По моему глубокому убеждению, главной движущей силой любой деятельности является интерес. Дать возможность учащимся самостоятельно добывать знания - наша задача. У обучающихся при этом формируется потребность в усвоении новых знаний, они приобретают качества, необходимые в дальнейшей жизни вне зависимости от сферы их профессиональных интересов. Все эти личностные качества очень нужны в условиях нарастающего потока информации для ее детального анализа, отбора, классификации и обработки, для успешной социализации выпускника школы в современном мире.

Литература

1. Федеральный государственный образовательный стандарт основного общего образования / Министерство образования и науки Российской Федерации. 2-е изд. - М.: Просвещение, 2013. С. 23

2. Петерсон Л.Г. Требование к составлению плана урока по дидактической системе деятель-ностного метода [Текст] / Л.Г. Петерсон, М.А. Ку-бышева, Т.Г. Кудряшова. - Москва, 2006.

3. Системно-деятельностный подход - методологическая основа ФГОС [Электронный ресурс]. - Режим доступа: http ://infourok. ru/sistemnodeyatelnostniy -podhod-metodologicheskaya-osnova-fgos-426263.html

THE CONNECTION OF PHILOSOPHY AND PHYSICS THROUGH THE LAWS OF THE THEORY

OF THE UNIVERSE

Rysin A.,

ANO "STRC" Technical Committee "Moscow, radio engineer

Nikiforov I.,

Chuvash State University, Cheboksary, candidate of technical sciences, associate professor

Boykachev V.

ANO "STRC" Technical Committee "Moscow, director, candidate of technical sciences

ABSTRACT

In this article we expand the number of laws of philosophy based on the principles of existence and interaction in the universe. At the same time, the result is a general formula of the universe, from which all the laws of physics follow.

Keywords: Einstein SRT and GRT, vector potentials, wave of Louis de Broglie.

Statement of the axiom about the absence of miracles

The first attempt at a logical substantiation of the laws of the universe was made through the laws of philosophy. As is known, Engels formulated the "three laws of dialectics", which were obtained by him through the interpretation of Hegel's dialectics and Marx's philosophical works:

1.The law of unity and struggle of opposites ("Movement and development in nature, society and thinking is caused by the splitting of the unified view onto the opposites with penetrating in each other and by the resolution of contradictions between them through struggle" [1]).

2.The law of the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones ("Development is carried out by accumulating quantitative changes in a subject, which inevitably leads to infringement of its measure (stable state) and an abrupt transformation through the jump into a qualitatively new subject " [1]).

3. The law of negation of negation ("Development goes through the constant negation of opposites with each other, through their mutual conversion, as a result of which at the forward movement occurs return, the features of the old are repeated in the new" [1]).

It is believed that the main one is the law of unity and struggle of opposites. With regard to the latter law, it can also be said that the acceptability of development is carried out in such a way that after the second successive negation of the old view by the new view, the new view includes the old view throughtransforming in form with other basis. However, these three laws of philosophy cannot be called laws, since they do not have any mathematical and logical basis for interaction, and it, most likely, are the statements which could be named the postulates if further from them it would be possible to establish certain logic of mathematical transformations and interactions. For this reason the philosophy has not received the further continuation as a science from which other sciences such as the physics, themathematics, the biology and the chemistry would follow.

Indeed, what practical meaning can carry the phrase about the law of unity and struggle of opposites if the definition of the very necessity of the existence of opposites is not given, and what opposites should represent in relation to each other. In addition, it is necessary to understand what the definition of unity and struggle is based on, and this statement also has no logical and mathematical justification.

The second law of the transition of quantitative changes to qualitative changes is also a statement, as there is no justification for the transition by a leap of quantitative changes to a new quality. In mathematics, quantitative changes in general can grow to infinity with the absence of a change in the law.

The third law, the negation of negation, also is deprived of any justification. This third law as though reflects result of the certain cycle of development and its orientation. Development of movement has forward-repeated character. Movement in the certain direction and repeatability of process gives spiral form.

The law of negation of negation means that the

transition from one qualitative view to another view occurred after overcoming the "old" quality and the secondary acceptance in a new form of what was accumulated at the previous stage. Let's describe an example of the operation of the law of negation of negation from mathematics, given by Engels: we take a positive number a, and subject it to negation and get -a (minus a). If we shall subject negate to new negation by multiplying -a by -a, we get +a2 (a squared), that is, the initial positive value, but at a higher level [2]. It is clear, that this example from mathematics is obvious adjustment under result because in the first case the negation has been connected with assignment of attribute of a minus (-1), and in the second case the attribute was -a, which resulted in the value +a2. In other words, we have arbitrariness in choosing the magnitude and sign of negation, which also has no justification.

Further, relying on the dialectical and historical materialism of Marx and Engels, V.I. Lenin, as it were, developed a philosophical doctrine, formulating in the work "Materialism and empiriocriticism" the concept of matter: "Matter is a philosophical category for denoting objective reality, which is given to man in his sensations, which is copied, photographed, displayed by our sensations, existing independently of them." However, how to express concept of a matter through known physical laws? Physics is obliged to concretely represent any physical object at interaction through specific mathematical formulas with quantitative ratios. As a result of such dim definition as "matter" in the physicist by scientists the concept of dark matter (energy) has been entered.

Proceeding from told early, it follows the conclusion, in order for philosophy (literally "love of wisdom") to really become a special form of cognition of the world, developing a system of knowledge about the most general characteristics, extremely of generalizing concepts and fundamental principles of reality (being) and cognition, concept of being of human, about the relationship of man and the world, it is necessary to give for the philosophy such an initial postulate (axiom), from which all the laws of physics, as well as the presence of living beings, would follow on the basis of logic and mathematics. And it, actually, will define sense of philosophy as the science confirmed by practice.

Let's begin with the system of substantiation of the main corner-stone of the theory presented by us, which is based on the axiom of the absence of miracles.

Why is the term "axiom" (associated with an axiom from geometry) used, but not some the postulation?

Our answer is that too many errors in the theory of physics arose precisely when relying on an unprovable postulation, which sometimes contradicted another postulation

In the course of further discussion, it will be shown that it is the axiom that must be recognized as the fundamental truth due to spatiotemporal transformations; although there are no differences in these concepts (if we do not take into account the very origins of the axiom formation from geometry). In the beginning we shall makedigress, summarizing briefly the experi-

ence made before us by all mankind. We reject religious dogmas atthe very beginning - they are initially based not on proofs, but on the statements of "authors" of ancient times. In the presence of miracles, there is no need for either quantity or for laws, as they can be any at the will of the Creator, and the Creator himself can also be any.

Scientific theories always rely on statements, the proof of which follows from an obviously observable fact (for example, through two points on a plane it is possible to lead only one straight line) or from a statement that follows from logic and is observed in practice (for example, Einstein's postulation about the constancy of the speed of light in mobile and motionless system). How the practice is showing, all statements, even the following from experience, have the relativity and borders of applicability. For example, it follows from the geometry of Euclid when parallel lines do not intersect and it corresponds to physics with low speeds, i.e. this variant is more suitable for statics. But at high speeds, Lobachevski's geometry is correct in dynamics, where Euclid's postulation about parallel lines is no longer fulfilled. Accordingly, the first statement (of Euclid) is an open coordinate system, so the plane of parallel lines can be stretched even to infinity, but in dynamics the Lorentz transformations are true, and here a closed coordinate system is obtained on account of motion.

With what it is connected, we shall explain a little bit later, and now pertinently to ask a question: « And whether there is such logic statement which would be firm without dependence from any changes and on which it would be possible to construct logic of formation of all universe? ».

The skeptic will tell: « Certainly, no, all flow also all changes ». However, we will have to upset such a skeptic and say: "Yes, there is such a statement! And this is an axiom about the absence of miracles!" Now we shall explain, why authors think so. For this purpose, it is necessary to penetrate into the very concept of the manifestation of a miracle and what it is expressed in.

The first association of all people from the manifestation of a miracle is due to the fact that something has arisen out of nothing (zero) or, conversely, something disappears into nothing. So, for ex-ample, wizards from fairy tales could create castles and jewels out of nothing and also destroy them without a trace. From the point of view of physics, this means the absence of laws and cause-and-effect relationships, and the quantitative assessment can be any value, and here 2 + 2 can be any digital value, at the example, it is 5 or 3, due to fact that there is a miracle of disappearance and appearance from nothing. But as practice shows, what changes would not occur in our universe, the only thing that happened was the replacement of one law through another law , while maintaining quantitative ratios, and here miracles associated with the disappearance or emergence from nothing are not observed. Really, what the concept of a miracle means, which is associating with the emergence of something from nothing, it is a perpetual motion machine for obtaining energy, as something obtained from nothing, has energy in the form of

force.

Otherwise, how can one fix the existence of this something if it does not manifest itself in any way through the force action associated with its energy? There is no solution here.

The second association connected with miracle, this is a full in-dependence. If we possess wonderful properties we shall be eternally young, i.e. « by magic, on our wish » we can change literally all. Nothing can affect us if we can miraculously change everything. In addition, instantaneous travel becomes possible both in space (teleportation) and in time (time machine). There are literally no laws. In other words, a miracle is equivalent to the statement of presence of necessity of singularities (breaks, jumps) without explaining the reasons for their occurrence. Therefore, if miracles are confirmed in science (that by the way, takes place now), then the search for the causes of singularities does not make sense. Once again, we note that the miracle has no connection with energy and value of a quantitative characteristic of something, otherwise, why do we have energy if everything is possible? That is, any jump is possible, up to the formation of the Universe from nothing!

From here also there is the third association connected with absence of expenses. Thus, the concept of a miracle is analogous to the concept of perpetual engine, full independence, and in general, this concept denies the possibility of any laws in the world, since any laws are associated with changes, and if it becomes possible to stop these changes through miracles, for example, to be eternally young, then how can this law of aging manifest itself?

In other words, the laws are necessarily associating with the law of conservation of energy, at the same time laws and miracles are opposites, and one negates the other.

Then the question arises: "If these are opposites, then maybe a miracle is possible in some view?"

The answer is simple: «It is not present, otherwise it means that the force does not need energy, which is associated with the expenses of the manifestation of the work of this force, i.e. the law of conservation of energy is not observed."

However, there is something that replaces the concept of a miracle, as an opposite that performs changes in the world, because when we talked about a miracle, we pictured for ourselves a certain law that should have turned out. It is changes that we associate with the concept of creating something, but no fromnothing, but from other real laws. Therefore, in our understanding, the negation of any one law, it is the manifestation of another law, which has real energy values and does not arise out of nothing.

It is clear that the difference of laws is always connected with discretization and at the same time there are breaks (singularities) and it would be analogous to a miracle if there were no opposites where the static (discontinuity) view in an one opposite means dynamics (continuity due to movement) in the other opposite. But we will show this a little below.

Many will say: "You think, what you discovered

America?" This is well known that there are no miracles!" But not everyone, even a scientist, can know and understand it, and even draw the right conclusions from this.

