[General] Foundational questions Tension field stable particles
Wolfgang Baer
wolf at nascentinc.com
Thu Feb 22 20:04:33 PST 2018
Chandra;
Your two oil drop experiment is a terrific idea. Two identical currents
(charges) moving in parallel attract
and all we have to do is have one of the astronauts do a Millican oil
drop experiment in the space lab ,
but the we are moving at some 500km/sec through space that should be
enough to overcome Coulomb repulsion- my guess is we would see nothing
But why?
wolf
Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com
On 2/22/2018 1:06 PM, Chip Akins wrote:
>
> Hi Andre
>
> Yes. Exactly. Electrons have magnetic fields which are caused by
> their spin. This also causes the electron magnetic moment. But since
> the magnetic field falls off with distance much faster than the
> electric field, we sense the electric field for “stationary” electrons
> much more than the magnetic fields. But at close distances these
> fields have more force than the charge field.
>
> Chip
>
> *From:*General
> [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
> *On Behalf Of *André Michaud
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 22, 2018 2:45 PM
> *To:* general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
> *Subject:* Re: [General] Foundational questions Tension field stable
> particles
>
> To all.
>
> Just to ask a question.
>
> Nobody seems to be considering the "spin" of electron, nor associating
> it to the magnetic field.
>
> How could two electrons unite in covalent bound by antiparallel spin
> alignment to so easily form hydrogen molecules despite their identical
> electric charges that repell each other as a function of the inverse
> square Coulomb force, if their spin was not related to really existing
> magnetic fields that could associate in antiparallel spin alignment as
> a function of the inverse cube interaction law that was verified in
> the Kottler et al experiment?
> ---
> André Michaud
> GSJournal admin
> http://www.gsjournal.net/
> http://www.srpinc.org/
>
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 20:02:11 +0000, "Roychoudhuri, Chandra" wrote:
>
>
> Albrecht: Your point is well taken. Not being expert in magnetism, I
> need to spend more time on this issue.
>
> However, let me pose a question to think.
>
> If two electrons are trapped in two side by side but separate Millikan
> oil drops, the two electrons feel each other’s static E-field, but no
> magnetic field. If the oil-drop chamber was given a steady velocity,
> could Millikan have measured the presence of a magnetic field due to
> the moving electrons (“current”), which would have been dying out as
> the chamber moved further away? This experiment can be conceived in
> many different ways and can be executed. Hence, this is not a pure
> “Gedanken” experiment. I am sure, some equivalent experiment has been
> done by somebody. Send me the reference, if you can find one.
>
> Are two parallel current carrying conductors deflecting magnetic
> needles (undergraduate experiment) different from two independent
> electrons moving parallel to each other?
>
> I have just re-phrased Einstein’s example that you have given below.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Chandra.
>
> *From:*General
> [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Albrecht Giese
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 22, 2018 2:26 PM
> *To:* general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
> <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [General] Foundational questions Tension field stable
> particles
>
> Chandra,
>
> I like very much what you have written here. Particularly what you say
> about "time" which physically means oscillations. That is what one
> should keep in mind when thinking about relativity.
>
> However in one point I have to object. That is your judgement of the
> parameter µ. I think that it is a result from the historical fact that
> magnetism was detected long time earlier than electricity. So
> magnetism plays a great role in our view of physics which does not
> reflect its role there. We know since about 100 years that magnetism
> is not a primary phenomenon but an apparent effect, a side effect of
> the electric field which is caused by the finiteness of c. If c would
> be infinite there would not be any magnetism. This is given by the
> equation c^2 = (1/ϵµ)which you have mentioned. This equation should be
> better written as µ = (1/c^2 ϵ)to reflect this physical fact, the
> dependency of the magnetism on c.
