Understanding low energy nuclear reactions. An overview by Péter Kálmán, Budapest University of Technology and Economics

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    Charge is a topological effect of nested magnetic flux. The electron structure and the proton structure are obviously different - but the mechanism how charge is generated is the same.

    This is very interesting.


    When i had to study the obligatory physics a few decades ago the lesson was something like this:

    - the magnetic field is a result of a movement of a charge

    - the magnetic field affects the moving charge by creating a force with the cross-product formula


    You tell now that the magnetic interaction doesn't need the charge at all but the interactions are between magnetic fields.

    Now the question is where does the required magnetic field for a magnetic flux based charge (e.g. electron) come from in this model?


    When looking into the future when you have removed charge out of the equations i suppose the next step is to remove mass from those also ?

    Quote from Rjzk

    - the magnetic field is a result of a movement of a charge

    - the magnetic field affects the moving charge by creating a force with the cross-product formula


    You tell now that the magnetic interaction doesn't need the charge at all but the interactions are between magnetic fields.

    Now the question is where does the required magnetic field for a magnetic flux based charge (e.g. electron) come from in this model?

    There are two pictures:

    - The macroscopic world according Maxwell - this needs only tiny extensions for interactions with dense mass.

    - Dense mass world cannot work with axioms = charge & "blubber mass".

    Magnetic flux is the only "stuff" that exists nothing else is needed to define physics. On the atomic level the magnetic moment is not generated by a ring current as in fact the field moves with "c" and the charge is at rest. This is given by the Faraday law. But the picture is completely symmetric of course, if you look at the magnetic moment only!

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    There are two pictures:

    - The macroscopic world according Maxwell - this needs only tiny extensions for interactions with dense mass.

    - Dense mass world cannot work with axioms = charge & "blubber mass".

    Magnetic flux is the only "stuff" that exists nothing else is needed to define physics. On the atomic level the magnetic moment is not generated by a ring current as in fact the field moves with "c" and the charge is at rest. This is given by the Faraday law. But the picture is completely symmetric of course, if you look at the magnetic moment only!

    Some more thinking. Let's have an electron and a positron. If they are according to your theory kind of magnetic structures it might be a piece of cake to construct the model of a positron from the model of an electron. Some phase-shift in the field and that's it :) .

    As we know when these particles meet each other the result is a disaster, they both disappear and continue as photons moving in space with the speed of light . Or should we call the result as electro-magnetic waves in this case? Now when the original particles contain energy capsulated in limited volume in their structure, what does happen to the local magnetic structures in order to be transformed to electro-magnetic waves?


    If i remember correctly it should be also possible to get an electron-positron pair as a result ( a reverse process) when two (suitable) photons collide.

    Maybe this can't be be possible if we think only the waves. Interaction of waves is not possible.

    How about your theory, what does it tell about this ? If it is possible to transform capsulated magnetic structures to waves, maybe the reverse should also be possible ?

    Quote from Rjzk

    Some more thinking. Let's have an electron and a positron. If they are according to your theory kind of magnetic structures it might be a piece of cake to construct the model of a positron from the model of an electron. Some phase-shift in the field and that's it

    This is pretty easy. Inside out flux is topologically left or right winded there is no classic symmetry in SO(4). If both particles met (under ideal conditions only) then all binding forces are opposite = cancel and thus only EM flux remains. The 3D/4D flux matrix is given in my writeups. With this you also will understand why only our protons do exist!

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    This is pretty easy. Inside out flux is topologically left or right winded there is no classic symmetry in SO(4). If both particles met (under ideal conditions only) then all binding forces are opposite = cancel and thus only EM flux remains. The 3D/4D flux matrix is given in my writeups. With this you also will understand why only our protons do exist!

    Still one more comparison. How about a positron v.s. a proton ? They both have the same charge, +e, but totally different mass.

    The mass-difference between an electron/positron and a proton has been one of the unsolved questions a long time. If the mass is a magnetic property in the end, maybe you have a good explanation to this also.

    Взаимодействие с другими людьми

    Quote from Rjzk

    Still one more comparison. How about a positron v.s. a proton ? They both have the same charge, +e, but totally different mass.

    The mass-difference between an electron/positron and a proton has been one of the unsolved questions a long time. If the mass is a magnetic property in the end, maybe you have a good explanation to this also.


    You wrote - "Still one more comparison. How about a positron v.s. a proton? They both have the same charge, + e, but totally different mass.

    The mass-difference between an electron / positron and a proton has been one of the unsolved questions a long time. If the mass is a magnetic property in the end, maybe you have a good explanation to this also. "Maxwell turned out to be a big mischief and a rascal - he powdered all physicists' brains for 150 years and no one has yet been able to" uncover his deception. " .. But I did THIS! Maxwell turned out to be a sharpie - a kind of "math player" and I uncovered his forgery in mathematical exercises ... Read it - you will like it ... Article in Russian -


    Exposing Maxwell - A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Part 1 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/Ddaj/4vkKrS79f


    Maxwell's Revealing - A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism Part 1 - https://drive.google.com/file/…id46fj1t/view?usp=sharing

    Did I miss your explanation of how your magnetic mass theory explains the mass differences between a positron and proton? Or how your theory mathematically predicts anything new that can be tested?

    Quote from Rjzk

    Still one more comparison. How about a positron v.s. a proton ? They both have the same charge, +e, but totally different mass.

    The mass-difference between an electron/positron and a proton has been one of the unsolved questions a long time. If the mass is a magnetic property in the end, maybe you have a good explanation to this also.

    Actually one answer is already (might requiry some understanding) in the chapter


    "4.2 Proton mass calculations" from


    "The proton, electron structure, its resonances and fusion products" by Wyttenbach.


    The discussion is about electron/proton but i suppose it doesn't matter whether it's an electron or positron.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.