Why do we have such an understanding? And it is connected with the fact that the physics of phenomena in quantum mechanics is persistently replaced by models of the emergence of something from nothing. Mysticism among scientists arose due to the fact that they rescheduled the probabilistic model, in which the initial causes of the phenomenon are unknown, onto physical processes in quantum mechanics and they have already completely excluded the cause-and-effect relationships that previously existed at describing all physical processes.

Thus, the character of the probabilistic function of the wave of the particle's location is considered separately from the forces forming this wave character. Further it is more,scientists not having man-aged to describe reason of inversely proportional communication between energy and time according to equality of their multiplication to a value of a constant of Planck, they introduced this as the Heisenberg's uncertainty relation, completely excluding any explanation of the need for a connection between energy and time. It turns out that the Heisenberg's uncertainty relation has its name precisely because there is no definite relationship between energy and time within the Planck constant. But if there is no definite connection, then there is no law.

The question is: "Then why we have the law received in the form of a multiplication equal to Planck's constant? And why then do unrelated quantities give a connection - how can this be?" Apparently, this is possible only through miracles! In general, laws can be observed only in case of the law of conservation of energy at mutual transformations.

In other words, physicists, through the Heisenberg uncertainty ratio, approved the law of the absence of the law of conservation of energy, and from here (as it will be seen later) they received teleportation and approved the emergence of something out of nothing, i.e., through the Heisenberg uncertainty ratio law, they introduced the negation of all laws. By attributing the concepts of energy and momentum to the wave probability functions (as required by the wave equation), they found that these probability functions for particles can exist in accordance with the accepted values of energy and momentum behind a potential barrier. Scientists also made this choice with respect to the particle: if earlier (near the potential barrier) the probability level of finding the particle should have been zero, now it should have been maximal, and the probability function of attenuation at the end of the wall of the potential barrier should not be zero.

And since probabilistic wave functions indicated only the probability of an arbitrary appearance of a particle in this or other place mathematically (but not physically), then, not knowing the reason for the interpretation of force of the probabilistic function of passing through a potential barrier, scientists introduced the tel-eportation of a particle through this potential barrier. At the same time, they could not take into account the dynamics of all processes.

Indeed, according to all the canons of the classics, a particle cannot overcome the energy of a potential barrier, because the probability function means only the probability of the particle's location without any force interpretation corresponding to physics, therefore only one thing remains, it is teleportation

But if the law of conservation of energy is not observed in the micro cosmos at the beginning, then where will the reason for observing the law of conservation of energy in the macro cosmos? This contradicts the induction method. Here there is a clear violation of cause-and-effect relationships, and hence the constancy of the speed of light according to Einstein's SRT, because in this case there must be an instantaneous movement of the particle. It is known that even if we assume that a particle does not move instantaneously, but at the speed of light, then the mass of such a particle should reach an infinite value. And this is fantastic! But as we have already noted, miracles have already been introduced into physics through the Heisenberg uncertainty ratio, according to which it turns out that the appearance of such a large energy is possible in a very short period of time.

And if in this short period of time this energy appears and disappears, then, allegedly, there are no violations in classical physics. But the paradox here is that at the same time physicists considered that this disappeared energy would have to give the impact of force, as otherwise we have zero of impact, but it does not happen without energy! In addition, the appearance of energy, even in a short time, should be accompanied by the formula E=mc2 by the corresponding appearance of mass, giving a space-time curvature, and this curvature then should not arise from zero, as it corresponds to miracles.

Further, after the introduction of the concept of the miraculous disappearance of a particle in one place and appearance of this particle in another place with rest mass, there were no problems with the introduction of virtual photons (to describe the Coulomb interaction) and pi-mesons or quarks (to describe the nuclear interaction), because in fact they give the same approaches.

We will consider all the paradoxes that arise with these phenomena below, and now we will note the importance of choosing the initial statement of the construction of the theory, because supporting only of a practical approach can lead to incorrect logical conclusions. That is why a fundamental description of the choice of the basic axiom of our theory was required.

It is impossible to tell, that the paradoxes of quantum mechanics were not known to physicists. For example, A. Einstein was an open opponent of the probabilistic approach in quantum mechanics and he devoted before death for the creation of a unified field theory near thirty years. But he failed, and his unsuccessful attempts were perceived as proof of the correctness of the probabilistic approach in quantum mechanics.

But the exclusion of the scientific axiomatic approach had obviously a negative impact on the development of physics, and this led to a number of paradoxes in the description of many phenomena. From here also there was need to create such theory, which could solve the accumulated paradoxes in the physics

of the field and the interaction of elementary particles.

The conclusion of the fundamental rules of the universe from the axiom of the absence of miracles

The main axiom on which the presented theory of the universe is based is the axiom of the absence of miracles. For the presence of miracles presupposes the absence of any laws that we observe in real life, and in this case there are no cause-and-effect relationships, everything can arise without any reason, therefore it is not possible to determine the magnitude of quantity, since this number can be any. This means the emergence of something out of nothing and violates the law of conservation of energy.

In this case, it is impossible to detect any law, because the source of the formation of any law is the reproducibility of quantitative energy ratios during transformations. And if it were possible that energy to appear out of zero, then repeatability would not be observed. Considering that the laws are still present in reality, and we observe them, the presence of miracles simultaneously with the laws means a paradox, and here one excludes the other.

Thus, our universe can consist and include only laws. Another statement means negation of our existence and the existence of magic. Therefore, it is impossible to come up with a more fundamental axiom.

The definition of laws in physics and the substantiation of its properties

Any event occurring in universe is somehow expressed in some view, and the question from here follows: «What is law in physics and how does it manifest itself?». At the same time, the definition of laws in physics should be observed in reality and have an unambiguous logical solution from any position. Taking into account that so far we have nothing but the axiom of the absence of miracles, we cannot rely on generally accepted definitions of regularity (of the laws in physics).

From philosophy, we know, for example, the definition of an object (Lat. objectum "object") - as a philosophical category denoting a thing, phenomenon or process, to which the subject-practical, controlling and cognitive activity of the subject (observer) is directed; at the same time, the subject itself can act as an object. The subject can be a person, a social group or whole society. The concept of an object (objectum) is used by Thomas Aquinas to denote what desire, aspiration or volition is directed at. It is clear that it is impossible to identify the logic of the universe from such definitions.

Therefore, we will give a very simple definition of regularity - by regularity(by object or law) should be understood as something particular that is separated somehow from the general view of the universe. In this case, the law and the object are the same thing, since they have signs that distinguish them from the general view of the universe. But in the future (taking into account the whole nature of the interaction of laws), these two concepts will be given a somewhat different meaning based on the wave-particle dualism. In this case we have no bindings neither to space, nor to time. The logic of describing the regularity (of law or object) in the form of such a simple representation is seen and proved very simply from the opposite approach.

Suppose that the pattern does not stand out in any way from the general view of universe, and this means complete uniformity. But if there are no distinguishing features and everything has uniformity, then it is impossible to talk about comparison.

The concept of the existence of regularity (of law or of object) in the universe implies the presence of a quantitative characteristic (at least exist two objects) and it require the obligatory presence of opposites in the universe - it is possible to compare something with something if there is an opposite (a difference on the principle of "yes" or "not"). We repeat that it is impossible to have less than two opposites otherwise will be uniformity. It is clear that a miracle also excludes the presence of opposites, since it is possible to get everything from zero. Here it is impossible to determine neither the law nor the quantity, since both can be any. Thus, the opposite of a miracle is the laws of physics, that is, regularities. But regularity implies an impact on something, otherwise the impact on zero cannot be de-ter-mined in any way and the impact itself cannot be expressed.

And here the following logic conclusion that there must be some objects (a certain number of them) on which this effect would be exerted. Accordingly, the impact should give changes in quantity; otherwise it is not possible to determine this impact. It is clear that if the quantity is constant and there is only one opposite, then there is also no way to determine the changes in this opposite (by rearranging identical objects inside a single opposite, it is impossible to identify the difference, and it is impossible to distinguish identical objects without an opposite, and the permutation itself is fixed only in the presence of a different environment or object, and there is also no uniformity here). Hence we have the requiring having another contrast with the quantity of objects.

Accordingly connection (addition) of quantity of objects in one contrast should look subtraction (separation) in other contrast; other-wise there are no differences between the opposites. It is impossible to understand, that such addition if there is no reverse operation of subtraction, etc. And such dependence on the observation system from the opposite is determined by the fact that no object can get out of the closed system of two global opposites, since this would mean a miracle with the disappearance of one of the opposites! It is clear that, since we have two global opposites, and each of them affects the other in a closed cycle, the laws of one opposite appear in the form of the number of objects for the other opposite, and vice versa.

This actually says that quantity and laws are oppo-sites, because a change in quantity in one opposite leads to the fact that a law changes in this opposite, and this give such a change so that equality between opposites in quantity is not violated.

Further, proceeding from definition, that the object of the universe is something private (separate from the general universe, otherwise there is nothing to talk), there should be conclusion that the object also has a magnitude (regularity) that characterizes its distinctive features from the general universe. Otherwise, the object would not belong to our universe, and object would

be impossible to detect.

But how these distinctive attributes and their size are expressed? How these distinctive attributes can be found out? A method of detection in the nature only one is changes through quantity, i.e. it is result of influence of laws. Other method to think up it is impossibly (at least, still nobody offered).

And, if these changes for all surrounding universe are identical, then to find out them is impossible. It is natural, the law (to be detected from the general universe) should operate for the detection not on the general phenomena, and should do any changes in a universe besides the general laws, and to define the independence from the general character.

Thus, we have established that changes in the universe are necessarily made by law, otherwise to observe something impossibly. But is the law affected by counteraction at the same time? If it does not turn out, then (in principle) it means a miracle, and we are dealing with a paradox. In this case, it turns out that a completely independent regularity (miracle) cannot interact with anything, i.e. act on any other object, due to the fact that then it would be possible to identify the law of action through counteraction.

Let's present, that the independent object changes other objects but as counteractions are not present, everything that this object "has wanted", will be executed without any expenses, that is, again we come to the Founder. Actually it means occurrence something out of nothing, and it is paradox! As already mentioned, this is equivalent to the concept of singularity (break, "jump") of any magnitude. For a completely independent object, there is no dependency on any other object.

There is no counteraction for object-miracle, what ultimately determines the law of object, such object must go through everything without encountering obstacles, which means that he cannot himself exert any action and be realized in the form of a law. In other words, if objects do not counteract the action of an independent object, then the influence of such an independent object cannot be detected, only through action of this object onto other objects, a certain dependence of the degree of influence and reaction can be deduced, and this indicates a certain interaction. Let's assume that we have no barriers or resistance in anything - then we will have no sense of our existence at all. On the other hand, full similarity with general phenomena (full dependence) it also does not allow us to talk about the presence of an object due to the inability to distinguish this object (uniformity).

From what has been said, it follows that the very concept of an object arises only if there are interacting opposites (dependence is the quantitative characteristic on which external influence is carried out, and independence is the law of the impact of the object itself on others).

From here we have a conclusion. The mutual exclusion of opposites is expressed in the fact that in order to manifest independence, an object must have a distinctive law from other objects that affects external objects. On the other hand, in order for this independent regularity to manifest itself (it is represented through a

change in the quantity in external objects), it is necessary that the object also had another dependent regularity (common view with other objects), according to which this object could be influenced (it is expressed through the change in the quantity of this object from action of external objects). One single object is characterized through two different laws, the actions of itself and the actions onto object from influence of external objects, i.e. the law of action and the law of counteraction.

Proceeding from this, it would be possible to give the concept an object a higher status as a representation consisting of two opposites, but we will do this only at the beginning, and further, in process of definition of new properties and proceeding from consideration of practical physical examples, it will be convenient to use the concept of law and object through opposites (in accordance with the wave-particle dualism).

The above logic is simple and is the required proof of presence of contrasts in object and demands existence in the same object of two laws through the mutual exclusion : the independence and the dependence, or action and counteraction. The real reflection of this principle is manifested in ourselves. We can influence and receive influence as objects of a universe.

These both laws cannot be identical in relation to other objects because at identical laws of action and counteraction the sum is equaled to zero and then the object cannot be separated (as will be shown in the further, such object is completely closed, and will rep-resent all universe). This practically leads to the conclusion that any object within the universe is subject to the changing, and it does not mean the identity of the law of action and counter-action.

The presence of two different laws in one object means a paradox if to accept the object as uniform and indivisible law. Indeed, if the object is indivisible, then this object can have only one designation, and in fact the paradox of uniformity would follow from here due to the summation of identical laws, through the exception of the concept of quantity at the uniformity, but the logic above requires two designations. Consequently, the resolution of the paradox is based on the need to divide the object into at least two components, the interaction of which should lead to the formation of a common object.

By dividing the object into two parts, we have not solved the paradox, due to the fact that we do not know the unifying mechanism of interaction between these two new parts. In other words, we do not know the action which is a sign of the connection of parts.

To understand how laws can be combined, it is necessary to define the concept of law not as a private, which is separated from the general view, but more deeply, based on the general process taking place in the universe. A law can be detected only through its impact on other objects, which present certain units of influence, i.e. we have a quantitative parameter for influence.

This implies the presence of a process of changing these other units-objects under the influence of this law, since otherwise the presence of an affecting law cannot be determined if no changes occur. This means that the

main process taking place in the universe is a process of change. The concept of the process of change is inextricably linked with the disappearance of any object-regularity (of law) as a result of the emergence of a new object-regularity. In life, we are constantly faced with the fact that some object (regularity) are born (arise), and other object die (disappear). If this were not the case, then no movement would be possible.

We get the following conclusion: the concept of the universe is divided into two opposites - the existence of some objects and the non-existence of others. This means that the static condition (in fact, it is the discrete view) of any object is being determined by continuous changes at a closed exchange of other small objects between opposites, since otherwise the static constants and changes cannot be combined in one object. We note that the concepts of existence (life) and of non-existence (death), as opposites, were introduced before us in classical philosophy, we only use these definitions taking into account the characteristics of objects, since it is possible to talk about existence and non-existence only in relation to something specific.

Nonexistence of all objects would mean denying and our life and it is absurd, and on the contrary, existence of all objects would mean absence of an opportunity to influence and change anything, because it means the denying of such indisputable concepts, as a birth and death of objects through which interaction between these opposites can be carried out. From here the next conclusion follows: the universe is the closed system of two global opposites: existence of some objects and nonexistence of other objects because any object (law) can be reviewed either as one opposite, or how other opposite, and an exchange of objects between these opposites solves a problem of combining of existence and nonexistence into single common object of a universe.

This conclusion is connected by that if we assume a universe to be an open system then it is necessary to assume that we have existence of object in any third system, besides variant when object may be or object is not present. It means infringement of logic as it is necessary to think up a condition with arising of object from nothing and disappearance of object in a zero as the third system should be shown through interaction and to have the difference with variants besides when the object may be or object is not present.

Now some words in occasion of interrelation of two global opposites through a mutual exchange of objects. Such interrelation can arise only when there is an exchange. This purely logical conclusion follows from contrast: can one object find out about existence of other object if there is no exchange? It is clear, if there is not exchange, it means there is not an interaction. It is not possible to assume interaction by other method other-wise than through change by exchange, since homogeneity gives instant impact and reaction, and in this case not a single physical law will exist.

Therefore in practice only owing to opposites uniformity is excluded due to the minimal discrete size in the form of the Planck's constant, and this Planck's constant is representing the smallest object, and simultaneously the size of speed of change, gives representation

about uniformity of object both excludes step-type behavior and characterizes a continuity, and is limited by speed of light! Above we wrote, that any object (the global opposites in view of the existence and non-existence is too objects of a universe) should be expressed through the influence on other objects and influence of other objects onto this original object.

How this influence can be expressed? Only in change which means that some earlier existing objects (laws) in life should come in opposite tothe nonexist-ence. At the same time, the appearance of new objects (laws) in non-existence means that changes have occurred in non-existence too and earlier existing objects (laws) have disappeared, and these objects can only go into the opposite to the existence, otherwise it would mean a violation of the law of conservation of energy (in view of absent of equality of the number of objects at exchange) with the appearance of uniformity and with the presence of miracles (when something can arise from nothing, and also disappear into zero).

Let's find out the following question: «Is it possible that, in the objects belonging to a universe, the exchange may be carried out differently, than it is carried out for global opposites of a universe?». By definition, the object of a universe should belong to the universe itself. And differently, it is necessary, this object to represent in the third object besides the existence in two global opposites, and then this third object cannot have anything the of connecting with our universe and cannot be found out. However, what does belonging the object to our universe? And it means that the object through one component should belong to system of existence, and by the other component - to nonexistence. If to assume other variant, for example, both components of object belong either to system of existence or system of nonexistence then the object cannot be subject to change and will be closed on itself because any change means disappearance of one condition and occurrence of another, and it is possible only through an exchange between opposite of existence and the opposite of nonexistence. And such an object cannot to be detected, because if there is no exchange, then there is not an interaction. Thus, any object of a universe should carry out an exchange in same way that it is carried out for global opposites, and it is obligatory when one component of object should belong to system of existence, and an-other component should belong to nonexist-ence.

It is known that in order to determine the existence of an object in system of the existence, changes are necessary, according to these changes the very existence of this object is being fixed and it can be carried out with the transition of something into non-existence and vice versa. Thus, by way of birth (union, connection, addition) and through death (disappearance, separation, subtraction), the paradox of combining two different laws into a single and indivisible object of the universe is solved.

The way of an exchange of elementary objects for a long time was predicted by physicists. It are virtual photons for the exchange between an electron and a positron, besides it are virtual mesons (and now quarks) to explain nuclear forces, in addition, there is no other

way to combine elements (singularities,breaks, discreteness) of space-time curvature otherwise than through exchange, and gravitons were invented for this, but physicists could not understand the logic of the need for this exchange, hence we have the approach through virtuality and miracles.

Thus, the difference of theories consists only in understanding of what objects carry out interrelation, but not in the method of interaction itself. Differently, physicists could not think up a other way of interaction of forces between objects, otherwise, than through an exchange of other smaller objects, but, as always, these decisions were questionable, in result they have attributed this interaction to the particles which are appearing from zero and disappearing there as well. Actually the interrelation is provided due to an exchange of objects through laws at transition from representation of wave to a corpuscular representation, and on the contrary, and wewill consider it below together with paradoxes of interaction through virtual particles.

Let's note that the concept of any movement is inextricably linked with the concept of a change of representation (at least due to the fact that there is no uniformity due to the presence of opposites, and absent of uniformity entails changes in interaction with new objects), and it can only be expressed through the exchange of objects or laws between systems of existence and of a non-existence (this is confirmed by Louis de Broglie's formula, as will be shown later).

Thus changes are accompanied by unification of any objects or laws in the new born object or law and the disappearance of earlier unification of object (of law). Moreover, due to the fact that the new pattern differs from the previous pattern, object has completely different quantitative parameters of unification (it is impossible to enter the same river twice).

An example confirming this statement is Einstein's SRT, according to which the presence of motion is accompanied by a change in the mass of the object. It should be noted that relativity does not applying in the case of considering the interaction with the reduction to one common system, for example, the return of a mobile system to a stationary system, because in this case relative changes should give the results in one common stationary system without relativity. So, the time change in SRT and GRT occurs on the system that is accelerating. If only there were no changes during movement, then the private time of the object moved and returned to the same point would coincide with time of unmobile stationary system according to Euclid's geometry, however - this is not the case.

The hierarchy of the universe and the inversely proportional relationship of opposites

To determine the following rule for the universe, we note once again: it is not by chance that the dual meaning of the objects (of laws) is emphasized here, because at the beginning we proved the need for two opposite components at objects, namely, the presence of dependent and independent parts. Considering the global components, we have only found a way of interaction between the two opposites of any object (of regularity). Obviously, if this is true for the global object-laws in the form of the universe, then it is not possible

to combine other opposite components of objects (of laws) from this universe otherwise, due to the fact that then they would have to be allocated into a third object independent to existence and non-existence, but this is impossible, otherwise this object cannot be detected.

It also follows from the above that any object (pattern) of the universe belongs simultaneously by one component - to existence, but by the other component - to non-existence, as there can be no other way of combining the opposite components of any object (of pattern) of the universe in accordance with the previously cited proof. From here the logical conclusion: the difference between the universe and its components in representation of objects (of laws) is in event, when the objects (laws) that make up the universe, alternately with their dependent and independent components have to be in systems of existence or non-existence, thereby maintaining the closed nature of the exchange in the universe and of the very presence of systems of existence and non-existence.

Absence of miracles is connected with exclusion of jumps of transition, that basically and means isolation of a universe, and is connected with a condition of continuous change of corpuscular components and of wave components of objects. Physically, continuity is being connected with movement, and the splitting into opposites does not allow characterizing object equally in two contrasts, and then speed of the movement that is giving continuity in one contrast is reflected by discrete size (object, a constant) in other contrast.

From here the following conclusion - such interaction means hierarchical construction of the universe. The proof of hierarchy lies in the fact that any object of the universe must be divided into two components: the dependent and independent parts. If we consider the processes of change are occurring also in each part separately, then these processes also need to be divided into dependent and independent components, and so on up to the size of the Planck constant, which characterizes the smallest heterogeneity of space and time, and it is associated with isolation of universe and absent of zero.

Hierarchy also manifests itself in the fact that the independent components of system of non-existence influence the dependent components of system of existence. At the same time, the independent component of system of non-existence is a dependent component for the independent component of system of existence. The hierarchy of building dependence and independence turns out, since it is possible to control existence only from non-existence, and vice versa. At the same time, the absence of a hierarchy with the division of two global opposite objects into dependent and independent parts would mean that the path of action and reaction coincides, and then no movement is possible. And as it will be seen later, the concept of hierarchy is of great importance for explaining quantization (separation) in the world-building.

