 |
Administrators :saucer, Iseason, us2u | |
 |
Forum Physiks Causali |
Not logged | Login
|
|
Online:There are 5 online. Click here to see more | |
Register | 
Profile | 
Private messages | 
Search | 
Online |  Help
| Create a free blog | ||
 | ||
|  |  |
Email Notification
Warn moderators| Author : | Topic: Electromagnetism | Bottom |
| saucer admin Posts : 673 A Good Tautology is Hard to Find!  |
|
| saucer admin Posts : 673 A Good Tautology is Hard to Find! |
|
| saucer admin Posts : 673 A Good Tautology is Hard to Find! |
-  Plasma-lamp- --Last edited by saucer on 2007-04-20 20:08:20 -- |
| saucer admin Posts : 673 A Good Tautology is Hard to Find! |
-  - |
| saucer admin Posts : 673 A Good Tautology is Hard to Find! |
- http://www.mariner.connectfree.co.uk/html/e_m_inertia.html Electrostatic inertia - problem in Relativity! Can we apply the maths to the electron on the assumption that the electron is a pure radial electric field? Because of its spherical symmetry the electron can be dealt with by three orthogonal vectors - one along the direction of motion, and the other two normal to the direction of motion, with the rest energy of the electric equally distributed between them. The 1/3 superscrïpt rd along the direction of motion induces no magnetic energy, while the other two vector directions induce 1/3 superscrïpt rd of v2/c exp2 each, so the total induced energy is 2/3 superscrïpt rd of v2/c exp2. Now the actual kinetic energy of an electron at Newtonian speeds is one half of v2/c2, so this result is 4/3 superscrïpt rd of what we might expect. This is famous as the “4/3 Problem”. In 1922 Enrico Fermi, in the paper “Il Nuovo Cimento”, derived this result relativistically (the maths here is the Classical solution), but showed nothing new - after all the relativistic approach must reduce to the Classical approach at sub-relativistic speeds. Feynman’s “Lectures on Physics” showed how this 4/3 result violated relativity. The conclusion often made is that the electron could not be purely electromagnetic. However the calculation was made for a radial electrostatic field (albeit on the working assumption that the electron could be modelled by this) and hence the proper conclusion is that a radial electrostatic field violates relativity. By geometrical inference all electrostatic field structures violate relativity. We cannot suspect the laws of induction, which are well-proven - electric motors work because induced fields containing energy, nor can we suspect the laws of relativity, which are again well proven, but there is little doubt the two are in conflict. There is no mechanism for an electrostatic field to propagate like an electromagnetic wave yet it has an effect at a distance. Either the electrostatic field must convert to an electromagnetic wave and then magically convert back when it sees another electrostatic field it can interact with, or else no energy is involved in its propagation implying that the speed of propagation of an electrostatic wave is either zero or infinite - the only possible solutions for this condition for any propagating field. The former is obviously disallowed by experiment, but no-one has ever worked out the speed of propagation of an elctrostatic wave from first principles as has been done for eletromagnetic waves to check the latter. Bear in mind that electromagnetic waves propagate by a falling magnetic field creating a rising electric field, and vice-versa, while moving electrostatic fields simply generate magnetic fields in situ. A electric dipole generates electrostatic and electromagnetic fields; near the dipole the electrostatic fields dominate, but the field falls off at 1/r exp3 while the electromagnetic fields fall off only as 1/r exp2, so more then a wavelength or more away from the aerial the electromagnetic waves dominate. There is an conflict between the scientists who work with relativistic particles and photons, and those who work with motion-induced induction, and neither group is interested in resolving it.- --Last edited by saucer on 2007-06-01 09:01:45 -- |
| saucer admin Posts : 673 A Good Tautology is Hard to Find! |
|
| | |
Get a free forum!
AceBoard Free Forum v 5.3
Download Premium Web Templates!