EVO and four dimensional electromagnetic analytic functions:
Waves of Charge. Four Dimensional Analytic Functions.
EVO and four dimensional electromagnetic analytic functions:
Waves of Charge. Four Dimensional Analytic Functions.
Do the De Broglie postulates fit too into Occam's Razor ?
Yes, the energy-mass m of the charged elementary particles is equal to the Zitterbewegung angular speed ω in natural units. This value is also equal to the product of the elementary charge e and the module of the vector potential A and to the curvature of the Zitterbewegung trajectory 1/r_{e}
ħ = c = 1
m = ω = eA = 1/r_{e}
The charge's vector potential module consequently is a measurable value being simply the value of mass/charge ratio.
This is in perfect agreement with Prof. Kanarev concept of "axiom of Unity":
"Реальность Единства пространства, материи и времени очевидна. Поэтому распространение знаний, базирующихся на фундаменте аксиомы Единства, также неотвратимо."
This is one of those philosophical arguments that does not alter predictions - the different formulations of the theory are provably identical.
Aharonov-Bohm effect is not a "philosophical argument" but an experimental evidence that shows the physical reality of the electromagnetic potentials. You cannot explain it using only E/B fields.
Display MoreFor classic 3D field everything is clear und you can use A for large sets of field sources.
But the whole field sucks since Dirac, who claimed that also mass is a flat field what is bare nonsense. Annihilation of electron/positron lead to 3 photons not 2 as some fringe physics folks once invented without any proof.
All serious experiments refute every single fake claim made by the standard model church members. There is no separate strong force its just the magnetic force as Schaefer could prove with deep scattering experiments. Quarks are only a resonance of hadronic mass and nobody ever could separate them. E=mc^{2} just work for classic EM fields as already Poincaré did show long before Einstein. Only a dilettante like Dirac could use E=mc^{2} as field equivalent mass energy...physicist doing experiments know that real mass never acts field like and you first have to add energy to crack the mass...
The standard model is a scary theater for deranged minds.
Definitely there are no doubts that Standard Model is deeply flawed and unrealistic. It's an excellent example of Occam's Razor principle violation.
Also the mainstream Dirac equation interpretation is not acceptable.
It's quite easy to find the electromagnetic origin of the inertial mass (i.e. Newton law F=ma) using the vector potential, but as far as I know nobody has proposed a pure electromagnetic origin of inertia using only E/B fields.
Electromagnetic potentials are more fundamental than EM fields
"Although use of the vector and scalar potentials (A, phi) in place of the EM fields (E, B ) is
considered simply to be an option in classical theory, in quantum theory they are understood
to be more fundamental than the derivative electric and magnetic fields (E, B ) which are the
‘coin of the realm’ in ordinary classical theory. In classical electrodynamics the choice of
which variable pair to use is arbitrary, and the overall resulting predictions in terms of
observables are indistinguishable. Nonetheless, cogent arguments can be made (and is made
here) that the (A, phi) approach is to be preferred, even in classical EM theory, because of
increased transparency in application."
Electromagnetic potentials basis for energy density and power flux
"Alas new theories need to predict (quantitatively) the direct experimental evidence of internal structure:"
There is a premise here that is not explicitly stated, that so called "Deep inelastic scattering" observations can be used as an efficient tool for understanding the internal structure of the proton. It's like to try to understand the structure of a glass vessel using gun shots and analyzing the behavior of the fragments.
Your idea that charge can move at light speed is just a mathematical fantasy as we know no charge exists without a carrier and all carriers have mass hence you always violate some relativistic models...
no charge exists without a carrier? Really? This is nothing more than a cognitive bias.
I think that no carrier exists without a charge and an associated magnetic flux...
I repeat again: learn your own lesson:
"So forget your education as it will only blind and disturb you."
An important point of Prof. Kanarev work that is strictly related to Occam's Razor principle:
ПРЕДИСЛОВИЕ
Уважаемые искатели научной истины!
История науки свидетельствует: процесс распространения знаний, связанных с реальностью, неотвратим. Никакие запреты и инквизиторские костры не способны остановить этот процесс. И наоборот, знания, не имеющие связи с реальностью, неотвратимо отправляются в небытие.
Реальность Единства пространства, материи и времени очевидна. Поэтому распространение знаний, базирующихся на фундаменте аксиомы Единства, также неотвратимо.