>
> The symmetry between electricity and magnetism is suggested by
> Maxwell's equation. These equations are mathematically very elegant
> and well usable in practice. But they do not reflect the physical
> reality. Easiest visible is the fact that we have electrical monopoles
> but no magnetic monopoles. Einstein has described this fact by saying:
> Whenever an observer is in a magnetic field, he can find a motion
> state so that the magnetic field disappears. - This is as we know not
> possible for an electric field.
>
> I think that we have discussed this earlier. Do you remember?
>
> Albrecht
>
> Am 21.02.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Roychoudhuri, Chandra:
>
> /“We nee//d a geometry in which both space and time are curved
> back on themselves to provide a donut in which the forces Fem,
> Fgi, Fcm,Fmc are self contained eigen states at each action quanta. /
>
> /Does any of this suggest a tension field you might be thinking
> about??”/
>
> Yes, Wolf, we need to model mathematically the “twists and turns”
> of different intrinsic potential gradients embedded in CTF
> (Complex Tension Field) to create stationary self-looped
> oscillations (*/field-particles/*). Maxwell achieved that for the
> propagating linear excitations using his brilliant observations of
> using the double differentiation – giving us the EM wave equation.
> We need to find non-propagating (stationary – Newton’s first law)
> self-looped oscillations – the in-phase ones will be stable,
> others will “break apart” with different life-times depending upon
> how far they are from the in-phase closed-loop conditions. The
> successes of the mathematical oscillatory dynamic model could be
> judged by the number of predicted properties the theory can find
> for the */field-particles,/* which we have measured so far. The
> physical CTF must remain stationary holding 100% of the cosmic
> energy.
>
> However, I would not attempt to keep the primacy of Relativity by
> trying to keep the Space-Time 4-D concept intact. If we want to
> capture the ontological reality; we must imagine and visualize the
> potential */foundational/* physical process and represent that
> with a set of algebraic symbols and call them the primary
> parameters of “different grades”. During constructing mathematical
> theories, it is of prime importance to introduce consciously this
> concept of “primary”, vs. “secondary”, vs. “tertiary”, etc.,
> physical parameters related to any observable physical phenomenon.
> The physical parameter that dictates the core existence of an
> entity in nature should be considered as primary. However, it is
> not going to be easy because of the complexities in the different
> interaction processes – different parameters take key role in
> transferring the energy in different interactions. Besides, our
> ignorance is still significantly broad compared to the “validated”
> knowledge we have gathered about our universe. Here is a glaring
> example. νλ = c = (1/ϵµ). If I am doing atomic physics, ν is of
> primary importance because of the quantum resonance with ν and the
> QM energy exchange rule is “hν”. “λ” changes from medium to
> medium. If I am doing Astrophysics, ϵ and µ for free space, are of
> primary significance; even though people tend to use “c”, while
> missing out the fundamental roles of ϵ and µ as some of the core
> building blocks of the universe. Funny thing is that the ϵ and µ
> of free space were recognized well before Maxwell synthesized
> Electromagnetism.
>
> With this background, I want underscore that the “running time,
> “t” is of critical importance in our formulation of the dynamic
> universe. And, yet “t’ is not a directly measurable physical
> parameter of any object in this universe. What we measure is
> really the frequency, or its inverse, the oscillation periods of
> different physical oscillators in this universe. So, frequency can
> be dilated or contracted by controlling the ambient physical
> parameter of the environment that surrounds and INFLUENCES the
> oscillator. The running time cannot be dilated or contracted; even
> though Minkowsky introduced this “dilation” concept. This is the
> reason why I have been pushing for the introduction in physics
> thinking the Interaction Process Mapping Epistemology (IPM-E).
>
> Chandra.
>
> *From:*General
> [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]*On
> Behalf Of *Wolfgang Baer
> *Sent:* Monday, February 19, 2018 10:56 PM
> *To:* general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
> <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [General] Foundational questions Tension field
> stable particles
>
> Candra:
>
> Let’s consider your tension filed is a medium underlying the
> experience of space composed of charge and mass density spread out
> in the cross-section of a time loop.. Coordinate frame cells of
> /small enough/ sizes can be described by constant enough mass and
> charge densities in each cell. For small enough cells the mass and
> charge values concentrated at their centers may be used in stead
> of the densities. The resulting field of center values can take
> any pattern that satisfies the extended dAlambert principle.
