Шарль Кулон и его теория. Почему Максвелл извратил учение Шарля Кулона ?

  • Links zur Website der Vereinigung französischer Physiker

    Erste Diplomarbeit. - Konstruktion und Verwendung einer elektrischen Waage basierend auf der Eigenschaft von Metalldrähten, eine Torsionskraft пропорционально zum Torsionswinkel zu haben (1785). (С.107) -

    Первый тезис. - Построение и использование электрических весов, основанных на том свойстве, что металлические провода обладают силой кручения, пропорциональной углу кручения (1785). (стр.107) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.107 - im.117

    Zweite Эти. - Wobei bestimmt wird, nach welchen Gesetzen sowohl das magnetische Fluid als auch das elektrische Fluid entweder durch Abstoßung oder durch Anziehung wirken (1785). (S.116) -

    Второй тезис. - Где определяется, в соответствии с какими законами магнитная жидкость, а также электрическая жидкость действуют посредством отталкивания или притяжения (1785). (стр.116)

    - http://cnum.cnam.fr/CGI/fpage.…21-1/126/90/416/0079/0316

    Дритте Эти. - Die Elektrizitätsmenge, die ein isolierter Körper in einer bestimmten Zeit verliert, entweder durch Kontakt mit mehr oder weniger feuchter Luft или entlang mehr oder weniger idioelektrischer Stützen (1785). (S.147) -

    Третий тезис. - Количество электричества, которое изолированное тело теряет в данный момент времени, либо при контакте с более или менее влажным воздухом, либо вдоль более или менее идиоэлектрических опор (1785). (стр.147) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.147 - im.157

    Vierte Эти. - Wo wir zwei Haupteigenschaften der elektrischen Flüssigkeit manifestrieren: die erste, dass sich diese Flüssigkeit in keinem Körper durch eine chemische Affinität oder durch eine elektive Anziehung ausbreitet oder durch eine elektive Anziehung ausbreitet, die ersözéréis deüssine, dass sichdischée, ersteeis, dass sich dieseunge auschenitet, die erste wörterwörter kiltakterno, abstain wirdenis dasschachtiedoßern Wirkung; zweitens, dass bei leitfähigen Körpern die Flüssigkeit, die einen Zustand der Stabilität erreicht hat, über die Oberfläche des Körpers verteilt wird und nicht in das Innere eindringt (1786). (S.173) -

    Тезис четвертый. - Здесь мы демонстрируем два основных свойства электрической жидкости: первое, что эта жидкость не распространяется в каком-либо теле за счет химического сродства или избирательного притяжения, а распределяется между различными телами, находящимися в контакте, только за счет своего репеллентное действие; во-вторых, в проводящих телах жидкость, достигшая состояния стабильности, распространяется по поверхности тела и не проникает внутрь (1786). (стр.173) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.173 - im.183

    Fünfte Memoiren. - Über die Art und Weise, wie die elektrische Flüssigkeit zwischen zwei в Kontakt befindlichen leitfähigen Körpern geteilt wird, und über die Verteilung dieser Flüssigkeit auf die verschiedenen Teile derfläche dieser Körper (17). (S.183) -

    Пятое воспоминание. - О том, как электрическая жидкость распределяется между двумя контактирующими проводящими телами, и о распределении этой жидкости по различным частям поверхности этих тел (1787). (стр.183) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.183 - im.193

    Sechste Memoiren. - Fortsetzung der Forschung zur Verteilung elektrischer Flüssigkeit zwischen mehreren Leitern. Bestimmung der elektrischen Dichte an den verschiedenen Stellen der Oberfläche dieser Körper (1788). (S.230) -

    Шестое воспоминание. - Продолжение исследований по распределению электрической жидкости между несколькими проводниками. Определение плотности электричества в различных точках поверхности этих тел (1788 г.). (стр.230) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.230 - im.240

    Siebte Memoiren. - Магнетизм (1789 г.). (Auszug aus den Memoiren der Royal Academy of Sciences.) (S.273) -

    Седьмое воспоминание. - Магнетизм (1789 г.). (Извлечение из мемуаров Королевской академии наук.) (Стр. 273) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.273 - im.284