Really, minimal number of objects in a universe can be only two. And each of these objects should possess dependent and independent parts by virtue of necessity of interaction. Thus the independent component

of the first object should influence a dependent component of the second object and to change the first object, but at the same time should occur and return operation - an independent component of the second object should influence a dependent component of the first object (return of counteraction is carried out on a circle). But by virtue of that in object between its dependent and independent components also there is an interrelation dependent and independent components of this object also cooperate with each other as objects.

Accordingly, this separation (quantization) can be made until infinitely (in the relative sense of the word due to the fact that continuity in one opposite characterizes discreteness in the other opposite, hence the limitations in the form of Planck's constant and the speed of light).

Actually the hierarchy defines the minimal number of parts (quantums) into which the universe can be divided.

Considering that the minimum number of interacting objects is two, and each of them should have the part in system of existence and system of non-existence (dependent and independent components), then, based on the need for interaction of each of these parts, in which each of parts must change under the influence of the other part and each part must change other parts, it turns out that the isolation corresponding to the universe can be performed at least in ac-count of four separate parts. Actually, we have an analogue of space and time, as it will be shown below. These parts make changes not along the same path (to exclude compensation), but orthogonally to each other. Otherwise, one of the four components disappears, followed by the disappearance of one of the opposites from the absent of dependence or independence.

Hence the following conclusion: if the paths of opposite changes coincide, then they compensate for each other, which mean that the changes are zero. And if there are no changes, then there are no laws, there is no universe. In other words, Newton's third law, when an action gives instantaneous reaction, is not true, and its implementation is associated with the dynamics of exchange in a closed cycle, which is actually expressed in the presence of inertia due to the speed of exchange equal to the speed of light.

The physical essence of the necessity of a closed movement (change) in four orthogonal components (objects) is laid down in the principle of the absence of the disappearance of quantity expressed in value of energy (quantitative description at exchange). Indeed, an object will must change continuously for its existence, that is, to receive and to give energy, otherwise it is a closed independent constant value that cannot be detected from absent of interaction. Then, if we have removed the energy associated with the quantitative description from one object, then energy cannot disappear, which means that energy must be attributed to another object, that is, there must be a transfer of energy from one object to another. However, the second object also cannot be unaffected by changes, for the same reason as the first object, hence there must be a transfer of energy to the next object. But the path of the reverse transition to the first object is occupied due to the fact

that the object of influence and the object of change are already defined here, which means that there is a third object in relation to which the object of change will act as an influencing one, and in this case the energy transition is carried out along the second independent path. The third object is also subject to changes, and accordingly its transformation path cannot coincide with the first path or the second path, due to the fact that the paths from the first object to the second object and from the second object to the third object are orthogonal (here is independent). So it is impossible to immediately have a return of energy from the third object to the first, due to violation of orthogonality, since in this case the third path can be performed through the previous two paths. From here necessity for the fourth object to which energy is being transferred. Accordingly, the energy from the fourth object is being transferred back to the first object along the fourth orthogonal path. Only in this way can the paradox of the existence of an object in the form of an immutable quantity and its interaction be solved. Consequently, there are four orthogonal components that have an objective representation with the condition of description of existence by a closed change and the condition of preserving quantity (energy). In other words, the hierarchy of influence determines the space-time orthogonality.

If we take into account that the transition paths must also have a real object embodiment (and we have already noted that continuity and discreteness are changing places depending on the observation system from opposites), then we get a minimal system of eight inter-acting objects. In other words, we are dealing with the existence of two space-time systems connected through change (movement), which reflects the existence of system of being and of system of non-existence. Indeed, the transition process itself is related to the speed of transmission, i.e. in the this condition the energy, as a quantity, does not belong to static objects, and energy is related to the dynamics of movement, that is, energy has a velocity attribute, it indicates that we have the belong to another system.

Process of an exchange by values of dependent and independent components of object (of law) between the system of existence and the system of nonexistence occurs all time because action of object and also the counteraction for object is being carried out always by virtue of necessity of its existence. Therefore we constantly feel the changes occurring in our space and time. Absence of changes means presence of constant value, and it is full independence and to find out such value it is impossible, as there is no interaction with anything.

Physicists' representation of the mass of rest of a particle as a constant value outside of representation through space and time played a "cruel joke", because this led to separating the perception of wave and corpuscular processes in the object without taking into account their relationship. And this contributed to the appearance of miracles in terms of predicting virtual particles.

The exchange between global opposites is equivalent, as the death of object (of law) in life means its automatic birthday in system of nonexistence. This is due

to fact, as the corpuscular and wave properties from system of existence and nonexistence are considered oppositely on the basis of opposite operations of the summation and subtraction in compliance with the law of conservation of quantity. Therefore, the disappearance of certain corpuscular properties in sys-tem of existence means their automatic appearance in non-existence, and vice versa, because there are no other properties (except for the corpuscular-wave description)! Accordingly, in non-existence, the previously existing pattern will disappear and pass into being, since nothing can go beyond the framework of the universe from two opposites. Therefore, none of the opposites can ever disappear. If hypothetically to admit not equivalent exchange between systems of existence and non-existence it conducts to disappearance of one of them. And it cannot be initially) as it means disappearance of contrasts and a universe and also impossibility of occurrence of the universe according to the above reasoning. It is obvious, that together, system of existence and nonexistence represent the closed system of a universe, and separately are the opened systems by virtue of that we observe processes of one contrast with unambiguous definition of each of the objects. Really, paying attention to our life which is being expressed in space and time, we see that the space and time extends to infinity and it is being based from statics. It corresponds to the opened system. Other variant would mean absence of orthogonality, and it excludes independence. Nonexist-ence also has the infinite sizes (as well as any opened system). But due to changes (and they always take place), the system of existence and the system of nonexistence are being combined in the view of space-time opposites, that is, dependence in dynamics is obtained.

According to it there is a paradox connected with hierarchical construction of a universe and representation in one system of supervision, which consists in the fact that the hierarchy for the maximum objects (of laws) means that they cannot be controlled by objects lower in the hierarchy. But the system of a universe is closed. Therefore the resolution of paradox probably only in case the objects (laws) that are higher in the hierarchy in system of existence, in system of nonexist-ence are the lowest on hierarchy, and on the contrary. Otherwise the paradox is unsoluble because of equality of influences atunambiguous hierarchythat is actually being carried out for global contrasts whichclosed onto each other and it defines a universe as a constant size.

Besides if the management by higher objects is being carried out on lower objects separately in the system of existence and in the system of nonexistence, then the systems of existence and nonexistence would be closed on itself, and this contradicts their general communication in a universe, and it again leads to a miracle of the Founder because of absence of reverse influence. It means necessity of inversely proportional communication of existence and nonexistence.

Actually, the inevitability of an inversely proportional relationship between opposites practically follows from the presence of a minimum quantization step in the form of Planck's constant, which makes it possible to exclude the "ultraviolet catastrophe", which leads to infinity of energy. Really, representation of object

through the minimal discrete size, in an identical kind and in both contrasts, would mean, that there are objects that are not subject to change because less nothing can be, and it would lead to an opportunity of presence of objects, which completely closed onto itself. The only solution to this paradox is that the minimum size in one opposite is the maximum in the other opposite! Actually, this means that the impossibility of change in one opposite is being corrected by the presence of quantitative changes in the other opposite, that is, the statics in one opposite are determined by the dynamics of change in the other opposite. Communication of dependent and independent parts of object (of law) in view of the sizes (r) and (1/r), gives to objects to have periodic stability. Otherwise the object (law) simply would not exist. The rule of inversely proportional communication has the important conclusion which removes necessity of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and hence miracles. Now, energy and time have an inversely proportional causal relationship, precisely because they are oppo-sites - of system of existence and nonexistence (it will be shown later and in more detail). Therefore the practical law at which exact definition of size of one parameter gives inexact definition of other parameter, actually means, that the calculation of size (r) leads to conformity to it of opposite size as (1/r).

How all measurements aredo for definition of accuracy? They should fix some minimum size (r) to which the opposite (1/r) corresponds. Scientists, not assuming the existence of the law of inversely proportional relationship between opposites, and not knowing that the incoming variables in the Heisenberg ratio are opposites, made the wrong conclusion, which completely excluded the causal relationships characteristic of the classics. In addition, they did not pay attention to the fact that the curvature of space and time under the influence of energy gives exactly the same law about the inversely proportional relationship between energy and time, but not random relationship, this law has view of regularity. From here if the higher the energy, then the time flows slower. And this is an experimentally established fact. Indeed, according to Einstein's formula E=mc2, we have a connection of two quantities - energy and mass. If we now divide this equation by the speed of light, then on the right and on the left we get the values of the impulses P1 = P2. However, these impulses characterize the equality of opposite quantities from a closed system, since the transformation can be only unambiguous. Hence, when observing these two quantities from one opposite (we cannot observe simultaneously from two opposites), we have the law of inversely proportional relationship P1/P2 = 1. From the relation of system of existence and nonexistence as (r) and (1/r), the conclusion that linear processes of change in system of existence will be nonlinear in system of nonexistence follows and the "infinite" size of objects (of laws) of system of existence is "infinitely" small in nonexistence (actually number of objects in all universe is finitely).

The physical interpretation of the linearity and non-linearity of the processes of change in systems of existence and non-existence means that a object which does not experience the action of forces in system of existence will simultaneously experience them in non-

existence. As will be shown later, this justifies the Louis de Broglie wave function for radiation and absorption (due to the presence of changes under the influence of forces) even in the presence of a rest mass. It should be noted that in our theory, the representation of continuity due to changes in one opposite (the motion gives the uncertainty of location) characterizes a certain constant (discreteness) in the other opposite, but not how the formula of Heisenberg uncertainty through a probabilistic approach.

The invariant form of the connection of global opposites, the transition of quantity into quality, the basic laws of the universe

As already noted, speaking about the global oppo-sites of the universe - systems of existence and nonexistence - and considering the need for their existence through the exchange of objects between them, we are obliged to represent each of the opposites in the form of dependent and independent parts. As it was proved above, the dependent and independent parts of systems of existence and nonexistence reflect the opposite character of the display. The exchange of objects between contrasts (opposites) is carried out by means of laws. The manifestation of a regularity (for example, in system of existence) is its ability to give birth to, and also destroy x of objects (of laws) (here, given the hierarchy, x is a certain number belonging to this regularity). Let's present all lawsof systems of existence and nonexistence, as the orthogonal sums of regularities (other approach is simply impossible, differently it would mean uniformity) YXj and YYj , providing hierarchical construction of a universe because all the others laws participates in formation of each higher law in level (from a condition of isolation). Therefore, under the sign of the sum E, we will understand a certain general regularity higher in the hierarchy (the type of these laws will be presented somewhat below). Summation is carried out for the objects having a certain identical structure (for example, unification through action connected with transition from the one contrast onto other contrast), otherwise their unification is simply impossible.