> Besides the classic electro-magnetic Fem and gravito-inertial
> force Fgi I postulate forces tat hold charge and mass together
> Fcm, Fmc. This condition assures mass charge centers in each cell
> appear at locations of balanced forces. Each pattern which
> satisfies this condition represents a static state of the loop in
> which the patterns are fixed for the lifetime of the loop.
>
> *The Charge-Mass Separation Vector and Equilibrium States*
>
> The physical size of the space is its volume. The volume (Vol) of
> space is the sum of the infinitesimal volumes dVol of each of the
> cells composing that space “Vol = ∫_all space dVol”. These
> infinitesimal volumes are calculated from the mass-charge density
> extensions in each cell when viewed externally as shown in figure
> 4.3-3a . The physical volume depends upon the mass charge
> separation pattern of the equilibrium state the system being
> modeled exists in.
>
> In CAT the extension of a cell can be calculated as follows. In
> each cell the distance between the center of charge and mass is a
> vector d*ζ.* The projection of this vector onto the degrees of
> freedom directions available for the charge and mass to move in
> the generalized coordinate space allows us to expansion this
> vector as,
>
> Eq. 4.3-1 *dζ =* dζ_t *∙u_t * + dζ_x *∙u_x *+ dζ_y *∙u_y *+ dζ_z
> *∙u_z +…* dζ_f *∙u_f +…,*
>
> where the *u_f *’s are the unit vectors. A space limited to
> Cartesian 3-space is characterized by three x,y,z directions, but
> CAT models a generalized space that encompasses all sensor
> modalities not only the optical ones.
>
> The volume of a cell calculated from the diagonal expansion vector
> “*dζ”* by multiplying all non zero coefficients,
>
> Eq. 4.3-2 dVol = dζ_t *∙*dζ_x *∙*dζ_y *∙*dζ_z *∙…∙*dζ_f *∙… .*
>
> The shape of this volume is determined by the direction of the
> expansion vector which in turn is determined by the direction and
> strength of forces pulling the charge and mass apart. The
> direction of pull depends upon the number of dimensions available
> in the generalized coordinates of the media. The forces must be in
> equilibrium but exact equilibrium pattern depends upon which
> global loop equilibrium state “Ζ” the event being modeled is in.
>
> In the simplest equilibrium state the masses and charges are
> collocated. This implies the internal forward propagating in time
> forces F_cm ,F_mc , and backward propagating in time force F_mc
> *,F_cm * are zero, and if there are no internal force pulling the
> charges and masses together then sum of the remaining exterior
> gravito-electric forces pulling the charge and mass apart must
> separately be zero precisely at the collocation point. A trivial
> condition that satisfies these equations is when all forces are
> zero. In this case there is no action in the media and no action
> for expanding the coordinate frame defining a volume of space. We
> are back to a formless blob of zero volume, where all charges and
> masses are at the same point. This is the absolute ground state of
> material, one level of something above nothing. The big bang
> before the energy of action flow is added.
>
> To exemplify the methods we consider an equilibrium state of a
> single isolated cell whose only degree of freedom is the time
> direction. This means the volume in all space directions are
> infinitesimally small and the volume can be considered a single
> line of extension “ΔVol = ΔT_w = ∫dζ_t “ along the time direction
> as shown in the god’s eye perspective of figure 4.3-6. In this
> situation we can consider charges and masses to be point
> particles. Forces as well as action can only propagate along the
> material length of the line time line represented in space as
> “Qw”. We now list the sequence of changes that can propagate
> through around the equilibrium positions indicated by numbers in
> parenthesis.