    Theoretische und Experimentalelle Bestimmung der Kräfte, die verschiedene Nadeln, bis zur Sättigung magnetisiert, auf ihren magnetischen Meridian приносят. [Auszug aus t. III der Memoiren des Instituts, Яр IX (1801 г.).] (S.320) -

    Теоретическое и экспериментальное определение сил, которые приводят различные иглы, намагниченные до насыщения, к их магнитному меридиану. [Выписка из т. III Воспоминаний института, IX год (1801 г.).] (P.320) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.320 - im.331

    Versuche, die Konsistenz von Flüssigkeiten und die Gesetze ihres Widerstands bei sehr langsamen Bewegungen zu bestimmen. [Auszug aus t. III der Memoiren des Instituts, Яр IX (1801 г.).] (S.333) -

    Эксперименты, предназначенные для определения консистенции жидкостей и законов их сопротивления при очень медленных движениях. [Выписка из т. III Воспоминаний института, IX год (1801 г.).] (P.333) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.333 - im.340

    Ergebnis der verschiedenen Methoden, die verwendet werden, um Stahlklingen und -stäben den höchsten Grad an Magnetismus zu verleihen. [Auszug aus t. VI der Memoiren des Instituts (1806).] (S.361) -

    Результат применения различных методов для придания стальным лезвиям и пруткам максимальной степени магнетизма. [Выписка из т. VI Воспоминаний института (1806 г.).] (P.361) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.361 - im.366

    Einfluss der Temperatur auf den Magnetismus von Stahl. (Auszug, nach Biot, aus einer unveröffentlichten Abhandlung (S.373) -

    Влияние температуры на магнетизм стали. (Отрывок из неопубликованных мемуаров по Био (стр. 373) -

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.373 - im.376

    ЗУСАЦ. Über die Verteilung auf der Oberfläche zweier elektrisch leitender Kugeln und die Anziehungskraft dieser Kugeln nach Poisson und Sir W. Thomson (S.379) -

    ДОБАВЛЕНИЕ. О распределении на поверхности двух наэлектризованных проводящих сфер и притяжении этих сфер, согласно Пуассону и сэру У. Томсону (стр. 379):

    CNUM - 8CA121-1 : p.379 - im.380


    Wir verstehen weiterhin die Fehler der Physiker, 2 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/do47/Dyc8Er4rE

    Wir verstehen weiterhin die Fehler der Physiker, 2 - https://docs.google.com/docume…iAeNO5t5/edit?usp=sharing



  • Какая дата у этой конференции? Рад видеть Николая Самсоненко в отличной форме.

    This workshop took place on February 27, 2021 ...


    3 hours 18 minutes - about charge -


    Samsonenko's answer, associate professor of the Department of Theoretical Physics, a student of Louis de Broglie - "Nobody knows what a charge is!"


    Speech by Nikolai Vladimirovich Samsonenko, Associate Professor of the Department of Theoretical Physics of the RUDN University - Cold Nuclear Fusion and Ball Lightning: seminar at RUDN University, February 27, 2020 -

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    I think it will be interesting for you to listen to my conversation with Samsonenko this summer. I asked him - "Did he read my article? -


    Dimension of Electrostatic Electricity Unit according to Maxwell, June 17, 2021 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/ie1g/y5k6rwhw9


    Maxwell Electrostatic Electricity Dimension, June 17, 2021 - https://drive.google.com/file/...sow0iw5x/view?usp=sharing


    To which he replied - "Yes. I read it with interest and support you ..."


    Conversation with N.V. Samsonenko July 14, 2021 - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/QbHA/sKXsSmc77


    It will be interesting for you to listen to the reasoning of Nikolai Vladimirovich in 2017, after I opened Maxwell's mistakes -


    I draw your attention to what Samsonenko says in the 16th minute of this video -


    2017.05.30 (1-2) Samsonenko N.V. Wonders of Mathematics - Maxwell's Equation from Dirac's Equation -

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    19 minutes - Samsonenko - "... it is funny to take into account only the" electrostatic component "


    22 minutes on magnetic potential ...


    23 minutes 30 seconds about Terletsky ...


    28 minutes 15 seconds about the magnetic component ...


    2017.05.30 (2-2) Samsonenko N.V. Strong interactions are poorly understood magnetic interactions -

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.





  • Кулоновского барьера в природе нет - https://youtu.be/MnJRT5Wm76A

    Thought ..., a deep thought, which is embedded in this video, but I am not sure everyone is "caught by the tail" - it is pumping of "mass" by electrons - the mass of ether or the mass of photons that are absorbed and emitted by electrons ... As a continuation of this video I suggest watching another video - pay attention to the sensational information starting from 27 minutes 38 seconds - Triumph and collapse of Soviet science - How do they steal and what to do ?! Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences - Strebkov D.S. -

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    I think and will continue to promote this in science - there are no electric charges and electric charge gradient in nature, but there is a MASS GRADIENT and this is a very important part of Dmitry Semenovich Strebkov's speech. In nature, there is no Law of Conservation of Energy, but there is a Law of Conservation of Mass!

  • What is the date of this conference? I am happy to see Nicolaï Samsonenko in great shape.

    N.V. Samsonenko - "Science is moved by loners, in science personalities create!"

    In this video, Samsonenko tells the story of how he was engaged in the translation of a book by Louis de Broglie. Because of a small letter in which Louis de Broglie wrote that not a single research team had proposed anything new, the Soviet authorities wanted to ban the publication of this book ... But nevertheless, the book was published ... thanks to the efforts of Samsonenko. .. I am citing this letter translated from Russian into English.

    “The need for freedom in scientific creativity.

    Louis de Broglie.

    The history of science shows that its most significant progress was achieved through the efforts of the most daring thinkers, who discovered new and fruitful ways that others did not notice. If specialists in this field had got acquainted with the ideas of the brilliant scientists who laid the foundation of modern science, they, no doubt, would have found them extravagant and would have rejected them without understanding their originality and depth. Indeed, the struggle endured, for example, by Fresnel and Pasteur, sufficiently confirms this, some of the discoverers faced a lack of understanding by prominent scientists and had to give a lot of energy to the struggle before they achieved success. At a later time, in the field of theoretical physics, about which I can speak competently, the excellent new ideas of Lorentz, Planck and especially Einstein were met with incomprehension by prominent scientists. These ideas have triumphed, but with the establishment of an established system of organizing scientific research, the danger increases that new and fruitful ideas will no longer be able to develop freely.

    Let's summarize what has been said. As the forces of research and education are weighed down by cumbersome administrative, structural and financial obligations and tied to a massive regulatory and planning framework, it becomes more necessary than ever to safeguard scientific freedom and free initiative as they have always been. and will remain the most fruitful sources of the great progress of Science.

    _________________________

    This letter was sent by Louis de Broglie in connection with the 70th birthday of Professor J.P. Terletsky

    This letter was included in the book, but the authorities of the USSR considered this letter undesirable for publication.


    Louis de Broil on official science: no research team has proposed anything new -

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.



  • My constant search for answers to numerous questions in physics led me to the idea that what Charles Coulomb called "the mass of electricity" is not "the mass of electrons" - until recently I thought about it that way, but it is a displaced mass - mass , which free electrons move - it is either the mass of photons or the mass of ether - as you like best - and both will be true ... Thus, the "electric current" is the mass of ether moving in the conductor ...


    And now it is clear why the problem is solved in this way, which is presented in the screenshot below in the video lecture of Pavel Victor - under IA, I1 и I3 - electric currents, one must understand the mass being moved, which is whyIA = I1 - I3 ...

    This is the law of conservation of mass in its purest form.


    Thus, one could write this formula like this -

    MA = M1 - M3, where M is the mass of the transported ether in the conductor and free electrons move this ether.


    What is the conclusion from this? The conclusion is as follows - the ammeter measures the magnetodynamic characteristics of the mass being transported by free electrons ... This is the difference from the physics that Maxwell invented and which became erroneous only because Maxwell made gross errors in his mathematical transformations.





    See my corrections in this screenshot.


  • How does this "mass transfer of ether by electrons" explain transmission lines carrying so much power? How does it explain AC current where electrons just jiggle back and forth and are not transferred?

    I think Maxwell's Equations explain these, gross errors and all.

  • How does this "mass transfer of ether by electrons" explain transmission lines carrying so much power? How does it explain AC current where electrons just jiggle back and forth and are not transferred?

    I think Maxwell's Equations explain these, gross errors and all.

