Frank, sadly your paper goes over my head. If you are willing to explain your statement: Relativistic properties are due to the phase angle of the magnetic field.
Just to quickly reiterate my point of view... (before I rant more about it anyway) Protons and electrons posses a radial electric field (although I am uncertain we really appreciate what topology field a single electron possesses). This electric field does not bend as we think of electric and magnetic fields doing, rather superimposed electric fields sum to zero from vector addition in a charge neutral object. As electrons move through a wire, it undergoes length contraction, actually Lorentz contraction was initially an (A)Ether theory and I am personally entierly clear about the objective reality of the aether. The electrons electric field (that fills perhaps the entire universe?) undergoes length contraction propagating at the speed of light. Understanding how this creates the forces expected from parallel current carrying conductors is not very challenging and is conventionally accepted and explained. https://www.mtholyoke.edu/courses/tdray/phys310/electromag.pdf Meanwhile the electric induction from a time varying current is in my understanding due to bending of electric field lines due to acceleration similar to the effect from moving a hose side to side as water comes out, the induction created by such agrees with the expected induction along a wire. The point is that no magnetic field is ever needed to derive the expected force, I am not aware of any particle that directly responds to a magnetic field, electrons feel a very real electric force at 90 degrees to a magnetic field, and magnetic fields are only ever created by electric fields, in short it is always electric and the magnetic is just a very useful tool to conceptualize a complex relativistic electric field. When you consider such a squashed field it would create a type of electric field, this is termed a motional E field, although that can also be established from looking at the magnetic loops around a wire as moving with the electron drift. Actually this is then getting close to the Homopolar generator, in which a current moves through a loop, and movement in a circle parallel to the current generates (or alters) the strength of the motional E-field. What is this generator telling us? It is telling us that if we move so as to increase the velocity of the electrons, even though the protons create an opposing E field that is enhanced the electrons velocity being somewhat greater faces a greater degree of amplification. To give examples, if the electrons were drifting at 1 meter a second, and you begin moving in the opposite direction to 1 meter a second then you have doubled the velocity of the moving electrons, if this were to create more than double the EMF from these electrons then there would be a net gain as the unpaired protonic field (if you get my drift :) would be at 1/meter a second. If I am to state with reasonable confidence that the electric field intensity of a magnetic field is effected by both the drift velocity and any velocity along the wire then a Homopolar Generator (without ferromagnetic components) should have a greater voltage output everything being equal if the electrons in the electromagnet have a high drift velocity! The better question is if this can be expected to translate to more force with electromagnets (or simply 2 current carrying wires), but this is more complex as we must consider forces on the electrons and protons of each wire under multiple different frames (or, is it absolute motion relative to the aether). Also is time varying induction effected? Well if that is a result of the bending of electric field lines (which is I believe accepted in theory about antennas) then faster moving electrons would lead to a such more directional and steeper gradient. Is there any reason to think that electromagnetism which is created by relativistic effects is so largely unaffected by the velocity by which it is formed? I can't do the equations myself, but electrodynamics being explained by SR and such transformations being accepted makes me wonder what this model says about velocity. Does it predict a difference between a high speed flow of 1 coulomb of electrons a second past a point, or a low speed flow of 1 Coulomb of electrons past a point per second for in for instance the case of a homopolar generator? And if not how can such a generator be understood to work at all given this model? Definitely not sure this area has had sufficient scrutiny. John On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 12:47 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Here is the invite in case any of you want to write a paper. Jones it > time for you to get published. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: gar <[email protected]> > To: gar <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 12:21 pm > Subject: Reminder - SPSISW 2013 - Call for Abstracts > > All, > > Reminder that the initial call for abstracts is to end on 1 November. > We thank those that have already submitted theirs. > > However, many more are needed for us to move forward after 1 November. > > Please pass around. > > With Regards, > > SPSISW 2013 Organizing Committee > > > Tracks at: http://www.ias-spes.org/SPSISW2013/PDFs/SPSIS_Tracks.pdf > > Subject Areas at: > http://www.ias-spes.org/SPSISW2013/PDFs/SPSIS_Subject_Areas.pdf > > > > > >
