There are a lot of equations in the application
3) rotM= -∂E/∂t,
Before you write down fantastic equations you should at least define the meaning of the letters you use.
And may be think about why E should change for neutral matter...
Then you should also explain the physical meaning of e.g. rot(M) etc. and always keep in mind that your equations should work here down on earth.
Display More3) rotM= -∂E/∂t,
Before you write down fantastic equations you should at least define the meaning of the letters you use.
And may be think about why E should change for neutral matter...
Then you should also explain the physical meaning of e.g. rot(M) etc. and always keep in mind that your equations should work here down on earth.
You are in a hurry to criticize and deny. First try to understand, everything is explained there.
everything is explained there.
not quite everything...
3) rotM= -∂E/∂t,
4) rotE=j+1/c2∙∂M/∂t, ???...
from Google
"
About 0 results (0.17 seconds)
Did you mean: rotMG= -∂E/∂t,
No results containing all your search terms were found.
Your search - rotM= -∂E/∂t, - did not match any documents..."
anything to do with Rodriguez?
Rodrigues' rotation formula - Wikipedia
3D...4D 6D framework?
What you do not understand does not need to be declared non-existent!
It's too bad Richard Fynman didn't adapt that point of veiw on on that fateful day in November of 1968. Had he done so an explosion would not have occurred and an engineer would not have died, and history would be different.
Display Morenot quite everything...
3) rotM= -∂E/∂t,
4) rotE=j+1/c2∙∂M/∂t, ???...
from Google
"
About 0 results (0.17 seconds)
Did you mean: rotMG= -∂E/∂t,
No results containing all your search terms were found.
Your search - rotM= -∂E/∂t, - did not match any documents..."
anything to do with Rodriguez?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodrigues%27_rotation_formula
3D...4D 6D framework?
Basic ideas in simple terms (sorry for repeating myself):
1) Our World is absolutely non-mechanical!
2) The movement of matter occurs as material-neutrino induction (formal analogy with electromagnetism), as a spherical drain-source with the Planck time frequency,
3) Formulas describe this process in 6-dimensional space-time (3 spaces, 3 times) in the LT (mass-second) dimensional system, where there is no gravitational constant.
4) As for the critical experiment (in fact, we need to repeat Faraday’s experiment, but at a different qualitative fundamental level): to set fermion-baryon matter in motion, it is necessary to influence it with a moving neutrino field!
3) rotM= -∂E/∂t,
4) rotE=j+1/c2∙∂M/∂t, ???...
Our World is absolutely non-mechanical!
Please fill in the gaps..
Handwaving does not explain"RotM" or"everything"
Please fill in the gaps..
Handwaving does not explain"RotM" or"everything"
Take your time please! If you are interested in this, then carefully read my article and I will answer all your specific questions.
I think Wyttenbach should find a good mathematician to review his work. He doesn't seem to understand that Maxwell's Equations don't involve point charges. All the functions there are well behaved. I view his rotation in 6D as being curl like, and as such question wether one can go directly from a magnetic field to charge. Since his 6D theory must be consistent with Maxwell's Equations when projected to 4D it must have a divergence type operator. He doesn't seem to understand that the divergence giving zero is just as important as non zero. The current density J from Maxwell's Equations has a zero divergence. What that means is if you place that current on a round ball it must form a closed loop. A current leaving the ball and going to infinity doesn't happen. Those current loops Wyttenbach uses to develop his theory, from a physical stand point, also must have zero divergence. So the divergence function is really in his theory from the beginning.
everything is explained there.
hen carefully read my article
RotM was not explained...
RotM was not explained...
I'm a bad mathematician, but if everything else is normal, I'll try to explain this equation.
I call on strong mathematicians to join in and work together.
This equation in differential form describes the process of volumetric spherical material-neutrino-energy induction (by formal analogy with Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction), when a change in the intensity of the neutrino-energy field generates a volumetric spherical baryon material field (not a vortex one like Maxwell’s),
where the sign "rot" ("rotor") denotes a spherical drain-source,
M - material field intensity,
E - neutrino field strength in energy equivalent.
He doesn't seem to understand that the divergence giving zero is just as important as non zero. The current density J from Maxwell's Equations has a zero divergence.
All EM flux loops are closed, thus by induction divergence is always 0. There is no need to find an additional prove.
I always explain to the standard model church followers that the 4 potential fails for particles and hence renormalization is impossible. Because the electron/proton are not point sources and far more important the rot operator is not local! charge occurs at the rim of the rot area! Every child knows that EM flux lines cannot pass through a charge. Only brain dead mathematicians try this miracle.
One more thing: If the current density from Maxwells (exactly Farraday) equations would have 0 divergence we would live in a dark world...
The induction law gives j=const*dphi/dt (phi EM flux) You can transform this "t" also into space coordinates for a rotating body.
Then it (simplified) becomes j=dphii/dwi.
