Jefimenko

Discussion in 'Physics' started by BR-549, Oct 10, 2014.

  1. BR-549

    Thread Starter Well-Known Member

    Sep 22, 2013
    2,004
    394
    nsaspook, I posted this to get your attention. I didn’t want to hijack that thread. I went to your link and then reviewed the material.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefimenko's_equations#Discussion

    The c2 formula at the bottom of explanation is progress and welcome to see. We are starting to see this more now. This shows balance between the electric and magnetic.

    But he thinks that this balance shows that there can be no causation between electric and magnetic. This is a mistake. The magnetic is created from the electric. It always follows by 90 degrees. This is the cause of perpendicularity. This all happens when charge reaches the speed of light and turns into matter.

    I also reviewed his link and found he resides in my home town. I knew the halls of the old university well. In elementary school I sold critters to the biology students there.
     
  2. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,910
    2,174
    What he shows (using retarded potentials) is that both fields change instantly so Causality of one to the other is impossible if the speed of EM waves/fields are limited to c across space. So what we see in our changing frame of reference of space to it are changing views of the isomorphic electric and magnetic fields of that electromagnetic (4-dimensional tensor) entity that doesn't change only our view of it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2014
  3. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,910
    2,174
    To go a little deeper into the rabbit hole you can imagine that the EM force has more dimensions than can be seen in our universe so what we see and measure are only the 3D properties similar to what you see when we project higher dimension image matrix data into a 3D representation on a 2D computer screen. If we use a matrix functions on the data the 2D view from our fixed point of reference shows different parts of the same object.

    Single rotation
    [​IMG]
    Double rotation
    [​IMG]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesseract
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-dimensional_space

    Maxwell's original papers used four-dimensional Quaternion
    geometric operators instead of the familiar Vector analysis form that's commonly seen today because he believed in the physical reality of fields but he also believed in material ether so you have to be careful when reading them.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bivector#Maxwell.27s_equations

    I'm nowhere near an expert in this (I studied computer graphics image matrix rotation functions once so the subject is faintly familiar) but the basic operations are simple to understand.

    All about Quaterions
    http://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.4440.pdf
     
  4. BR-549

    Thread Starter Well-Known Member

    Sep 22, 2013
    2,004
    394
    Where is any evidence of extra dimensions other than in the mind? All properties work at all scales. The effects are different because of scale, but properties and law are the same. There is no need for extra dimensions. The universe is simple and efficient.
    Extra dimensions were invented because modern theory does not agree with reality. It never has.
    Modern science says the universe works on the balance between energy and mass. But when they do a mass inventory, they come up super duper short. Do these educated people say.......hey....we must be really wrong about this. Heavens no....they say the mass is there, we are just not able to see or even detect most of the mass and energy in the universe. Because their theory can not be wrong.
    How long must this go on?

    Charge. All energy is charge. All matter is charge. There is no other material and no other energy. It's all charge.
     
  5. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,910
    2,174
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2014
  6. BR-549

    Thread Starter Well-Known Member

    Sep 22, 2013
    2,004
    394
    I believe those two links are gimmicks and distractions from true science. Theoretical math has done a true dis-service to physics for many years. That didn't come out right. Physicists have used theoretical math for many years cover up and sustain their failed theories. Theoretical math is worthwhile and should continue, but they should stay away from physicists. It confuses them and shields them from their responsibility.

    A degree of freedom is a rotation or an arc. A sphere has an infinite amount of them. That alone should close the discussion on them.
    If you look up degree of freedom....you will see many believe each one is a dimension.
    A location can not have a velocity factor, location does not move! But for the theories and equations to work..............they have to say that dimensions and rate of time changes. And with those conditions....any theory, action or law can be proven by any select-able cause. It’s a good job if you can get one.

    Let’s stick to reality. We have 3 dimensions and we have time. Time is only a rate of movement measurement. That’s all it is. It is not magic. If you take time away......you still have 3 dimensions.
    There is no such thing as space-time. That is an invention. Relativity is an invention. Quantum physics is an invention. Dark matter is an invention. Big bang is an invention. There are many more with thought up math.

    These inventions have great popularity right now. They have a life of there own. But as our tech increases and we go down in scale, reality will have to be confronted. I hope I am around long enough to see it.

    And I just might see it. As more tech comes on line and more scientist are trying to apply these theories......something fundamentally wrong is being realized. And the physicists are scrambling. Even some of the high brow and long hairs are rethinking some long thought of assumptions. It's a pleasure to see.

    They are going to fire cern up and make some more fragments. Instead of wasting all this time and money.....they should cut one electron........and see what the charge does. It's things like this we should be studying. And I don't mean by busting it up in pieces. I mean taking the charge out of confinement. One snip. The whole charge. This is what science should be doing. If we can define and control charge........we have everything.
     
  7. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,910
    2,174
    mattbullet and wayneh like this.