Beyond Electro-Magnetism

  • Our current electromagnetism model is based only on the first solution, while ignoring the second solution of Maxwell's equation and it's physical interpretation and meaning,

    Could be there a MAGNETO-ELECTRIC radiation also instead of only an ELECTRO-MAGNETIC radiation ?

    What i found interesting about a MAGNETO-ELECTRIC radiation is that it has a maximum speed of C^2

    If this type of radiation exist where the main carrier is the magnetic vector, and i strongly suspect it exist indeed, how can we develop a method of detecting this type of radiation....

    what type of particles this radiation use as it's neighbour use photons


    If this is confirmed then we open up a whole new horizon..


    Let us start the conversation !

  • goldinium

    Changed the title of the thread from “Beyond Elecro-Magnetism” to “Beyond Electro-Magnetism”.
  • Beginning material, I quote


    Rest can be found here:

    https://customers.hbci.com/~we…w/milewski.htm#superlight

  • There are only photon waves, which are formed by groups of photons that emit free electrons - for example, free electrons from the material of a transmitting antenna ...

    The stupidity of physicists, who, like Maxwell, believe that there are electromagnetic waves in nature, is obvious to me - this is how Kanarev represents this stupidity -

    “... the change in the strengths of electric and magnetic fields is most often represented as two mutually perpendicular sinusoids, changing in time (Fig. 7, 147, c) and described by Maxwell's equations: (there are four of them) ... these are partial differential equations, so they automatically contradict the axiom of Unity. This contradiction is reinforced by the independence of r and t. As a result, they cannot describe correctly the movement in space of any objects. Therefore, we have reason to doubt the correspondence of the reality of Maxwell's electromagnetic wave (Fig. 7, 147, c). ...

    This doubt is based on a mass of contradictions between experimental facts and Maxwell's equations. For example, ring magnetic fields around a wire (Fig. 147, a, b) is a strict experimental fact, and a wave with simultaneously and sinusoidally varying strengths of electric E and magnetic H fields (Fig. 7, 147, c) is an invention of theorists. Having accepted it, they are obliged to tell us: how does a cylindrical magnetic field (Fig. 147, a, b), formed by electrons around any wire through which a current flows, turns into two mutually perpendicular sinusoids (Fig. 7, 147, c)? How are the amplitudes of mutually perpendicular sinusoids formed from a circular magnetic field and what are they equal to? But such questions do not bother theoretical physicists. Without blinking an eye, they unfoundedly assert that no representations are needed, mathematics perfectly manages without any representations in predicting an experimental result. "

    Further -

    “Information about a photon clarifies the reason for the convergence of the results of solutions of Maxwell's equations with a number of experimental data. The point is that electrons of any antenna are continuously excited by photons of the medium, forming its temperature and background noise. A controlled influence on this process makes the same electrons emit pulses of photons with different radii in the form of waves (Fig. 8), which excite current pulses at the receiver antenna, the same ones that are mistakenly attributed to the action of the Maxwellian electromagnetic wave (Fig. 7). If the wave emitted by an antenna or any other source consists of photons (Fig. 8), then the magnitude of the generated current will depend on the number of photons hitting it, and on their individual energy, but not on the intensity invented for this case of electric and magnetic fields. This is proved by the IGA-1 device (Fig. 17). With a sensitivity of 100 pico volts, it receives natural radiation at a frequency of 5 kHz and a wavelength

    λ = С / ν = 3 • 10 ^ 8/5 • 10 ^ 3 = 0.6 • 10 ^ 5 = 60 km

    to an antenna with a diameter of 30 mm.

    Maxwell's equations work only when the radiation wavelength is comparable to the size of the receiver antenna. This is compelling evidence that Maxwell's electromagnetic waves (Fig. 7) are a theoretical invention. They are not carriers of radiation. "

  • I would also like to note the following - many mathematicians are tempted to present nature to us in such a way that nature supposedly follows the laws of mathematics and the solutions of some equations ... But I am against this approach.

    Maxwell's equations for the magnetic field in matter, August 27, 2018 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/46aS/46NBmbp31


    Maxwell's equations for the magnetic field in matter, August 27, 2018 -

    https://drive.google.com/file/…uPPabVZ4/view?usp=sharing

  • There are only photon waves, which are formed by groups of photons that emit free electrons - for example, free electrons from the material of a transmitting antenna ...

    The stupidity of physicists, who, like Maxwell, believe that there are electromagnetic waves in nature, is obvious to me - this is how Kanarev represents this...

    Cherepanov, you are constantly talking nonsense and ruining the site's reputation.

  • Взаимодействие с другими людьми

    Cherepanov, you are constantly talking nonsense and ruining the site's reputation.


    You did not specify what kind of nonsense I sounded here, and therefore your unfounded statements without any proof cause significant harm to this site ... You do not respect people, do not respect the opinions of other people, behave arrogantly, and "bang" on the keys your computer like a cowardly hare! Take courage, show your knowledge, if you are a physicist ... I do not argue with writers ..., keep this in mind!

  • Quote

    It resembles Nicola Tesla scalar waves. In dense aether model light corresponds the surface ripples at the water surface, whereas scalar waves are faster and they correspond spreading of sound waves through underwater. They manifest itself like magnetic turbulences and vortices of vacuum. So that photons correspond Russels solitons and scalar waves correspond so-called Falaco solitons at the water surface. They have some aspects of magnetic monopoles (anapoles and anyons in solid state physics) and they can also constitute dark matter.