    Many of you will be interested to know how Maxwell misled the Nobel laureate in physics - Enrique Fermi ... In 1949, Enrique Fermi could not have known that after 72 years the nuclear physicist Alexey Ivanovich Cherepanov would expose Maxwell and prove that on a proton and there are no "electric charges" on the electron. What's alarming? Below I will reveal the story ... And I want you to notice a strange situation - we are talking about 1949 - it was at this time, since 1947, that the electron's own magnetic moment was discovered ..., but at the same time we see that Fermi did not respond in any way in his studies to this discovery ... In his analysis and in his physical formulas, you will not see the presence of an electron's own magnetic moment ...



    At the same time Fermi got carried away with "particles" and "antiparticles" ... What should Fermi do after the discovery of the electron's own magnetic moment in 1947? He should have rethought the discovery in 1932 by the American scientist Anderson of the positron ... If Fermi had done this, he would have discovered the following - the deflection of the electron to a permanent magnet is due to the fact that the electron has its own magnetic field and its own magnetic poles ... the same electron that flew to the magnet with its opposite magnetic pole ... But Andersen is forgivable in 1932, since physicists did not know anything that in 1933 - exactly one year after Anderson's discovery, the proton's own magnetic moment would be discovered, and in 15 years, the electron's own magnetic moment will be discovered ...


    Using Pauli's hypothesis, Enrico Fermi developed the first beta decay theory in 1933. Interestingly, his work was refused to be published in the journal Nature, citing the excessive abstractness of the article. Fermi's theory is based on the use of a second quantization method, similar to that which had already been applied by that time for the processes of emission and absorption of photons. One of the ideas voiced in the work was also the statement that the particles emitted from the atom were not contained in it initially, but were born in the process of interaction.


    Let's figure it out ... 1933 ... Already Rutherford, Bohr, Pauli, Dirac, Anderson fell for Maxwell's "bait" ... They believed that there is an "electric charge" on the proton and electron ...


    Fermi took up the theory of beta decay, not knowing that in 14 years the electron's own magnetic moment would be discovered ... Not understanding the physics of neutron decay and not having sufficient knowledge about the neutron, he nevertheless decided to create a theory of beta decay ... ? I am alarmed, so physicists still use Fermi's nonsense ... None of Fermi's followers understands how deeply he was mistaken ...


    Fermi actually replaced physics with mathematics and used the method of "second quantization" ... In fact, he turned out to be the same mathematical magician as Maxwell ... Read Wikipedia -


    «Suppose that there is a classification of all possible states of each particle or quasiparticle in the system under consideration. Let's designate the particle states as 1, 2, 3,…. Then any possible state of the system is described by a set of numbers of particles (occupation numbers) in each of these states N1, N2, N3,…. The essence of the second quantization method is that instead of the wave functions of particles in the coordinate or momentum representation, wave functions are introduced in the representation of the occupation numbers of different states of one particle. The advantage of the second quantization method is that it allows you to uniformly describe systems with different numbers of particles


    (Note by A.I. Cherepanov - do you understand today, living in 2021, the full depth of Fermi's delusions in 1933 - 88 years ago? that there are no such systems in nature that Fermi imagined? do not have rotational motion around the nucleus of an atom, as Bohr and Fermi believed with him, that there are free electrons that are capable of creating clusters, due to their magnetic properties and due to their magnetic poles?),


    as with a finite fixed (in the problems of condensed matter physics ) and with a potentially infinite variable (in QFT problems). Transitions between different states (for example, from state k to state q) of one particle are described as a decrease in the occupation number corresponding to one wave function by one ( Nk Nk - 1), and an increase in the occupation number of another state by one ( Nq Nq + 1){\displaystyle (N_{q}\Rightarrow N_{q}+1)}. The probabilities of these processes depend not only on the elementary transition probability, but also on the occupation numbers involved in the process of states.»


    For me, this is the obvious nonsense of Enrico Fermi ...


    “In the summer of 1949, E. Fermi and his nineteen-year-old graduate student C. Young wrote an article that was directly called:“ Are mesons elementary particles? ” The authors began with the natural assumption that antinucleons exist in nature (by the way, the antiproton and antineutron will be discovered only a few years after the appearance of their paper).


