Reconstructing EM & Energy Theory from scratch

[Tehnoman]

[..]Aharonov–Bohm effect, [..]

You mean this one? Wiki

[..]is a quantum mechanical phenomenon[..]

Then here is really nothing to do, it has been already explained by quantum physics. I remember discussions about this in our lectures on quantum physics.

Or you want to destroy quantum physics too?

[Agent.A]

1. i dont want to destroy anything.

2. yes, i meant that one.

3. i asked you to explain it and not give me quotes from wiki or telling me that it was already explained.

[Tehnoman]

1. i dont want to destroy anything.[..]

Really? As I can recall, you want to reconstruct EM theory from scratch, basically it means to destroy Maxwell equations.

[..]
3. i asked you to explain it and not give me quotes from wiki or telling me that it was already explained.[..]

If you want me to give my understanding, the experiment can be explained with fact, that in nature "magnetic induction vector potential" is a real parameter (similar as "force", for example), which interacts with particle phase. Therefore one can observe deviations in interference result.

But for real - quantum physics is a whole different story than EM. There is a successful theory, which describe this effect. I can live with that.

[Agent.A]

1. are you serious ?

theories are flying here as popcorn in a hot pot and you pick me for suggesting the idea of reconstruction ?
i dont propose any theory, just reexamination of DATA and following a different path ( if its there ) and you nit pick me ?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME ?!!

you hold all current theories as de facto the holy truth !?

have you ever replicated any experiment based on tesla, bedini, joule thief variants, SEC, hot/cold plasma cells, whatever,
that suggest that current theories are not sufficient to explain their DATA ?

open google and write -
"maxwell equations" contradictions - and you get 18200 results to pick from.
"relativity theory" contradictions - and you get 19300 results to pick from
"quantum mechanics" contradictions - and you get 186000 results to pick from.
"quantum physics" contradictions - and you get 930000 results to pick from.

you say that there may be something missing from current science, well, come on,
stop the bull**** and start looking for the missing bits and pieces instead of arguing with me about the right meaning in the dictionary of what i basically mean.

follow the points that i'll post and show me ( or anyone ) what that DATA means and check with me/us if there can be any different views of that data.



2. as to your 'understanding', well, my dear Tehnoman ...

Incompatibility of the Aharonov-Bohm effect with the quantum laws

ScienceDirect - Advances in Imaging and Electron Physics : The Aharonov-Bohm effect—A second opinion

Aharonov-Bohm effect in a 2-dimensional harmonic oscillator

Feynman’s Relativistic Electrodynamics Paradox and the Aharonov-Bohm Effect

Eliyahu Comay - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Aharonov-Bohm effect as a classical electromagnetic effect using electromagnetic potentials

A PROPOSED EXPERIMENT OF DIRECT DETECTING OF THE VECTOR POTENTIAL WITHIN CLASSICAL ELECTRODYNAMICS

Healey on the Aharonov-Bohm Effect

now, do tell me what you 'understand', because i, personally, dont 'understand'. ( well, actually, i do, but it depends on which 'professor' of physics i talk with )

[Tehnoman]

1. are you serious ?

theories are flying here as popcorn in a hot pot and you pick me for suggesting the idea of reconstruction ?
i dont propose any theory, just reexamination of DATA and following a different path ( if its there ) and you nit pick me ?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME ?!!
[..]

I believe you are overreacting. And basically yeah, suggestion is a sign of path one wishes to take himself. If you suggest reconstructing EM theory from scratch, I do say that you want to destroy Maxwell equations. Without any jokes.

Why such strong word - "destroy"? Ok, maybe it is an exaggeration from my point of view. But it does represent my thoughts about this reconstruction from scratch, it can be treated literary as destruction of Maxwell equations.

[..]
you hold all current theories as de facto the holy truth !?

have you ever replicated any experiment based on tesla, bedini, joule thief variants, SEC, hot/cold plasma cells, whatever,
that suggest that current theories are not sufficient to explain their DATA ?
[..]

No, holy truth is a very bad word. I would say - rock solid basis. You can ask - why? The answer is quite around us all. Look at industry. Airplanes are flying, cars are driving, laptops are working. All this is created using conventional science, engineers learn Maxwell equations and take EM force into account in high tech areas, like airplane or rocket industry. Electric motors.

Millions of people have been relaying on these theories. Therefore I am quite confident that they work and should not be neglected. Reconstructing from scratch is exactly neglecting all industry, that is around us.

About experiments - do want to create some of them, but what is the point of recreating an experiment, If it is so complicated, that there is almost no possible way to make a conclusion in reasonable time whether or not the result fits into existing theories? I have started an Meyl proposed experiment (that should be analogue to Tesla experiments at smaller voltage scale), but despite it seemed quite simple, there are damn many details that has to be taken into account.

[..]
open google and write -
"maxwell equations" contradictions - and you get 18200 results to pick from.
"relativity theory" contradictions - and you get 19300 results to pick from
"quantum mechanics" contradictions - and you get 186000 results to pick from.
"quantum physics" contradictions - and you get 930000 results to pick from.

you say that there may be something missing from current science, well, come on,
stop the bull**** and start looking for the missing bits and pieces instead of arguing with me about the right meaning in the dictionary of what i basically mean.
[..]

Congratulations, you posted a whole bunch of information (interesting indeed), that I can not in reasonable time successfully process with my present knowledge.

I want to piece together missing bits, but to do that, I have to see a bit, that I can chew. I am constantly searching for it. Member Harvey posted an absolutely chewable suggestion.

Analytic description in simplest case about magnet is already finished. I hope to digitize it soon.

[..]
2. as to your 'understanding', well, my dear Tehnoman ...

Incompatibility of the Aharonov-Bohm effect with the quantum laws

ScienceDirect - Advances in Imaging and Electron Physics : The Aharonov-Bohm effect—A second opinion

Aharonov-Bohm effect in a 2-dimensional harmonic oscillator

Feynman’s Relativistic Electrodynamics Paradox and the Aharonov-Bohm Effect

Eliyahu Comay - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Aharonov-Bohm effect as a classical electromagnetic effect using electromagnetic potentials

A PROPOSED EXPERIMENT OF DIRECT DETECTING OF THE VECTOR POTENTIAL WITHIN CLASSICAL ELECTRODYNAMICS

Healey on the Aharonov-Bohm Effect

now, do tell me what you 'understand', because i, personally, dont 'understand'. ( well, actually, i do, but it depends on which 'professor' of physics i talk with )

I don't pretend to understand everything. And I could not accomplish such task (if I would try to do so) in my lifetime.

But there is absolutely no right to anyone to say that this or that is wrong, If the one does not understand it. And the same is true for a defense side - If one does not understand a theory, the one can not defend it.

As for me, I do not deem myself to be worth to defend QPh description of specific physical phenomena. If someone want to talk about the same Aharonov–Bohm effect, he must find a guy, which is strong in QPh theories.

What corresponds to classical EM theories, I like to work in these and I see myself to be quite educated in them. But the problem is that even if I find a case, which contradicts classical EM theory, I must take data and go to colleague, which works with quantum theories and discuss it with him.

Nevertheless there is known general conclusions from Quantum physics, create a device, that sends signal faster than light, or extract energy from vacuum, and you are on the fly. But such experiments I can not find in any of your links.

[Agent.A]

WOW, what do we have here ?

"classical electromagnetism" contradictions

oh my, google is indeed my friend.

About experiments - do want to create some of them, but what is the point of recreating an experiment, If it is so complicated, that there is almost no possible way to make a conclusion in reasonable time whether or not the result fits into existing theories? I have started an Meyl proposed experiment (that should be analogue to Tesla experiments at smaller voltage scale), but despite it seemed quite simple, there are damn many details that has to be taken into account.

oky doky, you criticise every alternative theory and suggestions but you dont experiment due to the excuse of :
1. whats the point ?
2. its complicated ?
3. bla ?

come on, this is bull****.
did you ever, E-V-E-R, tried to see and study the origin of current models and the experiments they are based on ? did you do any replication of old experiments ?

Nevertheless there is known general conclusions from Quantum physics, create a device, that sends signal faster than light, or extract energy from vacuum, and you are on the fly. But such experiments I can not find in any of your links.

damn, im simply amazed by you, not in a good way.

Speed of light broken with basic lab kit

Light that travels... faster than light!

Quantum strangeness breaks the light barrier

Alexander V. Chernetsky - Self-Generating Discharge Plasmatron

[Agent.A]

here ya go, more and more

Real polarizers and faster than light signaling

Device Makes Radio Waves Travel Faster Than Light

Ball-Lightning ZPE-Generator Video

VORTEX DYNAMICS AND ANOMALOUS EFFECTS

and more ... and more ... and more ... and more ...
Tehnoman, spread your wings and fly, research, study, experiment, dude, seriously.

i dont claim that any of these is any sort of proof to anything, for me it is DATA that suggests that REALITY may be different then the image that is in your head.