In accordance with the fact that the universe cannot be a regularity, because universe includes all laws and cannot change (other-wise it would mean that it is open system), from here it should be assumed that mathematically universe is expressed as a constant number. Moreover, the value of the constant cannot be zero due to the fact that this would mean the absence of its existence. This is possible only from the point of view of other universes, but not from our point of view. It would seem that the formula of a universe will look so:

YXj + YYj = const. (1)

However, such a record leads to a paradox associated with the possible zeroing of the regularity of existence and the regularity of nonexistence at the summation, since the actual numbers from the laws can be both positive value and negative value. An example is the change of existence as a cosine, and of non-existence as a minus cosine. It is clear, that in this case the universe is initially equal to zero of that cannot. At the same time, it should be taken into account that there is no sign of separation onto opposites, which would not

lead to the zeroing of the universe, because mathematically 1-1 = 0. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the view of laws according to the formula (1).

In addition, if each regularity corresponds to a certain number x of objects which are being transferred, then there is equality of objects being born and destroyed. Otherwise, the inequality between systems of existence and nonexistence means the disappearance of the universe already at the stage of its emergence, from here:

X6(EX) = xnCT. (2)

The observance of equality (2) means, that increase (decrease) X6(SX/) and Xn(ZY) occurs simultaneously. However, the simultaneous increase and decrease in the number of regularities between systems of existence and nonexistence means that the laws of systems of existence and nonexistence coincides, and in this case the formula (1) is not observed and the conclusion follows that the universe is also a regularity. This cannot be because all the laws are in the universe, and the attribution of a certain law to the universe means that universe does not contain all the laws. Thus, for observance of the formula (1) it is necessary, that: *6(£X) = xn(LYj) = const. (3)

Otherwise the universe becomes law and not of the full closed system. The necessity of equality to constant size of quantity of transferred objects from system of existence to system of nonexistence, and back, speaks about effect, in which the speed of an exchange of objects between global contrasts always the same. Indeed, the change in speed leads to the fact that the universe cannot be a constant number, since the velocity of exchange is determined by different values. It is clear, at speed of an exchange in universe equal to the zero, for opposites of universe we have the conclusion about the independence of opposites with their full isolation. The infinite velocity of exchange is associated with uniformity in the form of a single and indivisible object, and it gives infinity in the transmission of action and this again excludes opposites. Accordingly, there is also an analogy between the speed of light and the speed of the exchange between global opposites. We have already noted the fact that every movement means a change that cannot but be accompanied by an exchange of laws (of objects) between systems of existence and non-existence. It is connected with the fact that no object of the universe, including light, can be described otherwise than in the meanings of systems of existence and non-existence. Once again we shall emphasize, that existence of contrasts without an exchange of objects is impossible.

However, if formula (3) is correct, then the laws of sums of systems of existence and non-existence are also constants:

YXj = YXj = const. (4)

This means that systems of existence and non-existence, if considered even from some of the one opposite, are self-contained systems that include all the laws, and it, in accordance with the above reasoning, means a paradox. From here the conclusion follows: summation and also subtraction of laws of systems of existence and nonexistence, leads to paradox. Moreover, at subtracting, zeroing is possibly immediately. In addition,

the formula (4) does not reflect the impossibility of separate existence of systems of existence and non-existence and mutual influence. Also it is clear, that in the formula (4) there is no attribute of distinction between systems of existence and nonexistence as life and non-existence are characterized here by the valid numerical values. This means that the transfer of values from left part of equation into right part can always give zero, but we will not consider this paradox yet (it will be solved in our theory bit lower). Consequently, we believe that the action of associative subtraction and addition between the laws of systems of existence and non-existence is not possible due to a certain prohibition (as will be shown later, this prohibition is ensured by the equality of real and imaginary numbers). Then it is necessary to assume following record:

TXj / TYj = const. (5)

In other words, the interaction of global opposites must be ex-pressed through an inversely proportional relationship. This characterizes the complete coincidence of the laws of systems of existence and nonexist-ence when they are considered in each of them separately, which means the simultaneous change and ensures equality of action and reaction. Compliance with the universe constant is also ensured here. However such record does not reflect a principle of relativity, there are no functional distinctions between life and nonexistence, it corresponds to consideration of process from the universe, but not from one any global contrast. Equality of dependent and independent parts that corresponds only to the universe turns out, but there is no dynamics of process between life and the nonexistence, expressed in processes of summation in life and accordingly of subtraction in nonexistence, and on the contrary. In other words, the exchange between opposites is not expressed. And with such a presentation of the private from the division, the inversely proportional relationship of opposites is not expressed explicitly. In accordance with this, the only possible non-paradoxical record is obtained:

TXj •TJj = const. (6)

Here, obviously, the impossibility of the being of systems of existence and nonexistence separately is observed, and we have the representation of the observed process from one contrast with a difference in the laws of life and nonexistence, as well as quantity. Accordingly, it remains to find the kind of total laws of systems of existence and nonexistence, in which summation on system of existence leads to the same subtraction in nonexistence, and we have the observing of equality to the universe constant. Thus laws of life and nonexist-ence should have inversely proportional communication, that is, it is necessary to receive conditions of preservation of equality (6) in dynamics of an exchange between contrasts. Hence, if law of life is presented as P, law of nonexistence - as H, and change of law is presented in the form K, then:

(P + K) (H - K) = const. (7)

If we consider P and H as quantitative parameters (and changes are always expressed in terms of quantity), then, since the number of objects being born is equal to the number of dying, due to the eternity of the universe, and at the same time system of existence is

always equal to system of nonexistence, then, therefore, P = H. Differently, the quantity of regularities in life and nonexistence is equality in dynamics. However, if we represent P, H and K as linearly varying numbers (that is, a pure magnitude of number that has no regularities), then equality (7) becomes impossible. In other words, it is impossible to separate quantity and quality within the framework of equality (7). In accordance with this, the P, H and K should be laws that include all other regularities. At the same time, the laws of P and H should coincide because of the equality of number of the laws (of objects), which have being born and dying. Besides inversely proportional communication between life and nonexistence should be observed. Therefore, the formula (7) can be written down so:

(P + K) (P - K) = const. (8)

In this case, the formula (2) is not violated. The inversely proportional relationship here is obtained purely automatically by virtue of equality (8). From the formula (8) it is visible, that a difference between life and nonexistence that summation in life means subtraction in nonexistence and on the contrary. It is necessary to find only a kind of laws P and K in view of hierarchical construction of a universe. The well-known quadratic invariant form follows from formula (8):

P2 - K 2 = const. (9)

Hence the conclusion follows: the well-known invariant form of equality to the constant number at the subtraction of laws of opposites in square is a consequence of the law of opposites and the law of conservation of quantity in the exchange between opposites. The further reasoning will more evidently confirm this conclusion. It should be noted that the authors introduce the concept of multiplication (of division) how a result of unification or separation in accordance with the implementation of the impact of some regularity. This differs from the usual approach onto multiplication or division in mathematics, when, for example, the process of multiplication is explained through taking a certain number a certain number of times. In physics, the certain amount is associated with a change in quality, i.e. with regularity, and connected with the dynamics of the process, from here we have the requirement to use regularities in formula (9), but not in representation of the quantity, as this practically reflect statics.

Describing necessity of the invariant form, we have collided with necessity of representation of object for one case as laws, and in other - as quantitative unit on which influence is carried out. Such a dual definition of an object as a regularity and quantity is determined by a hierarchical structure and corresponds to the well-known law of the philosophy of the transition of quantity to a new quality, since the quantity of a new object is always associated with the presence of new regularities. Really, an increase in quantity or a decrease in quantity without transition to regularity means non-compliance with formula (8), because varying quantitative characteristics linearly according to formula (8) will never eventually give a constant number. Considering that summation in one global opposite is represented by subtraction in another global opposite (otherwise the opposites will be identical), we must describe the formula of the universe more fully in the form of

equality:

A + B = C - D = const. (10)

It is clear that if we use numeric values greater than zero instead of A, B, C, D, then we will never get equality. This leads to the conclusion that the laws should be substitute of numbers. Taking into account the laws known in mathematics, we can write down the general formula of the universe:

cos2(x)+sin2(x) = ch2(w)-sh2(w) =1= const; ,,.. exp(ix)exp(-ix) = exp(w)exp(-w) =1. ( Here w=(-1)1/2x. In other words, the difference of objects is determined by the attribute of belonging in the form i=(-1)1/2, which determines the change of laws depending on the observation system. The essence of the representation of regularities as operations of changing the logical state in each of the opposites can be expressed through Boolean algebra operations in the form of an element of unification OR and in the form of an element of negation of the previous state onto the opposite NOT. In fact, these are elements of summation and subtraction, and any counter and any function are expressed through them in the same way as we do it in a computer. However, Boolean algebra suffers from the same disadvantage as ordinary mathematics,because does not take into account the need to transition to the contrast when adding and subtracting with a change of regularities.

In the future, we will consider in more detail the character of the relationship between quantity and regularities on the basis of a more serious consideration of the processes of interaction in the universe.

The isolation (closed system) and the open system, the principle of relativity, action and reaction, the Huygens-Fresnel's principle The concept of closed system and open system for objects follows from the concept of mutual exchange. Not only we came to the necessity of the principle of exchange, but physicists came up with the exchange of virtual photons to explain the interaction in electro-statics. At the same time, the law of conservation of quantity is fulfilled - and this is understandable, otherwise there can be no of any exchange.

From here we have the concept of closed system, as phenomena that gives mutual exchange and of the open system when is being used the unilateral interaction. In a universe which is being closed on the oppo-sites, the exchange is always equal and with two-path of the interaction. However, in a private case, for each object, taking into account its belonging to two oppo-sites at once, a condition must be fulfilled according to which closed processes in one opposite would look open in another opposite, otherwise it would be impossible to talk about the presence of opposites, that is, there would be no differences.

Here is the next logical chain - objects exist only through exchange, exchange is associated with the presence of opposites, otherwise it cannot be detected. Between contrasts an exchange equal, otherwise presence of miracles. But opposites are expressed by a different representation, otherwise - it's the same thing. And if the closed process of exchange (closed circulation) occurs according to the same rules in both oppo-

sites, then there are no differences, and the path of mutual exchange will be the same (with inevitable compensation and the zeroing). In addition, it would mean the existence of one absolute system without opposites. Then there is only one variant, we have the closed process of an exchange in one contrast, which should look not closed in another contrast as isolation of object in both contrasts on itself excludes interaction of object with something external and then it a zero for other objects. To provide such a representation of the object, it is necessary that subtraction in one opposite (the closed circulation) looks like summation (the open system) in the other opposite, and this is reflected in the form of four quantities according to the formula (10). As will be shown later, in practice, this condition is fulfilled precisely due to the representation of opposites as of two interconnected space-time systems according to SRT and Einstein's GRT. This allows us the processes of mutual exchange between opposites to present orthogonally, and it excludes compensation.