    Quote

    most of all we welcome new theories that advance LENR. So if what you say is confirmed, how will it help us

    In my theory LENR arises, when long chain of atoms attenuates momentum during collision by Astroblaster effect, during this their orbitals will temporarily merge into a pipe, which serves as a waveguide for EM wave during it. When this pipe decays, it releases gamma ray but also scalar wave soliton, which may be detected like anomalous spiral-like tracks and or like anomalous magnetic field around LENR reactors.


    In chemistry byproducts of reactions often help to make reaction reversible, i.e. catalyze it. So that scalar waves may be produced during LENR but they can also catalyse it. It could explain, why high-frequency spikes (Q-wave of Brilloulion Corp. for example) can speed up LENR.

  • According to Gregory Hodwanec experiments one can generate scalar waves with planar (mica) capacitor, charged to a high voltage. When we introduce high frequency signal to such a capacitor (usually through another HV capacitor), it will start to radiate scalar wave beam perpendicularly to its axis. The standard EMG component of this signal can be filtered out with metallic cage and ferromagnetic shield. As a detector may serve another planar capacitor charged to high voltage as well: it will collect AC signal which can be amplified. Just don't try commonly accessible ceramic capacitors, where most of capacity resides at the randomly oriented boundaries of crystal grains. Such a capacitor will also emanate scalar waves, but in all directions and as such more difficult to detect.


    See also: Could the cold fusion be induced by electric or magnetic field?

  • The stupidity of physicists, who, like Maxwell, believe that there are electromagnetic waves in nature, is obvious to me - this is how Kanarev represents this stupidity -

    I do not know where you did study EM theory. A photon is no EM wave it just show some wave like behavior. And EM waves are the only form of energy you can transport over a distance.

    What you mix up is: The EM wave needs charge for coupling (see how it is produced!) and the energy only occurs after coupling. The pure EM wave contains "no energy" what is bit paradox as people always talk of field energy density what is correct for a static field only! So energy density of a wave gives you a kind of maximal possible transport of energy.

  • Взаимодействие с другими людьми

    I do not know where you did study EM theory. A photon is no EM wave it just show some wave like behavior. And EM waves are the only form of energy you can transport over a distance.

    What you mix up is: The EM wave needs charge for coupling (see how it is produced!) and the energy only occurs after coupling. The pure EM wave contains "no energy" what is bit paradox as people always talk of field energy density what is correct for a static field only! So energy density of a wave gives you a kind of maximal possible transport of energy.

    My dear opponent, Wyttenbach! I understand your bewilderment ... You reason exactly as I was taught at NRNU MEPhI in 1972-1978. I firmly believed in this physics ... But the year 2016 came and I realized that this physics was wrong ... How did I come to such a sad conclusion? The reason is that I studied the textbook of F.M. Kanarev. - "Fundamentals of the physical chemistry of the microworld" ... I heeded the arguments of Philip Mikhailovich and agreed with him that the photon has mass! I agreed with him that when radio waves are emitted by the antenna of a radio transmitter, it is free electrons that emit photons ... Electrons emit photons in groups and these groups form a radio wave - earlier it was called an "electromagnetic wave" and it was wrong ... Now, according to the physical chemistry of the microworld, it is correct to call these waves - "photon wave" ... What to do? You argue in one paradigm, and I argue in another paradigm ... Which of us is right? It is impossible to find out on the pages of this site ... Why so? Simply because you have not studied the textbook of the physical chemistry of the microworld - this is the problem and this problem is yours, not mine, since, unlike you, I am familiar with both paradigms and have the opportunity to compare them ... You have no such opportunity ... ... You have the right to disagree with my opinion, and I have the right to express my opinion ...

  • You have no such opportunity ... ... You have the right to disagree with my opinion, and I have the right to express my opinion ...

    No need: Just show how you transport an EM signal to a TV receiver! EM waves are no photons. Some people treat their interaction as virtual photons what is corect as an EM wave is first order one halve of a photon.


    You have to understand the fundamental difference between a photon and EM-wave! (My last word in this.)

  • Взаимодействие с другими людьми

    My dear opponent, Wyttenbach! I understand your bewilderment ... You reason exactly as I was taught at NRNU MEPhI in 1972-1978. I firmly believed in this physics ... But the year 2016 came and I realized that this physics was wrong ... How did I come to such a sad conclusion? The reason is that I studied the textbook of F.M. Kanarev. - "Fundamentals of the physical chemistry of the microworld" ... I heeded the arguments of Philip Mikhailovich and agreed with him that the photon has mass! I agreed with him that when radio waves are emitted by the antenna of a radio transmitter, it is free electrons that emit photons ... Electrons emit photons in groups and these groups form a radio wave - earlier it was called an "electromagnetic wave" and it was wrong ... Now, according to the physical chemistry of the microworld, it is correct to call these waves - "photon wave" ... What to do? You argue in one paradigm, and I argue in another paradigm ... Which of us is right? It is impossible to find out on the pages of this site ... Why so? Simply because you have not studied the textbook of the physical chemistry of the microworld - this is the problem and this problem is yours, not mine, since, unlike you, I am familiar with both paradigms and have the opportunity to compare them ... You have no such opportunity ... ... You have the right to disagree with my opinion, and I have the right to express my opinion ...

    I have seen you making the exact same statement several times Cherepanov2020 , and I am glad that you feel so illuminated to have had the chance of reading that book that gave you the chance to “see the light” so to speak.


    I will ask you again to give us a concrete example of how your superior knowledge Can be applied to solve any particular problem in a better way than the currently existing and accepted. Bear in mind that the model of Wyttenbach has the ability to predict the values of experimentally observed properties of matter to an accuracy that is unprecedented.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.