So you are postulating that:
 "What mainstream calls a magnetic field is really a 'relativistically 
distorted electric field'."
 
Okay, that's a good start...
But then you say,
"...ignoring the fact that I have already essentially proven that magnetic 
fields are
non-existant..."
 
I'm afraid that simply asserting that you've "proven" something doesn't fly on 
this forum...
What you have done is postulated an alternative explanation, and that is what I 
was looking for, and
is certainly out the box thinking, however, it is NOT PROOF of what you are 
postulating.  Can you
provide some specific examples with calculations???  Are there any examples 
where your theoretical
framework explains aspects of electromagnetics that current theory does not???
-Mark


  _____  

From: John Berry [mailto:aethe...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2011 3:00 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Why are the electric and magnetic fields perpendicular?



Ok, as you might guess from my email address I very much disagree that the 
aether was proven false,
nothing of the sort.  Only a static Aether was found to have evidence against 
it.


Secondly if you still want to know why Electric and Magnetic fields are 
perpendicular in an EM wave
etc... then you are ignoring the fact that I have already essentially proven 
that magnetic fields
are non-existant and only a convenient was to understand how relativistically 
distorted electric
fields manifest.

So it is like asking why I am perpendicular to that dark guy lying on the floor 
where I am standing
by a light at night, how come we are always perpendicular when I am standing on 
the floor.

If I have told you that it just looks like a man but it is just my shadow do 
you really need to keep
on being curious when you now understand precisely how it comes to be that way?

I can show you every example where magnetic forces arise are due to electric 
fields/forces that are
distorted by movement that creates precisely the same force we expect and get 
magnetically.
Quite a co-incidence.

If you choose to ignore the simple logical truth that makes sense then it is 
likely you are really
just practicing mysticism, and IMO there are plenty of real mysteries to work 
out, no need to create
them where none exists.

Electrons spin and orbit, Nucleus's spin, and distort their electric fields 
doing so and should
create the forces that we experience with permanent magnets.
Wires attract and repel in theory as experienced.

 

On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 1:26 AM, Mauro Lacy <ma...@lacy.com.ar> wrote:


On 05/27/2011 07:50 PM, Charles Hope wrote:


I suppose we are all somewhere on the conservative/crank spectrum. I think 
physics is a difficult
place for novel thought because the current models are so excellent. Yet 
mysteries do remain.
However I didn't know that Cooper pairs was one of them.


But I see the difficulty in our communication. I take epistemic issue with the 
idea that there can
be a mathematical model without true understanding. If we have a model, it 
behooves us to twist our
minds into understanding that! There is no understanding but the use of a valid 
model.
  



Exactly. And once you understood it, you stick with it because "it just works". 
You almost never
question it at the philosophical or epistemological level. During most of the 
last century, there
was a lot of confusion, introduced by Relativity theory, about the concept of 
time, by example.

The case of the aether is also paradigmatic: when the results of some 
experiments were not the
expected ones, the aether was disregarded, and relativity theories appeared. 
Nobody, or almost
nobody, took the time to reflect at the philosophical level on what had 
happened, and as a
consequence, a lot of confusion ensued. What had happened was that the 
mechanical model of the
aether was found to be false by experiment. As a replacement, purely 
mathematical models were
quickly introduced, which agreed with the experiments. But those models were 
now devoid of physical
meaning. Just the general idea of "relativity", and of "all is relative" popped 
up, and stuck like a
grand revelation. That happened during most of the last century, and is still 
happening.
That philosophical thinking is still lacking, and it's coming from outsiders 
like me, because "real
scientists" are so busy trying to understand the math first, and to apply for 
grants and publish
later, that they don't have time to really reflect and think.

Philosophy was disregarded(a big mistake) in the name of results and predictive 
power. The other
consequence of the increasing complexity and the quest for results was 
super-specialization. You
have to be an expert to be able to talk with authority and understanding about 
something. And when
you finally study to be an expert in one field, you cannot talk about anything 
else! Moreover: you
mostly lost the ability to relate and correlate knowledge from different fields 
of knowledge.

That is an unfortunate state of affairs, and we can say that a great part of 
the decadence of the
western culture we experience today is related to our urge for control only 
from the mechanistic
perspective.

Regards,
Mauro




Reply via email to