At the same time, the exchange of coordinates (through values of lengths along each of axis) in one opposite is replaced by an exchange between the coordinate of length and time in the other opposite, that is, it follows from the fact that the opposites are two spacetime systems connected through the speed of light, in which the coordinate of length and of time have exchange and this corresponds to the Lorentz - Minkow-ski transformations. Accordingly, the law of conservation of quantity is observed here. As a result, the exchange of coordinates (for example, through closed electromagnetic lines of force) is replaced by an exchange between the coordinate and time. This allows the closed exchange process (electromagnetic) to represent as an open rectilinear corpuscular motion and solve the problem of the separation of exchange processes for opposites; this gives the exception of their mutual compensation. Indeed, the movement of the charges in a rectilinear wire causes closed magnetic lines of force in space, and the direct movement of the magnetic coil causes the closed circulation of intensity of electric field in the closed circuit of the conductor.

In other words, if we take into account the fact that the object (regularity) differs from global opposites only in plan that object has periodic stability in systems of existence or of nonexistence, then we must, by analogy with the closed universe, assume the periodic isolation of objects (periodic closed system) which are being found lower in the hierarchy in our higher object (regularity). That is, for the existence of an object (of regularity) in system of life and its stability, a closed cycle of one of its two components of object is necessary. Accordingly, the second component of the object (of regularity) must be open, since a completely closed object cannot be detected. Thus, a closed change (the closed circulation - movement) of one component of an object (of regularity), for example in life, should be accompanied by an infinite change (the straightforward movement) of its other component in non-existence. Therefore, the constancy of the preservation of some closed hierarchically constructed structure of objects in life is maintained due to the infinite change (of move-

ment) of small objects which are controlled in non-existence under influence, i.e. their cyclic transition from system of existence to system of non-existence, and vice versa (it is being reflected through Louis-de Brog-lie wave functions). This means that an integral part of each law (of object) is the representation of its components in closed and open view, respectively. If we assume otherwise, then the object cannot exist (the open system without supervision of parts of selection), or object cannot be detected (completely closed system). In other words, in order to combine the dependent and independent parts of the regularity (of object) into a single whole, it is necessary that a certain set of objects disappeared and appeared within the dependent and independent parts of the regularity (of object). Considering the hierarchy of construction, this means that the current state of any object has the form of layers of cake and we have the constant changes of layers. These changes occur with any object of the universe. From here it is impossible to get closed system or the open system in a "pure" form. Therefore, it is possible to say that an object has a closed or open view only in relation to something specific, and even then relatively. Really, it to detect the closed system impossibly, and openness in its pure form means the presence of one space-time system with uniformity and excludes opposites initially. Considering that every logical statement must have practical confirmation, we point out a complete analogy with the particle-wave properties of any object. Here, the corpuscular part is expressed in the form of so-called gravitational force lines (the space-time curvature) extending to infinity, and the wave part in the form of closed electromagnetic force lines. But since real objects have a hierarchical structure, the corpuscular and wave properties are relative.

Another practical confirmation follows from electrodynamics, when the electrodynamic potentials A and 9, at differentiating through time and length, in one case give the Lorentz calibration, that is, equality from the differentials for A and 9, but in the other case, when rearranging the differentiation in length and time, give a specific value of intensity of the field, that is, here inequality of differentials is observed.

Considering the object (regularity) from the point of view of the dependent and independent parts, we should not forget that these components of systems of existence and nonexistence will be considered separately, because the object (regularity) belongs simultaneously its dependent and independent parts to systems of existence and nonexistence, respectively, i.e. the object (regularity) cannot has the dependent part and non-dependent part in the existence (in nonexistence) simultaneously for the reasons described above. And this automatically means that the dependent part of the object (regularity) in life is an independent part in nonex-istence, otherwise, it would be necessary to exclude the existence of the law of opposites, if the independent part of the object in life will also remain independent in nonexistence, and hence systems of existence and non-existence are not opposites. In other words, this is connected to the fact that the field of influence of system of existence is only system of nonexistence and vice versa - the field of influence of nonexistence is only

system of existence, the third is not given due to the reasons described above. In fact, this statement forms the principle of relativity, as depending on the system where the process has supervision, a conclusion follows in the representation, in dependent and independent parts. Really, an electromagnetic wave has and shows corpuscular properties during interaction, but its movement with speed of light defines its belonging, for example, to nonexistence. At the same time, corpuscular objects can have the move and have wave properties, but their speed cannot reach the speed of light, for this reason they belong to the space-time system in the existence. To obtain the transition of an object (of regularity) from system of existence into nonexistence, and vice versa, it is required to form a counteraction to this object (to the regularity), i.e. the action of an independent component of the object (of regularity) gives rise to a counteraction to this object. Otherwise, the object (regularity) can exist eternally in one of the global op-posites, and this will determine its complete independence, which means a paradox, i.e. the presence of a perpetual motion machine. In other words, the changes introduced by the independent component of the object (of the regularity), lead to the formation of counteraction. Mathematically, this is expressed in the disappearance (in the zeroing) of this object in the global opposite in which this object exists.

No change in system of existence can occur without causing reciprocal changes in nonexistence, and vice versa, other variant would mean the independence of system of existence from nonexistence. This, together with the hierarchy of construction, with the isolation of the universe and with the equality of action and reaction, justifies the needfor the Huygens-Fresnel principle in the practice. The essence of the Huygens-Fresnel principle is that each element from elements of a closed surface of space that surround the source of an electromagnetic field (it can also be a primary electromagnetic wave) can be considered as a source of secondary radiation generating an elementary secondary electromagnetic wave, and here the field at the point of observation is a superposition of these elementary secondary waves. However, this means that in order to form a secondary source of radiation in this small element of a closed space, the primary electromagnetic wave must interact with something. Indeed, the rounding of an obstacle by a wave is based on the fact that secondary sources of radiation created by the primary wave form their own electromagnetic waves, and here the direction of movement does not coincide with the direct independent movement of the primary wave, and therefore an electromagnetic wave exists behind the area of the obstacle. And a completely independent direct motion of the wave, as an object, cannot lead to a change in the direction of movement of the wave without interacting with something. Another important conclusion follows from the Huygens-Fresnel principle that counteraction from system of the opposite, in fact, has freedom of choice (independence), since otherwise the counteraction would be strictly in the direction of action.

Of course, these limits of freedom of choice are determined by the hierarchy structure of the opposite.

Within the limits of modern theories, the cause of the sources of secondary waves is unknown, since they consider space and time on the one hand and the electromagnetic wave on the other hand as independent sizes. And according to modern ideas, based on Michel-son's experiments, space and time are not ether (scientists tried to determine the ether on the basis of its possible motion, of the so-called "ethereal wind"), and if so, there is nothing to interact with. However this paradox is easily re-solved at dividing of a universe onto systems of existence and nonexistence. Any movement (including electromagnetic wave) is accompanied by a mutual exchange between life and nonexistence (otherwise, we have no the closed movement). As it was already marked,, an electromagnetic wave can be considered as an corpuscular object belonging to a space-time system of nonexistence due to movement at the speed of light in system of existence, but movement of electromagnetic wave causes a change in this system of existence, through influence on space-time system of existence. Because of the isolation of the universe, the action of nonexistence is equal to the counteraction of system of existence and can be considered as an initial formative action. The counteraction of system of existence has the expression in the form of its space-time system through regularity, and it is the source of the formation of secondary waves. Thus, an electromagnetic wave in motion causes the transition of objects (of regularities) into nonexistence from existence, respectively, the reverse transition is new source of secondary waves from the primary electromagnetic wave. It is clear that if there were no counteraction, there would be no reason for the occurrence of secondary waves. At the same time, the interaction of systems of existence and nonexistence is carried out at the speed of light, so there can be no "ethereal winds" here. It should be noted that the necessity of interaction of an electromagnetic wave, in view of one system, with space and time, in view of another system, is practically confirmed by a change in the frequency of an electromagnetic wave in a gravitational field. Deformation of an electromagnetic wave is possible only at interaction that can be expressed only through an exchange. And it also means necessity of formation of secondary sources through which this exchange can be made. The independence of the electromagnetic wave from the space-time curvature could not give deformation (frequency change) of the electromagnetic wave under any conditions.

Considering the interaction, and hence the mutual transformation, it only remains to describe the sources of the formation of secondary electromagnetic waves through mutual transformation which takes place. In other words, there must be an unambiguous connection of space and time with electromagnetic components. Hence, the space and time of the opposite space-time system is expressed in our observation system through the value of kinetic energy in the form of velocity in the Lorentz transformation formula. Really, in the Lorentz transformations, the velocity of mutual movement cannot belong to either of the two observation systems, that are considered in the interrelation, and here the velocity is a relative value (as it is known , the velocity and fre-

quency of waves are unambiguously related, for example, through Louis de Broglie waves). As a result, we have a mechanism for the formation of secondary waves, according to which an electromagnetic wave expressed in representation of velocity from frequency of wave of Louisde Broglie gives an increase in spacetime curvature, and the resulting additional space-time curvature serves as a source of formation of secondary electromagnetic waves according to the Huygens-Fres-nel principle. Here there is a mutual transformation for the obtaining of interaction, and there is the principle of prompting and influence. Once again, we emphasize that the presence of an unambiguous single absolute space-time system cannot give the presence of velocity in the Lorentz transformations, since the Lorentz transformations themselves speak of the ambiguity of spacetime systems.

Space and time as a manifestation of laws, the dividing of the universe through the opposites

The above description of the interaction of oppo-sites on the global scale of the universe will be more understandable if it to show by a concrete example. For example, it is usual, under a universe the people understand the objects which are located in the space and time. In accordance with this, the question arises: "Are the space and time also the objects (regularities)?". This question is not accidental, since recently scientists have invented ether in the form of electromagnetic vacuum, dark matter, and so on. In addition, most physicists consider space and time as something the separate and with propagation in infinity, in which the objects of the universe with corresponding masses of rest are located. From here, by the way, different inflationary theories with expansion of the Universe into infinity and the occurrence of the Universe from zero due to the Big Explosion. And in this case, space is considered as a kind of homogeneous structure extending to infinity, in which there is some matter. However, uniformity generally excludes any changes and any interaction differently than through a miracle with the presence of breaks, and it contradicts the practice of having a minimum discrete quantity in the form of Planck's constant and the presence of interaction with the speed of light.

Therefore, before answering the above question, we once again shall remind, that we understand under the regularities (laws). In a life the laws are expressed in the form of the certain dependencies on something, and simultaneously with it they can be found out, if they make any changes. It is impossible to detect something that is not being changed and does not influence anything. As people say: "Court is absent, if word "not" we speak!" Therefore, if we proceed from this classification, then the answer to this question obviously follows from Einstein's SRT. Depending on the motion (change) in accordance with the Lorentz transformations, a change in the parameters of space and time is observed, and it confirms GRT, at the same time the change in space-time parameters due to motion means a curvature of space and time. This leads to the force of gravitation, and this force is everywhere. In other words, Euclid's approach to the independence of time and length is incorrect, if we proceed from the practical results on SRT and Einstein's GRT. Full emptiness, i.e.

zero, cannot be detected, and the transformation of the coordinate of length into coordinate of time, and vice versa, would be impossible. In fact we cannot see the space and time outside of objects formed by them. The zero interests nobody, it does not give in to measurement as a zero plus a zero gives a zero, but the space and time have size of measurement (quantitative parameter not equal to zero). In other words, space and time depend on motion (change), are expressed and act through gravitational force on the basis of space-time curvature. Here there are two necessary functions that we noticed earlier in any objects (regularities): they are subject to changing and can change other objects. It is clear that if we have connected the concepts of space and time with an object (depending on its movement), then there can be no question of the independence of space and time, since full in-dependence is expressed precisely in the absence of changes under the influence of something. According to it the answer is simple enough: space and time - objects (laws). Obviously, the argument in this case is a regularity that leads to movement (change). It is Einstein's SRT and GRT that actually are the cause of the representation of space and time as regularities, since any point in space and time has to be described as a changing (moving) of system in accordance with the equality of inertial and gravitational masses. As a result, each point of space and time has become a regularity that has changes and onto this point can do the influence, due to the resulting heterogeneity.

