gio06 Verified User
  • Member since Oct 10th 2014

Posts by gio06

    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.

    Evidence for Aharonov-Bohm effect with magnetic field completely shielded from electron wave
    Evidence for the Aharonov-Bohm effect was obtained with magnetic fields shielded from the electron wave. A toroidal ferromagnet was covered with a…
    journals.aps.org

    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

    Misleading Concepts: Quarks


    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.

    THHuxleynew

    "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.

    "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]"


    Comments on "What the Electromagnetic Vector Potential Describes" by E. J. Konopinski
    The seminal paper on the meaning of the vector potential by E. J. Konopinski is revisited. The full significance of this work has not been generally recognized…
    arxiv.org

    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:

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330619569_Electron_Structure_Ultra-Dense_Hydrogen_and_Low_Energy_Nuclear_Reactions

    and more recently

    https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/q0333#t=aboutBook

    see also:

    https://vixra.org/abs/1910.0156

    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."


    Unravelling the potentials puzzle and corresponding case for the scalar longitudinal electrodynamic wave


    "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."


    Implications of Gauge-Free Extended Electrodynamics

    The assumptions behind the quark model


    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.

    Why Particle Physics is Stuck in a Dead End


    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.

    Alan Fletcher


    You might find this paper more approachable... http://commonsensescience.net/…icles/the_real_proton.pdf

    This interesting paper is cited in the "Proton and Occam's razor" article:

    "The advantages of a simple ring-shaped proton model were indeed pointed out by David L. Bergman in his paper "The Real Proton" [2]. This approach, while works well for muons, introduces unacceptably large errors if naively used for proton modeling. Firstly, the magnetic moment of such a simple model is equal to the nuclear magneton µN , while the experimental proton magnetic moment value is approximately 2.79 times larger. Secondly, as discussed in section 2.2, the proton's experimental radius value is 0.839 ± 0.007 fm, while the scaled positron model yields a 0.2103 fm Zitterbewegung radius."

    Quo vadis, particle physics?

    The particle zoo and the parallel to the Middle Ages