Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: falling back to the Maxwell Equations Chapt13.4091 Review of DTW
theory #1066 New Physics #1186 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Replies: 0  

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List  
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com

Posts: 9,375
Registered: 3/31/08
falling back to the Maxwell Equations Chapt13.4091 Review of DTW
theory #1066 New Physics #1186 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Posted: Dec 6, 2012 3:42 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply


Alright, I was in deep trouble there, but had a way out. In New
Physics, there is always just one way out of trouble and that is the
Maxwell Equations.
If there is nothing else that I teach the reader, is that
physics is Maxwell Equations, Maxwell Equations and more Maxwell
Equations.

I too, myself was like the Old Physicists with Old Physics where I
lashed onto a delight of mine and then sought to saddle physics just
because I loved that delight of mine. I remember in the 1990s that I
loved the "spring", so I thence made some physics centered around the
spring concept. Old Physicists loved the "string" and they thence made
a lot of physics with fake string theory. Some Old Physicists loved
the elevator, and thence made gravity a elevator analogy. Some Old
Physicists loved the "triune algebra" called quarks and proceeded to
fill Old Physics with the fake quark theory. Some Old Physicists loved
the idea of walking through mud and collecting on their boots the mud
as the Higgs boson theory. But all of these loves are not actually
true physics. They are pet cranks, cranked into a crackpot physics.

The only thing in physics that can be cranked and be true is the
Maxwell Equations.

What I had to do, when in trouble was impose the Maxwell Equations
upon the transverse wave itself with magnetic monopoles.

A single transverse wave is pictured as this with its E and B:

E
|
|___ B

While a double transverse wave is pictured this with its E and M's:

E-
M-__|__M+
|
E+

Where the E's and M's form the vertices of a square,
and partake in destructive-interference.

Now Faraday's law is a moving bar magnet into a
closed loop wire causes the electrons in the wire to
flow as a electric current.

If we consider in the double transverse wave as the E field, since it
is destructive-interference it is a full loop of wire and we consider
the B- with B+ or the B's taken singularly as a bar magnet, what we
have is the Faraday law upon the double transverse wave itself.

So that the Faraday law applies to the double transverse wave as the
most simple application possible for the Faraday law. That the E- and E
+ forms a closed loop wire and the M- is the bar magnet, (or both
M's). And so the Double Transverse Wave is a Faraday law in action.

What that means is that the Double Transverse Wave has 4 poles and the
Faraday law still upholds
when only 3 poles are used.

Now can the Faraday law uphold on just 2 poles such as the single-
transverse-wave?

M-
|
|___ M+

or on

M-
|
|
M+

The answer is no because the M's do not form a
closed loop whereas 3 poles form a closed loop and a bar magnet.

Now it may turn out that Old Physics had it correct as to the spin of
the neutrino, electron, proton being 1/2 whereas the spin of the
photon was 1, in that in
Double Transverse Wave theory, 2 of the 4 poles form a closed loop
leaving 1 pole vacant of any M
is a 1/2 spin whereas if all 4 poles have occupancy
they form two closed loops and spin 1.

It may be the case that the photon is special over the neutrino,
electron and proton by having all 4 poles occupied as spin 1 and speed
of light. Whereas particles of spin 1/2 have 1/2 loop open and speed
that is less than the speed of light and thus carry rest-mass. So that
the Faraday law governs spin, speed, rest-mass.

Instead of calling this chapter the summary, let me retitle it as the
Review since I need to re work the ideas.

Google's New-Newsgroups censors AP posts and halted a proper
archiving of author, but Drexel's Math Forum does not and my posts?in
archive form is 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



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.