    (Note by A.I. Cherepanov - with the antiproton the same story - the proton also has two magnetic poles, and therefore, if the proton flies in front, on which the proton has a north magnetic pole, then the proton deviates to the south magnetic pole of the magnet, and if the proton flies forward with its south magnetic pole, then the proton is deflected towards the north magnetic pole of the magnet.)


    Then they hypothesized that the pi-meson is simply a bound state of a nucleon and an antinucleon, and not a special elementary particle, as X. Yukawa thought, and tried to evaluate the main properties of this composite nuclear quantum. The rules for composing the observed pi-mesons can be traced using simple charge arithmetic: a positively charged pi-meson should consist of a proton and an antineutron, a negatively charged pi-meson should consist of a neutron and an antiproton, and a neutral pi-meson should consist of a mixture of proton-antiproton and neutron-antineutron pairs. ... In all cases, mesons have the correct values of electric charges, and their baryon charges are equal to zero.


    After the "strange" particles - ca-mesons and hyperons - were finally established as a special class of hadrons, it became clear that one nucleon could not be enough in constructing a composite model of particles. After all, the nucleon was an image of two baryons that did not have "strangeness" (proton and neutron), and from them it was impossible to construct, say, a "strange" ka-meson. Therefore, physicists had to attract the third fundamental particle - one of the "strange" mesons or hyperons. It was along this path that the creators of the first universal models of composite hadrons, the Soviet theoretician Academician M. Markov and the Japanese scientist S. Sakata, took.


    (Note by A.I. Cherepanov - it is easy to understand that both M. Markov and S. Sakata also "fell victim" to Maxwell's delusions ...)


    A somewhat more graphic model of S. Sakata is a direct development of the ideas of E. Fermi and C. Young. He chose the proton, neutron and lambda-hyperon as three fundamental particles and showed that, in principle, all the other particles of the hadron family could be built out of them. Pi-mesons were constructed in this scheme according to the same rules as in the Fermi-Yang model, and for "strange" mesons and hyperons, slightly more complicated rules of the same charge arithmetic were used (taking into account the "strangeness"). For example, a ka-meson with a negative electric charge and "strangeness" minus one can be constructed from a lambda hyperon (electric charge - zero, "strangeness" - minus one) and an antiproton (electric charge - minus one, "strangeness" - zero), and a negatively charged xi-minus hyperon with a "strangeness" equal to minus two is made up of two lambda hyperons and one antiproton. Just as a proton and a neutron represented different states of a nucleon, 3 particles: a proton, a neutron and a lambda-hyperon - had to represent 3 different states of some fundamental particle - the sakaton


    This is such nonsense of physicists ... Understand that the concept of "charge arithmetic", which came to us from Maxwell's manipulations, is the hardest virus in elementary particle physics ... All this "arithmetic" has nothing to do with elementary particle physics ...


    I do not want to belittle Fermi's contribution to the development of science ... Fermi simply could not have the knowledge that physicists have at their disposal today, and therefore his delusions are forgivable and I am not going to judge him very harshly, but I note that Fermi overlooked a lot and today it is not clear to me - did he do it by accident or on purpose?



    This figure schematically shows the decay of a neutron - Fermi did not have such a scheme ...


    On the left you can see the separation of an electron, which will certainly fly forward with the north magnetic pole ... And on the right, there is an option in which the electron is separated and flies forward with the south magnetic pole ... Neither Anderson nor Fermi could imagine this, and they could not. analyze as I do, since these physicists did not have enough knowledge ...


    Why do such options arise? If we consider the first option, then in the first option, another neutron of the atomic nucleus is located under the neutron, and in the second case, another neutron of the atomic nucleus is above the decaying neutron ... This is the logic of nature ... What forces tear the neutron into pieces in the ratio 1: 1836? These forces, in my opinion, can only be the forces of the secondary magnetic field, which are generated in the body of the neutron itself ...


    This is a hypothesis ... but it looks like the truth ... You have the right to doubt my correctness and offer your own models of this process ... As far as I know, no one has ever proposed anything like this before me ...


    Many of the modern physicists certainly see the mistakes of the 20th century physicists, but they are silent and do not want to “swim against the tide” ... Why do they do this? First of all, they think about their finances and do not want to lose their earnings because of the conflict with the officials who manage science and who finance it ... This is very bad, since the development of science suffers from this.


    I am an independent researcher and I have nothing to do with such officials, so I don't care what they think about my articles and my reasoning, which run counter to generally accepted dogmas ... I do not fall on my knees before the Nobel laureates and if I see that they are are right and that they are wrong, then I point out their mistakes ...


    Fermi did not have a scheme for beta decay - neutron decay, but I created such a scheme and substantiated it ... I showed that before decay a neutron must rotate ... I pointed to the source that makes the neutron rotate - these are photons ... This is my version ... But I have there is also a second version - the reason for the rotation of the neutron can also be the magnetic field of either the Earth or the Sun ... But no one knows what a "magnetic field" is ... This is paradoxical ...


    Below is the material on electron drift from Wikipedia. Ridiculous speed ... This fact alone should make you think that it is not electrons that are "electric current", but photons or ether, the mass of which moves at a speed close to the speed of light ... - that is why you observe how the light bulb instantly lights up from the switch, which is 100 meters from the light bulb ...




    Next, see the videos -



    Spark Discharge Phenomenon ... - феномен искрового разряда... - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Rvw8RMtn40


    Irregularity of the EMF ..;) - Неравномерность ЭМПоля..;) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e92p3djiPr4


    EMF of a magnet in a conductor ..)) - ЭДС магнита в проводнике..)) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAYrhz55AU4


    Below is a link to a video in which we clearly observe the magnetic properties of free electrons - it is thanks to them that the upper part of the top sticks to the spiral ...


    The Spinning Top Riddle 2 - Загадка волчка 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop


    In the experiment with a top, a demonstration of the effect of a sound wave takes place - this is a photon wave, which consists of groups of photons that have a mass ... Photon wave photons interact with free electrons and break the magnetic bond between the top and the spiral ... This is a complex process that I am not able to describe in in a nutshell ... - "Interaction of photons and free electrons" ...


    In this video, they alternately light up - either an incandescent lamp or a neon lamp ...


    Electromagnetic Induction - Электромагнитная индукция - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRDzxy4nFaU


    In all these videos, we record the "pumping of mass" - in the jargon of the old physicists, this pumping of "energy" is a very bad and incorrect expression of physicists who today use it in their speech - this is very bad ... It is correct to talk about "transfer of mass" ...


    Here is an example of how the mass is pumped from the "electrical network" through the adapter into the device that you are charging -


    Exploring Wireless Charging - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWEQhrjuSEU


    Demonstration of "ignition" of a neon lamp from a mechanical piezo lighter - you will be surprised, but this is also a demonstration of "pumping mass" –


    Piezo Lighter Neon Glow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtybTRxtteE



    And finally, the most impressive demonstration of how a mass gradient is created and then the mass is transmitted through one wire to a light bulb and in the form of a mass of photons this mass propagates in space -


    Demonstration of Transmitting Electricity over One Wire - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MgMhqy3SA0


    Transmitting Electricity Through One Thin Wire - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZUPx4C3QI4


    30 seconds - "cacher on the ignition coil" ...


    1 minute 13 seconds - "The wire comes to the ignition coil. On the left - he shows with his hand - everything is turned off. "


    1 minute 20 seconds - "indicates - this is the ignition coil. Where there is a "bolt" - a high-voltage line comes - "single-wire" ..., and a "grounding capacitance" is connected to the other - an aluminum wire - the system does not work without it ... "


    1 minute 57 seconds showed "grounding", i.e. uses the grounding provided in the standard electrical outlet in this room.


    2 minutes 10 seconds - "wire length - 10-12 meters."


    2 minutes 13 seconds - turns on "kacher" - jargon.


    2 minutes 16 seconds - "this lamp is turned on in series with this cacher."


    2 minutes 38 seconds - "shows a weak glow of a light bulb" ...


    3 minutes 00 seconds - "sparks from the container" ...


    3 minutes 24 seconds - "this is the grounding of the aluminum wire ..." the lamp starts to burn brighter ...


    Further, the experimenter demonstrates that the light on the receiver “dims” a little when the ground is connected to the aluminum wire ...


    He says - "When we connect the ground, then more power is released at the receiver, and the current consumption drops ..."