Thus, by results of experiences it is established, that the space and time is laws, but there is a question: « Where here relationship of division of a universe under the theory onto systems of existence and nonexist-ence with concept of space and time in view of laws?

Let's recollect, according to the physics of phenomena, any object of the universe has a corpuscular-wave dualism. In accordance with the fact that any object of the universe must have a dependent and independent component (otherwise the paradox of a miracle), we must attribute a dependent component to the corpuscular properties of the object, but an independent component is being attributed to the wave properties, although everything is determined by what kind of interaction and from what system of supervision, we consider the process of interaction. We already spoke, that one part of the object should belong to system of existence, and another part should belong to nonexistence, and we have shown paradoxes which arise in case of the assumption of other variants. Let's consider therefore, that the corpuscular part belongs to existence, and a wave part - to nonexistence. As it is known, in accordance with SRT and Lorentz transformations, when an object moves (changes), the coordinate of length is being changed onto the value of time, and the value of time is being changed onto coordinate of length. The invariant form obtained in this case is always equal to a constant size, without dependence from the observation system. The change of the coordinate of length on value of time means that in addition to our system of space and time, there is another system of space and time in which the space and time are treated differently,

vice versa.

Hence, any object can be presented in the form of a vector with the module in the form of a constant size in system of these two opposite systems of the coordinates describing systems of existence and nonexist-ence. Moreover, the movement of the object causes a turn of vector at a certain angle in these systems and can in no way lead to going beyond these two opposite systems, which are being closed on each other due to movement with the speed of light. Any change in the velocity of the object will be expressed only in drawing of a circle by a constant vector on sphere in accordance with the closed geometry of Lobachevsky-Riemann, since the changes in length and magnitude of time are equal. Accordingly, the objects of the universe are expressed in belonging to both system of existence and non-existence, and movement (i.e., the disappearance of one representation and the appearance of another) leads only to a change in the object in the space-time description in these two possible space-time systems (which differ by virtue of that the coordinate of length and value of time in them are considered oppositely). The absence of continuity of the transition would mean the presence of a jump, and where there is a break; there is necessarily a miracle, i.e. the absence of the law of conservation of energy.

Thus the conclusion follows: one of the space-time systems of the object must belong to system of existence, but the other variant must belong to system of non-existence (connected to the first through the speed of light).

Every change in an object is expressed in the fact that there are changes in its corpuscular-wave parts, which belong respectively to systems of existence and non-existence. If we consider two obvious opposites -a particle (corpuscle) with a large rest mass and an electromagnetic wave, then it is known that an electromagnetic wave has moving with the speed of light, but a corpuscular particle, having a rest mass, cannot move with the speed of light due to an increase in mass of particle to infinity. Therefore, according to SRT, the time and the coordinate of length of the opposite coordinate systems of an ideal particle and wave should be considered oppositely. At the same time, the SRT for such opposite space-time systems fulfills the condition of closure on each other in accordance with the Loba-chevsky-Riemann geometry due to the implementation of the invariant relation. In order to refute the conclusion about the existence of an object in these two opposite space-time systems, it is necessary to assume and find a third space-time system. And this is impossible, since in this case we have exit from our universe (then we need to come up with a third variant in addition to opposites - be or not to be, but how?). The first spacetime system belongs to system of existence and differs from the second system belonging to non-existence, onto the speed of light. The difference between these systems is that the coordinate of length in the direction of movement changes for a value of time, and vice versa. Accordingly, the third fictional space-time system must differ in some way from the first two, and then the question arises about the methods of its repre-

sentation and measurement, since it cannot be expressed in the same way as the two previous systems. We have already noted that the space-time system in our universe is regularity, and the individuality of the regularity is expressed in change. But the maximum change is limited by the speed of light (why so, will be discussed somewhat below) and we wrote earlier, such moving system with the speed of light corresponds to a space-time system of non-existence. The result is a change of the coordinate of length on value of time. And other changes fit into the presence of a space-time system of existence, since the choice of axis of coordinates is always arbitrary. In other words, it is impossible to imagine other third space-time system for any object, because there is no fifth coordinate of change, otherwise there must be a new observable parameter of change, and this parameter must be orthogonal to all the previous four. At the same time, the new space-time system cannot be such system of opposite, belonging to systems of existence or non-existence, since these places are already occupied. Thus, the global opposites of a closed universe - from systems of existence and non-existence - are space-time systems that differ by the speed of light with the replacement of coordinates of lengths by value of time, since only through them is it possibly to describe any object. If we focus on the fulfillment of Einstein's SRT transformation formulas, then the logical chain here is based on the fact that the only way of the transforming inside of the universe is to change the length, for example, along the axis - x on value of time - t, and vice versa. Therefore, the need for two orthogonal parameters is already obvious, the way of their interaction through exchange is clear and orthogonality is clear, because the overlaping give compensating of the action and counteraction in one resulting direction. And it means absence and of the universe. The other two parameters on the axisy and on the axis z can be attributed to the fulfillment of the condition of the Einstein SRT transformation formulas in the opposite system, and precisely because of the isolation of the universe by the two opposites, changes in them can only be equal in accordance with the formula (10), and at the same time, always, Einstein's STO formulas must be fulfilled. This follows from the symmetry of oppo-sites, which gives equality from isolation. Therefore, the principle of change according to formulas that do not correspond to Einstein's SRT would violate equality. However, the parameter of time in one opposite cannot coincide with the parameter of time in the other opposite, the direction of lengths on each axis of coordinate from opposites cannot coincide too; otherwise it would mean a coincidence of coordinates due to the same principle of transformation (there are no differences). Thus, the changes in non-existence present orthogonal coordinates on the axis y and z with respect to the parameters of system of existence on the axis x and t. Hence, the view of space and time in opposites is adequate due to the symmetry associated with the law of conservation of quantity, except that the role of length in system of the opposite will play time and vice versa. This is also due to the fact that the opposites x and t in one global opposite of system of existence are not such

parameters into another global opposite of non-existence and are represented as y and z. Let's emphasize once again that otherwise there would be no difference between systems of existence and non-existence if objects retained their appearance in the same parameters.

Let's note that the four parameters of change are the minimum necessaryform of existence of the absence of compensation and the coincidence of directions. Accordingly, we see changes in the corpuscular form of motion in system of non-existence, as closed lines of force of electric and magnetic fields in system of existence. The above justifies the wave-particle dualism, in which rectilinear motion in system of existence in the form of a corpuscle will give closed lines of electric and magnetic fields in non-existence, giving wave motion. That is, we get the condition of isolation and openness in coordinates of length and time.

Justification of the magnitude of the constant of the universe, of the constancy of the speed of light, of the minimum step of a discrete quantity and the relativity of the minimum and maximum size

The isolation of the universe and its equality to a constant size also determines the constancy of the velocity of exchange (light), as noted above. And if the universe is a constant size, then the exchange between global opposites can only take place at one constant speed, otherwise the universe automatically becomes regularity(object) and, accordingly, cannot be a closed value. Limiting of the discretization of step through value of Planck's constant excludes uniformity, and is connected with the absence of an "ultraviolet catastrophe" with an increase in energy to infinity. And with the isolation of the universe into two global opposites, the discretization step also automatically follows from the constancy of the exchange velocity. Let's note that it is not possible to determine the exchange velocity for an infinitesimal object. So, given the size of the minimum object how N and by virtue of the defining its transfer speed as S, at the presence of the infinitely small objects, we can always represent this object as N=kn, where n is an even smaller object. Accordingly, the transfer speed for object n must be higher in k times, in order to obtain a value of the exchange speed equal to S for a common object N. In this case, there is no limit to the exchange velocity.

From hence the conclusion: the isolation of the universe deter-mines both the value of the maximum exchange speed (velocity of light) and the value of the minimum sampling step, which determines the presence of smaller objects of influence. The universe constant is determined by the multiplication of the exchange velocity per the step of the discretization.

Otherwise there would be individual elements which do not participate in an exchange because they are independent of processes in a universe. Such independence means absence of interaction, and interaction means an exchange. Therefore, if the individual object does not take part in an exchange then the object does not cooperate, that is, is independent. But participation in the exchange is deter-mined by speed. Therefore, the velocity of exchange should be such that all the individual elements of the universe had the interaction to

change. Otherwise, the elements that are not captured through the exchange automatically become independent.

From here we have: the multiplication of the speed of light (c) on Planck's constant (h) determines the value of the constant size of our universe by virtue of interaction:

hc = 1 = const. (12)

Here we have the following logical chain. The isolation of the universe determines the constancy of the exchange velocity during interaction, which also leads to the presence of a minimum sampling step. Since interaction is possible only in the case of exchange, it is possible to exclude the independence of individual elements only when the total quantitative exchange, which characterizes the interaction energy, is determined by the formula of the multiplication of the speed of light on Planck's constant!

Note that the need to link the speed of light with Planck's constant has already been introduced as a thin structure constant:

OncT=2rcq2/(hc) = 2n/137. (13)

The difference is only in the normalization to one, and it can be calculated, if we take into account that the charge q according to Dirac theory can be considered equal to plus or minus one, since this charge is not in the Einstein energy formula, and its role is led to representing the operation of radiation or absorption, that is, not quantity, but action-regularity. Once again, we note that it is impossible to come up with a different principle of interaction besides exchange, and exchange is necessarily characterized by the speed and magnitude of the sampling step. In addition, it should be noted that the multiplication of the exchange velocity (light) onto the sampling step (Planck's constant) has a magnitude equal to one, otherwise either the exchange velocity or the sampling step have a other quantity. And now the main thing that follows from this logic is that the minimal objects corresponding to the step of discretization must also correspond to the principle of their existence due to the impact on something at the exchange and for the preservation of the relationship with wave-particle dualism, i.e. they must not only be subjected to external influences, but also to influence on something. Within the limits of a single space-time system without oppo-sites, this paradox cannot be resolved, since the smallest object corresponding to the sampling step is defined here. This paradox can be solved only with the help of the other opposite space-time system, where, according to the logic of the inversely proportional relationship of opposites, the smallest objects of one opposite should have the maximum sizes in the other opposite. This is the logic of the need for inversely proportional communication in the presence of closed systems.