>
> (1)The upper charge is pushed from its equilibrium position
> (filled icon) forward along the time line
>
> (2)It exerts a force “Fem” on the left charge pushing it forward
> while feeling a reaction force “Fem*” that retards it back to its
> equilibrium position
>
> (3)While the left charge is moved from equilibrium it exerts an
> internal “Fcm” force on the bottom mass while feeling a reaction
> force “Fcm*” which returns it to equilibrium.
>
> (4)While the bottom mass is moved from equilibrium it exerts a
> force “Fgi” on the right mass while feeling a reaction force
> “Fgi*” which returns it to equilibrium.
>
> (5)While the right mass is moved from equilibrium it exerts a
> force “Fmc” on the upper charge while feeling a reaction force
> “Fmc*” which returns it to equilibrium. We are now back to (1).
>
> If the system is isolated there is no dissipation into other
> degrees of freedom and the oscillation continues to move as a
> compression wave around the “Qw” time line circumference forever.
> The graph however is static and shows a fixed amount of action
> indicated by the shaded arrows around the time line. Motion in
> “block” models is produced by the velocity of the observer or
> model operator as he moves around the time line. From our god’s
> eye perspective an action density is permanently painted on the
> clock dial and thereby describes an total event. The last degree
> of freedom events are rather trivial
>
> We need a geometry in which both space and time are curved back on
> themselves to provide a donut in which the forces Fem, Fgi,
> Fcm,Fmc are self contained eigen states at each action quanta.
>
> Does any of this suggest a tension field you might be thinking about??
>
> Dr. Wolfgang Baer
>
> Research Director
>
> Nascent Systems Inc.
>
> tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
>
> E-mailwolf at NascentInc.com <mailto:wolf at NascentInc.com>
>
> On 1/24/2018 7:20 PM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra wrote:
>
> 1. Yes, I have submitted an essay. FQXi has not sent the
> approval link yet.
>
> 2. Replacement of our SPIE conf. Without a supporting
> infrastructure to replace SPIE-like support, it is very
> difficult to manage. I will try NSF during the last week of
> May. Do you want to start negotiating with some out-of-box
> European groups?
>
> 3. Re-starting afresh from the bottom up is the only way to
> start re-building a unified field theory. It is futile to
> force-fit whole bunch of different theories that were
> structured differently at different states of human cultural
> epoch.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Jan 24, 2018, at 6:08 PM, Wolfgang Baer
> <wolf at nascentinc.com <mailto:wolf at nascentinc.com>> wrote:
>
> Chandra:
>
> Just rereading your 2015 paper "Urgency of evolution..."
>
> I love the sentiment " This is a good time to start
> iteratively re-evaluating and restructuring all the
> foundational postulates behind all the working theories"
>
> Did you write a paper for FQXi?
>
> I sent one in https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3043
>
> Is there any chance to get a replacement for the SPIE
> conference, one that would expand the questions
>
> beyond the nature of light?
>
> Wolf
>
> --
>
> Dr. Wolfgang Baer
>
> Research Director
>
> Nascent Systems Inc.
>
> tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
>
> E-mailwolf at NascentInc.com <mailto:wolf at NascentInc.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the
> Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
> chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu
> <mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu>
> <a
> href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/chandra.roychoudhuri%40uconn.edu?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
> Click here to unsubscribe
> </a>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List atWolf at nascentinc.com <mailto:Wolf at nascentinc.com>
>
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
> <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>>
>
> Click here to unsubscribe
>
> </a>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List atphys at a-giese.de <mailto:phys at a-giese.de>
>
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
> <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>>
>
> Click here to unsubscribe
>
> </a>
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of
> Light and Particles General Discussion List at srp2 at srpinc.org
> <mailto:srp2 at srpinc.org>
>
> Click here to unsubscribe
> <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/srp2%40srpinc.org?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
> Click here to unsubscribe
> </a>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20180222/d91908da/attachment.html>
More information about the General
mailing list