can photons behave like electrons in AC current Chapt15.34 explaining Superconductivity from Maxwell Equations #1179 New Physics #1299 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed
Jan 27, 2013 6:09 AM
> Of the top ten toughest challenges of science that I > have had to > wrestle with, superconductivity is certainly among > those top ten.
How about getting a moron like you to learn anything asshole? Isn't that a challenge?
Morover: what makes you think anyone cares to know what a nobody like you has had to wrestle with? > > The last few days, I have hunted down some facts.
I'll give you one, asshole: you're not welcome in here.
> I wanted to see how close the displacement current > magnitude was to > the resistivity of silver and mercury. I was playing > the idea that > zero resistance for mercury at 4 K is due to applied > current + self > induced current from the temperature gradient. > > A typical displacement current is about 130mA as seen > from a problem > set in Halliday & Resnick, page > 837, of Fundamentals of Physics, 1988. > > I looked up what Onnes in 1911 used as a current for > his > superconductivity of mercury and he used a 0.6 A > magnetic induced > current. > > I did some checking around and that superconductivity > for zero > resistance must be DC current and cannot be AC > current. Again, my > complaint is that I cannot solve superconductivity, > unless I know the > proper truthful facts. So much of the literature is > obfuscation of the > true properties of superconductivity. > > So I am dismissing the idea that I need an extra > current, a self > induced current involving dB/dK. > > What I end up with is where I started with the Ohm's > law and a Malus > law replacement of the R term in Ohm's law. > > In other words, I now am more confident than before > that this formula > solves superconductivity: > > V = i*R (Ohm's law > > I' = I" cos^2(A) (Malus law) > > Replacing R with Malus law and we have: > > V = i * (I" cos^2(A)) > > Now, let me play some more around the concept of > voltage. > > If we look up AC current and find out the difference > between it and DC > current, we find it simply means the charge carriers > move back and > forth in AC, and move in only forward direction in > DC. Now that > understanding gives us a major clue as to what the > role of photons are > in electricity. The photons are what signals all the > charge carriers > in the wire circuit to move forward and then to move > backward. It must > be photons because the speed of AC and DC are the > same speed of > electricity-- the speed of light. > > So the photons are responsible for the AC current as > the messengers. > And thus Malus law applies. And thus, since the Malus > law applies, the > Malus law causes some photons to be lost and thus > resistivity occurs. > If the wire circuit is polarized with a cosine of 0 > degrees, then all > the photons get through to tell the electrons to move > and thus 0 > resistance. > > So a superconductor is a polarizer of 0 degrees. > > Now let me also remark about Voltage in physics. > Because if the > photons are the messengers that tell electrons to > move forward or move > backwards at the speed of light, then AC current is > pretty much what > voltage is. For if a electron at the junction of the > AC circuit, the > end of the circuit, then the electron is at one > moment in time moving > forward and then the next moment moving backwards is > the same as emf, > or electromotive force or voltage. > > And that idea agrees with Ohm's law: > > V= i*R > for we have this: > > speed of light = electron speed * resistance > > or we have this: > > speed of light/ speed of electron = resistance > > And we all know that electrons can travel up to 90% > or even 99% of the > speed of light (never at 100% but very close to it). > > So what I am discovering is that voltage is really a > term that means > photons moving at the speed of light that creates a > potential > difference in the electric circuit. > > In summary, I am back with the idea that > superconductivity is merely > the Malus law in the Ohm's law and that > superconductivity is really a > very simple > and not complex phenomenon. > > -- > > Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from > search-engine- > bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a > excellent, simple and > fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as > seen here: > > http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986 > > Archimedes Plutonium > http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium > whole entire Universe is just one big atom > where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies