Does the Ampere need to be redefined?

[madhatter]

I should quickly clarify, the use of m^2 vs m^3 is because amperage is a time dependent function of the volume charge. this gets complex but it's quantum physics at play, the charge volume is bound within an arbitrary space. the current density is a surface plane within that space for a given point in time. So if we move the current to a volume density then the charge needs to move up to a hyper-dimensional plane. Now look what happens, hyperdimensional charge is time invariant and can exhibit 'quantum tunneling' FTL etc...

given that we can not access or measure beyond our 4D universe, much like a 2D plane has no ability to conceptualize a 3D object moving thru it, units and measurements are based on what measure and how accurate we get. the gap between classical and quantum is HUGE, I'll say that you've stumbled into the disconnects on the way down the rabbit hole.

want some real fun... dig deep into displacement current theory

[garrettm4]

Maxwell's Potentials

madMAx4,

I think you are on to something here, and I commend you for thinking outside the box - a rare thing to see now ‘a days!

The elegance of fluid mechanics applied to electrodynamic analysis is quite refreshing but not necessarily a new idea. It's my understanding that Maxwell also thought of the aether as a fluid. Tesla, as boguslaw mentioned, thought that the aether was a fluid as well. I don't feel that these (and other) savants were materially wrong in their conceptions of electromagnetism. If anything their strong beliefs corroborate this conception.

From my meager and superficial understanding of "Maxwell's Theory" (which when first proposed was considered as merely another "paper theory" - up until Hertz's half loop resonator experiments), Maxwell believed that the "potentials" (electric potential and magnetic vector potential) were primary and causative of all electrodynamic effects. The fields that your average electrical engineer use are only a secondary effect caused by the potentials interactions. This view seems to be closely aligned to yours from what I have read.

As a side note, here's an interesting and possibly relevant opinion of Maxwell's theory that I found some time ago:

"Maxwell places as primary something he calls "electromagnetic momentum" (because its time derivative is force). Electric and magnetic fields are secondary. His friend, Michael Faraday, who originated the field concept as an alternative to the then popular "action at a distance," called it the "electrotonic state." It is, Faraday said, changes in the electrotonic state surrounding magnets that cause magnetic induction. Maxwell formalized Faraday's field concept. The electrotonic state is today called the magnetic vector potential, usually introduced only in graduate level EM courses as a side-effect of a cute little vector identity (primacy of the vector potential is returning to popularity in physics).

Maxwell viewed magnetic vector potential as primary (presumably why he gave it the symbol A) and magnetic field as secondary (presumably why he gave it the symbol B). However, by making the vector (and scalar) potentials primary, Maxwell's equations became complicated. And so, very few took the time to learn them. -- JC Rautio, 2008"

Then you have Heaviside, another savant of the black arts of electromagnetism, who spent his entire life (since the age of 24 onwards) studying Maxwell's "Theory" (or as Heaviside says “gospel”):

“I browsed through it and I was astonished! I read the preface and the last chapter, and several bits here and there; I saw that it was great, greater and greatest… I was determined to master the book and set to work.”

Whom, after all his studying of Maxwell's work, tells you that the "potentials" of Maxwell are unnecessary and serve to confuse and confound! "I never made any progress until I threw all the potentials overboard." Independently of Heaviside, Heinrich Hertz - the "savior" of Maxwell's paper theory, also tacitly discarded Maxwell's potentials, both giants came to the same conclusion - that the potentials are unnecessary (for describing transverse wave propagation). Though such they both independently developed the "duplex" form of "Maxwell's equations" utilizing E, H, D and B - sometimes called the Maxwell-Hertz or Maxwell-Heaviside equations. Heaviside also condemns the quaternion of Hamilton as one of the most useless and overly complicated mathematical constructs ever used in electromagnetism! Of which, Maxwell used liberally throughout his work, along with other notations thankfully. It is my understanding that Heaviside places the E & H fields and not the potentials as primary and causative of electromagnetic interactions or at least that the potentials are not needed when one deals with transverse electric waves. As for the longitudinal electric waves, the potentials may actually be needed to describe the operation of its propagation. This is hinted to by Tom Bearden and his work. Interestingly, Heaviside says that Maxwell’s theory pertains only to transverse waves, but then other people have said that longitudinal waves are also possible with his theory, notably Helmholtz (with his variant of Maxwell's theory) and ET Whittaker.

Below is a short excerpt that Heaviside gave on Maxwell's potentials:





I have a few questions for you, if you don't mind.