The conclusion follows from this: the kind of the regularities depends on the place of observation, since the observed picture of the universe from the standpoint of observation from an electron will be different, due to the fact that the minimal objects will be completely other objects, otherwise regularity (object) has action without reaction, i.e. the representation of the universe depends on the object of observation in the hierarchy of construction.

From the standpoint of our hierarchy, an electron is a minimal object, but from the point of view of observing the hierarchy of construction from an electron, this minimal object can be the maximum object for us, because of the isolation of the universe, i.e. the concept of the minimum and maximum object is absolutely relative here, as is the kind of representation. This conclusion is very important, for it means many-sided nature of representation of the same objects depending on a place of supervision on hierarchy. Differently, the universe is expressed through a prism of the given law. From the point of view of the absolute system, the electron has only one designation, and this is the difference between other theories and our theory, since from the point of view of observation from the opposite, electron can be, for example, an antineutrino, a neutrino or a proton.

On the basis of the aforesaid it is possible to deduce the following philosophical laws received by logic conclusion for objects (for laws).

1. The main axiom of our universe is the axiom of the absence of miracles, which means that there are cause-and-effect relationships in the world, expressed in the form of regularities belonging to two global op-posites of a closed universe - systems of existence and non-existence. In other words, we have defined oppo-sites as something concrete.

2. The manifestation of laws (of objects) in systems of existence and non-existence is expressed through the changes which they make in the universe. These changes occur continuously and are accompanied either by the unification or separation of existing objects due to the necessity of the relationship of oppo-sites. Mathematically, this means continuous summation or subtraction, which is expressed through integration or differentiation. In other words, we also introduce into the philosophical laws of the universe the need for interaction through exchange, and here statics is possible through exchange in a closed cycle. That is, we introduce the principle of the interaction of oppo-sites.

3. Because of the isolation of the universe and by virtue of invariance, it follows that for both systems of existence and non-existence, all laws from the one opposite appear for other opposite as individual discrete smallest objects. This is connected to the fact that the subtraction of the regularity K*K from regularity P*P according to the formula (9) is equal to a constant magnitude, therefore, the speed of change is also constant both in system of existence and in system of non-existence. If the transmission velocity is unchanged, it means that systems of existence and non-existence have no signs of comparing objects - they are equal in dynamics and cannot give the zero. Presence of the minimal individual objects follows from representation of a universe as closed system in the form of a constant magnitude that defines a constancy of speed of an exchange and magnitude of the minimal step of discretization, and this is the one from conditions of existence of contrasts. It should be noted here that the law of radiation and absorption by discrete portions of energy is associated precisely with the existence of a minimum sampling quantity, which sets the smallest portion of

energy (otherwise an ultraviolet catastrophe). In addition, the invariant form also requires the duality of the representation of the object, i.e. not only as a quantity, in which there are summation and subtraction operations, but also as a regularity characterizing quantitative changes in order to fulfill equality (7). This variant is being presented through formula of Universe (11).

4. None of the laws of systems of existence and non-existence can be fully dependent or independent, as well as exist outside the system of the universe.

5. The regularity, independently acting on objects and changing them, thereby forms a counteraction (dependence) to itself, which ensures the transition from system of existence to non-existence, and vice versa. In other words, an action forms a counteraction to itself. Otherwise - eternal existence and full independence.

6. The principle of relativity and equivalence of transformations is being observed, for example, summation in system of existence means subtraction in non-existence, if the consideration was from system of existence. From nonexistence, subtraction will be summation, and summation will be subtraction. This principle of relativity and equivalence of transformations with symmetry follows from the fact that the universe is a closed system, therefore dependence in system of existence means independence in non-existence, and vice versa. There are no objects at which the dependent and independent components are simultaneously either in system of existence or in system of non-existence. If the principle of relativity and equivalence of transformations during the transition were not observed, then this would mean inequality of action and reaction, which in a closed system is expressed in inequality of emerging objects and disappearing objects in systems of existence and non-existence, which means the disappearance of the universe, and hence the impossibility of its occurrence. It is equality that means equivalent, functional dependence in the relative consideration from systems of existence and non-existence.

7. The universe is built on a hierarchical principle, since any object can be divided into independent and dependent components. The components are also divided into dependent and independent parts, etc. Hierarchy is already embedded in the principle of controlling system of existence from non-existence, and vice versa. At the same time, the hierarchy forms the separation of objects, and also their transition from quantity to quality.

8. There is an inversely proportional relationship between systems of existence and non-existence. Otherwise, the universe will not represent a closed system, due to the fact that the objects that are higher in the hierarchy in system of existence will remain higher in non-existence, and for isolation of universe through closed change between global opposites it is necessary that the higher objects in one opposite in the hierarchy can be controlled by the lower objects of other opposite. If such a thing is carried out separately in systems of existence and non-existence, then existence and non-existence will be closed to themselves, and it contradicts their common connection in the universe. The principle of inversely proportional connection allows a minimal individual object to have the same corpuscle-

wave representation as any other object of the universe, because, this object is the largest in size in system of opposite, and here has objects controlled by our object and is itself subject to change, in other variant, otherwise it could not be. It defines also a relativity of representation of objects of a universe depending on a place of supervision in hierarchy. At the same time, one global opposite in the form of a maximum value through a constant magnitude is represented as minimal objects in the system of another global opposite with the presence of changes through movement that characterize the processes of dynamics in this opposite.

9. Individual objects (laws) exist in a universe eternally, and then the dependent and independent parts of objects, which are being found in systems of existence and nonexistence, make continuous rotation in these contrasts periodically. Otherwise the universe would not be the closed system.

10. The universe as an object is characterized by four orthogonal parameters of change: a) between the dependent and non-dependent parts of system of existence; b) between the dependent and independent parts of system of non-existence; c) between the independent part of system of existence and the dependent part of system of non-existence; d) between the independent part of system of non-existence and the dependent part of system of existences. The orthogonality of these changes is laid down by the hierarchy of the construction of the universe and is explained by the fact that in the case of the compatibility of these changes, full compensation occurs, and hence the impossibility of the existence of the universe. This is also due to the fact that if the paths of opposite changes coincide, then they compensate for each other, which mean that the changes are zero, and if there are no changes, then there are no laws, and hence the universe is absent. The practical implementation of this law is reflected through space and time and the connection with electromagnetic components in the form of common space-time continuum and electromagnetic continuum.

11. An integral part of each law (of object) is the representation of its components, respectively, in relatively closed and open forms. If we assume otherwise, then in one variant the object cannot exist (a full open system and it means that there is no designation of its boundaries), but in other variant the object cannot be detected (complete closed system).

12. No change in system of existence can occur without causing reciprocal changes in system of non-existence. And vice versa, other approach would mean the independence of system of existence from system of non-existence. This, together with the hierarchy of construction, of closed universe, at the equality of action and reaction, justifies the need of the using the Huygens-Fresnel principle in assessing the impact. By virtue of fact, that action is equal to reaction which can be considered as the initial formative action. And the transition of objects from system of non-existence to system of existence is new source of secondary waves in system of existence.

13. It is clear that if there were no counteraction from non-existence, then there would be no cause for the occurrence of secondary waves. At the same time,

the counteraction has some freedom (independence of manifestation) associated with the structure of the opposition, since otherwise counteraction would manifest itself directly in the direction of action and then the wave could not have the bypass of the obstacle in principle . This actually means that objects, depending on the hierarchy and construction, have freedom of choice. It follows from fact that the presence of living beings is determined by the structure and hierarchy of the formation of the objects of the universe and there is no miracle of the emergence of the living creature from the inanimate object by a random law.

14. The discreteness of an object in one opposite follows from the law of change (movement) in the other opposite. Thus, the paradox of discontinuity (breaks, singularities) is solved, since the connection between

discrete objects of one opposite is determined by the continuous exchange of objects of the other opposite according to the law, which in opposite also gives a discrete object.

In the conclusion we shall note, that our expansion of philosophical laws of a universe allows passing to concrete physical and mathematical display of these laws in practice that could not be received at formulations of three philosophical laws presented by us in the beginning.

References

1. Зубков И.Ф. Курс диалектического материализма. - М.: Изд-во Ун-та дружбы народов, 1990.

2. Фридрих Энгельс. Анти-Дюринг. Отдел 1. XIII. esperanto-mv.pp.ru.

ТРИБОЛЮМИНЕСЦЕНЦИЯ Tb2(SO4> И Ce2(SO4> В ТРЕХКОМПОНЕНТНОЙ СМЕСИ

ОДНОАТОМНЫХ ГАЗОВ

Тухбатуллин А.А.

К.ф.-м.н., Институт нефтехимии и катализа УФИЦ РАН,

Российская Федерация, Уфа Шарипов Г.Л.

Д.х.н., Институт нефтехимии и катализа УФИЦ РАН,

Российская Федерация, Уфа Абдрахманов А.М.

К.ф.-м.н., Институт нефтехимии и катализа УФИЦ РАН,

Российская Федерация, Уфа

TRIBOLUMINESCENCE OF Tb2(SO4> AND Ce2(SO4> IN A THREE-COMPONENT MIXTURE OF

MONATOMIC GASES

Tukhbatullin A.,

PhD, high-energy chemistry and catalysis laboratory Institute of petrochemistry and catalysis UFIC RAS■

Ufa, Russia Sharipov G.,

Professor, high-energy chemistry and catalysis laboratory Institute of petrochemistry and catalysis UFIC

RAS, Ufa, Russia Abdrakhmanov A.

PhD, Researcher high-energy chemistry and catalysis laboratory Institute of petrochemistry and catalysis

UFIC RAS, Ufa, Russia

АННОТАЦИЯ

С помощью разработанной триболюминесцентной лабораторной установки для анализа газов, исследована триболюминесценция солей лантанидов в атмосфере трехкомпонентных смесей одноатомных (He, Ne, Ar, Kr и Xe) газов. Определены составы газовой смеси путем сопоставления спектров триболюминес-ценции в атмосфере индивидуальных инертных газов со спектрами триболюминесценции в атмосфере трехкомпонентных смесей этих газов.

ABSTRACT

The triboluminescence of lanthanide salts in the three-component mixtures of monoatomic (He, Ne, Ar, Kr and Xe) gases has been investigated using the developed laboratory setup for gas analysis. The compositions of the gas mixture were determined by comparing the triboluminescence spectra in individual inert gases with the triboluminescence spectra in three-component mixtures gases atmosphere.

Ключевые слова: триболюминесценция, инертные газы, лантаниды, газовые смеси.

Keywords: triboluminescence, inert gases, lanthanide, gas mixtures.

Ранее было показано, что при напуске в рабочую ячейку инертных газов во время механоде-струкции в спектре триболюминесценции (ТЛ, свечение кристаллов при механическом воздействии

[1]) некоторых соединений лантанидов, содержащих 2 спектральные компоненты [1, 2] (азотная -эмиттер N2, твердотельная - эмиттер Ln3+), в составе газовой компоненты регистрируются линии