FOREWORD
Dear seekers of scientific truth! The history of science shows that the process of spreading knowledge related to reality is inevitable. No prohibitions and inquisitorial bonfires can stop this process. And vice versa, knowledge that has no connection with reality inevitably goes into non-existence.
The reality of the Unity of space, matter and time is obvious. Therefore, the spread of knowledge based on the foundation of the axiom of Unity is also inevitable.
You first have to accept that fields always need sources! Then you can try to include the magnetic moment field into your 4-potential... Good luck.
Or first you have to accept that sources need fields?
All fields need sources!
Ok, now try to write a formal definition of "sources"!
Display MoreOne more time you write down a standard model sermon that only indicates that you never throughly studied physics...
The 4 potential is only a mathematical unification for simplifying engineering work. It has nothing to do with the real fields of real field sources (e/p). This is a common beginners error.
The proton/electron produces 3 different fields where the 4 potential only covers 2 of them. The strongest field of the 3 the magnetic moment field is ignored as it can not be included due to a different origin!
If you like to learn what other crap the standard model folks invented here my compilation "basics of physics"
"The 4 potential is only a mathematical unification for simplifying engineering work"
Just a serious mistake widely present in mainstream literature. You should learn your own lesson:
"So forget your education as it will only blind and disturb you."
----------
"Konopinski’s analysis demonstrates the fallacy of the generally held view that the vector potential has no physical meaning in classical electromagnetism. His paper follows up on Feynman’s complaint that a bias exists regarding the vector potential [2]"
Thank you. If proven true, do you believe your theory will lead to a better understanding of LENR? I ask because the authors are affiliated with the EU Horizon funded CleanHME Project. Also, a brief summary of the theory is on the CleanHME website. In fact, they have this to say about it:
A possible definitive confirmation of the theory implies that the experimental parameters of the stable elementary particles derive from electric currents generated by charges moving at the speed of light, respecting Maxwell-Proca, Planck and the Aharonov-Bohm equations. The curvature of the path is strictly related to the relativistic mass value and to the local value of the electromagnetic potentials. A possible connection with Ultradense Hydrogen and LENR has been presented few years ago:
and more recently
https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/q0333#t=aboutBook
see also:
Great! after 4 years we know the complete proton structure thanks to the SO(4) physics model we fall back to the stone age and a 3D torus structure.
Are you aware that the real proton an all mass formed by protons show a 3D uniform behavior that is impossible with a flat 3 rotation torus? Further E/B field mass/energies are never the same. This is just true for EM field calculations where we do not postulate which field acts.
In reality there exists no possible 3D B/E field configuration that can reproduce the E field from the B field and the other way round. Key is to understand that B field flux can be contained by charge, where it in the electron case it is only 1183eV needed (for charge mass).
You are considering here E/B fields as fundamental physical entities, while they are simply the space-time derivatives of the electromagnetic four potential.
---------------
"As a matter of fact, nowhere in the pantheon of electrodynamic protocols that shall be cited, has the impact of the curl-free vector potential most clearly been shown to be felt, than with the Maxwell-Lodge effect. So much so, that when the significance of this phenomenon is duly appreciated by mainstream physics, it might represent the underpinnings to finally elevate the vector potential to its natural birthright physical status in CED; for this was the mantle it was originally intended to take on according to the worldviews of Maxwell and Faraday in the 19 th century."
"This work shows incompleteness and inconsistency in classical electrodynamics (CED) and quantum electrodynamics (QED). Extended electrodynamics (EED) resolves these issues. Stueckelberg-Horwitz-Piron (SHP) theory is equivalent to EED with important implications."
The assumptions behind the quark model
In few words , what is the guiding line ?
The main guide line is the use of Occam's Razor as a fundamental epistemological tool.
--------------------------
The trapped light ie towards an electromagnetic theory of elementary particles
Didn't know they were in this field. Even ultra-dense hydrogen, huh?...
If you prefer, you could call it hydrino:
So, maybe anyone here have any ideas to modify the fuel or smth, maybe conditions?...
This Airbus patent application suggests TiO2 as a preferred catalyst
"According to one embodiment of the device according to the invention, the catalyst coating has a granular and regular structure. Preferably, it is a titanium oxide."