Wyttenbach claims to have a theory that creates a charge (density?) from a magnetic field. The magnetic field has zero divergence, but the charge creates electric fields that have non zero divergence, a miraculous result.
Maxwell's Equations have failed to provide a solution for the structure of the photon. If Wyttenbach came find such a solution using his theory, his Nobel Prize can be assured.
The magnetic field has zero divergence, but the charge creates electric fields that have non zero divergence, a miraculous result.
If you would fully understand the Maxwell equation then we could exclude miracles. Any change in flux/area leads to charge not current as most misunderstand because of sloppy notation.
So the only thing you must find is a flux topology that leads to a constant change in flux. This only works in higher dimensions as the flux must be self enclosing. Of course the CT works fine if you make the proper extension as in SOP.
Theory Nobels are only given to people with a large brown tongue that respect all the errors made over the past 100 years and accept the SM holy bible. All theory Nobels of the last 50 years have been awarded for crap science. So one really should think whether one goes down 10 levels to be named together with the worst cheaters of the last 100 years.
A charge cluster is electrons held together as a cluster. The obvious objection is why would electrons be held together since they are negatively charge and should repel each other. Yet, they exist and have been photographed. After years of study Ken Shoulder express amazement of these objects which he called EVs.
“This is a very complex process; it is a wonder that anyone has figured out anything about it, even if it has taken over 80 years... And then a miracle happens. Somehow, out of this mess an EV emerges. If there was ever an example of how order is created out of chaos, this is it. I have not been privy to the finest details of this birth because it is a deep dark secret, veiled by a high density of particles moving like mad hornets around a despoiled nest. What I have seen, by observing from the outside with an electron camera, is an EV emerging from the plasma cloud.”
Electrical potential is simple to calculate. As the number of electrons in a cluster increases, the potential on negative test charge increase. If the cluster is big enough the potential would be large enough to convert to kinetic energy large enough to overcome the coulomb barrier.
Hence, if one can explain the transfer of kinetic energy to the fusion process and how a charge cluster forms, one may have a mathematically simple theory for LENR. That is what I intend to do in the thread Electrogravity (electron-gravity) as a cause of nuclear reactions. - Physics - LENR Forum (lenr-forum.com)
The obvious objection is why would electrons be held together since they are negatively charge and should repel each other. Yet, they exist and have been photographed. After years of study Ken Shoulder express amazement of these objects which he called EVs.
I already explained it once or twice. First real ball lightening has been produce by a Brazil researcher just by luck. An electric arc travelled over silicon dust along a window and bang! as sphere flew away. So the center of this sphere have been strongly positive silicon atoms. All Evos have atomic centers! I never did hear that one could produce them under vacuum....
Nice finding 
I just wanted to share an interesting article I came across about fusion. According to the report, RocketStar, a rocket company, has discovered that a fusion reaction is possible at the nozzle of a spacecraft. This type of fusion can be referred to as "semi-hot" fusion, which suggests that fusion reactions do not necessarily require high temperatures to overcome the Colombo barrier. I think this discovery could potentially provide indirect evidence for LENRs.
RocketStar Announces Successful Demonstration of Fusion-Enhanced Pulsed Plasma Electric Propulsion
I think Wyttenbach should find a good mathematician to review his work. He doesn't seem to understand that Maxwell's Equations don't involve point charges. All the functions there are well behaved. I view his rotation in 6D as being curl like, and as such question wether one can go directly from a magnetic field to charge. Since his 6D theory must be consistent with Maxwell's Equations when projected to 4D it must have a divergence type operator. He doesn't seem to understand that the divergence giving zero is just as important as non zero. The current density J from Maxwell's Equations has a zero divergence. What that means is if you place that current on a round ball it must form a closed loop. A current leaving the ball and going to infinity doesn't happen. Those current loops Wyttenbach uses to develop his theory, from a physical stand point, also must have zero divergence. So the divergence function is really in his theory from the beginning.
I think the science community would find Wyttenbach's work more interesting is he showed that he understood string theory by comparing and contrasting his ideas with the very many similar that derive from string theory, to take just one tiny example from quite some time ago:
Comparing and contrasting requires the author to review the comparator with sympathetic but critical insight. Basically - you need to understand it first - even if it is wrong!
Electrical potential is simple to calculate. As the number of electrons in a cluster increases, the potential on negative test charge increase. If the cluster is big enough the potential would be large enough to convert to kinetic energy large enough to overcome the coulomb barrier.
In an oscillating plasma you need to consider electromagnetic interactions, where you must model not just electric field, but magnetic field, and also QED effects. That is not so simple.
There are (many) theoretical models for self-stable plasma balls and rings:
In an oscillating plasma you need to consider electromagnetic interactions, where you must model not just electric field, but magnetic field, and also QED effects. That is not so simple.
There are (many) theoretical models for self-stable plasma balls and rings:
Thank for your interest. A detailed description will appear in the other thread in due time.