I have very limited knowledge of the potentials as given by Maxwell, how do you describe them and what is their significance? From my limited work with electromagnetic theory, I was under the impression that the field lines of Faraday were what constituted both the fields and the potentials. Also, I am unsure what “divergence”, “curl” and “gradient” actually mean in the physical “everyday” sense. Do these operations apply to the field lines changing them from a “potential” to a “field” or vice versa?

What do you think of Heaviside and his spin on Maxwell's electromagnetism?

What’s your opinion of Tom Bearden’s take on Maxwell’s potentials, if you have read his work?

Sorry for all the questions, but I have never found a simple, comprehensible, not make me fall asleep description of the potentials. So I thought I would ask you as it seems you have a good grasp of their significance and mathematical manipulation.

Keep up the good work,

Garrett

[madMAx4]

garrettm4,

what you are saying isn't completely new to me, however you gave a good overview of EM history to clear things up i had flowing around in my mind from reading bit and pieces here and there.

Now on to your questions:

I have very limited knowledge of the potentials as given by Maxwell, how do you describe them and what is their significance?

I would say the potentials are the actual state of the vacuum, which means their significance is 100% because with them you can explain everything else.
If you give me a bucket full of potentials and some equations to go along i can calculate everything what is happening in that bucket from that time on.

From my limited work with electromagnetic theory, I was under the impression that the field lines of Faraday were what constituted both the fields and the potentials. Also, I am unsure what “divergence”, “curl” and “gradient” actually mean in the physical “everyday” sense. Do these operations apply to the field lines changing them from a “potential” to a “field” or vice versa?

First let me say the magnetic and electric field are something principally different.
The electric field describes what will happen if you let time go on, however the magnetic field is in fact also a potential and thus indifferent to time.

Let me try to explain it using you driving a car as analogy. First and obvious the magnetic vector potential A would be your velocity and the electric field E your acceleration.
Now it get's a little tricky, the electric potential Phi would be how much gas is left in your tank to accelerate some more.
And finally the magnetic field describes how fast you are going in a circle.

Now this analogy is not 100% correct because with the vacuum there is an equation relating the change of gas in your tank to your velocity.
But you see how the magnetic field is in fact a potential and the electric field descibes what will happen to the velocity if you let time go on.

Regarding “divergence”, “curl” and “gradient” i suggest you spend some time on the corresponding wikipedia pages, they have some good pictures, they will tell you more than any amount of my words.

What do you think of Heaviside and his spin on Maxwell's electromagnetism?

Well he tried to make it simpler for the folks but he only made it much more difficult for any physicist trying to make sense of it all.
But in the end i think he just didnt get what Maxwell was trying to say and based on that made modifications which resulted in much worse.
Use this equation for example:

It shows how confused Heaviside must have been. If Maxwell said the vacuum was like a fluid then the above equation is complete nonsense. Let's formulate it in terms of words:
A force (E) equals (=) the reason of force (grad Phi) minus the effect of the force (dA/dt).
This is wrong on so many levels i cant even explain it. A force cannot be defined on its own effect. This is like saying the force with which you are pushing a car depends on how fast it will accelerate because of the force. It makes no sense, cause and effect need to be seperated into their own equations, like i have shown in previous posts.

What’s your opinion of Tom Bearden’s take on Maxwell’s potentials, if you have read his work?

I'm familiar with his work. He also says the potentials are primary and that you can freely provoke an A potential by changing a charge distribution in time.
However he only tries to capture the longitudinal A waves or scalar A waves which will require very high voltages to produce any significant power output. I think this is also what tesla was doing most of the time.

Now my idea was/is to use that freely provoked A potential to produce a magnetic field which will be amplified by a soft magnetic material like ferrite, mu-metal or metglas.

Basically what i did was i enclosed a ferrite rod with copper cables and wound a normal coil around it:

The cables are all connected to each other and i drive them with ~100ns 200V pulses which will induce a oscillating magnetic field which will be captured by the secondary coil.
The reason why this will create a magnetic field is because the aether is accelerated into the center of the rod where it will collide and begin to rotate into a vortex forming a magnetic field.

Now the important thing here is that the input and output are not coupled, the input signal does not show an copy of the output signal. So you can amplify the magnetic field without putting in the energy required to do that, the ferrite core or any other core does it for you.
I dont have any COP measurements yet as i'm still trying different things and seeing how it affects the operation. But one thing is clear, there is no correlation between input and output.