[mk1]

@all

I got a feeling Maxwell was right , in fact i know he was lets get the original equation out and build a model on a computer , it got simplified for bad reasons (no one could calculate it then ) .

Now my eye opening moment

I believe i have found something special

Google Sky

It raps this tread together quite nicely .

Go to the address select the right zoom scale , but it on the first step of the ladder then click on infrared ...

And see this ... How dose that fit in your theory

[Tehnoman]

WOW, what do we have here ?

"classical electromagnetism" contradictions

oh my, google is indeed my friend.
[..]

Nice one, took first link in google results, shows discussion with misunderstanding of classical laws. Did not read any further.

[..]
oky doky, you criticise every alternative theory and suggestions but you dont experiment due to the excuse of :
1. whats the point ?
2. its complicated ?
3. bla ?

come on, this is bull****.
[..]

First, I did not criticize any alternative theory, only the ones I find that contradicts real life experimental results and yes, excludes Maxwell equations. Second, you took some words out of my text and made a fool out of it.

[..]
did you ever, E-V-E-R, tried to see and study the origin of current models and the experiments they are based on ? did you do any replication of old experiments ?[..]

The origin of theories I have learned together with classical science. Basically all experiments in our laboratory is old and only a proof of concept. So, yes. Of course, I can not pretend, that I have done all experiments that has been carried out in history. And no one can pretend to achieve that.

[..]
damn, im simply amazed by you, not in a good way.
[..]

Likewise.

As far as I can see, author does not understand my point of view and will resist to any explanations. Taking out words out of complete construction and forming an interpretation different than original thought is not productive.

Thereby I will stop posting to this tread.

[Agent.A]

Tehnoman, i understand your point of view very well.
as to my 'resistance' to any explanations ... come on, grow up.

hay, wait a sec, what about the links i posted ?

do you have any thoughts about them too ? you did not address any of them ( besides the first ), why is that ? they are not scientific enough ?
those are not crackpots who say they made FTL or ZPE experiments, those are main science people with hard DATA.

please do give answer to that and how it fits ( or not ) your point of view.

[Harvey]

@all

I got a feeling Maxwell was right , in fact i know he was lets get the original equation out and build a model on a computer , it got simplified for bad reasons (no one could calculate it then ) .

Now my eye opening moment

I believe i have found something special

Google Sky

It raps this tread together quite nicely .

Go to the address select the right zoom scale , but it on the first step of the ladder then click on infrared ...

And see this ... How dose that fit in your theory

A picture is worth a thousand words

I read your post (via email) , clicked the link and promptly pressed the "Right" button rather than the left, up, or down in the zoom interface and then zoomed in on the Galaxy there and clicked Infrared. Not finding anything spectacular, I came to the forum and found your attachment. Then I realized that your use of the word "Right" meant "Correct"

I should have finished my coffee first - those buttons I was clicking are not zoom buttons

But your attachment really is what you wanted us to see.

Zooming the slider to 3 lines above the bottom or lower wraps the image around on itself so you have a repeating pattern. Because the image is a 2D image of a spherical perspective you have a sinus border similar to those maps you see of the globe all flattened out.

If you were to construct the data into a 3D hologram you would have a good representation of what it looks like peering through the IR of our galaxy edge on.

Regarding Maxwell, Oliver Heaviside did a good job in helping the world to understand Maxwell's equations. Heaviside had no degree and did not have much more than basic algebra and trigonometry from high school. But he taught himself Calculus and presented the equations in a manner that he could describe easily. He is one of the few uncredentialed persons whose work is recognized my mainstream academia.

Even so, Science has reached boundaries with his equations where a 'Little Salt and Pepper" as Prof. Lewin of MIT would call it, must be added in to properly align the equations with quantum observations.

These adjustments are not new to science - It was well known in Einsteins day that the orbit of Mercury did not obey Newtons laws of gravity. Only after the application of relativity did the formula's work. Likewise, in our day, our GPS satellites do not work correctly unless adjusted for relativistic changes.

It would be very nice if a unified mathematical model could be formulated that brought all of these variations into fluid agreement. I know the missing piece and have dropped clues to it, but I am not sure the world is quite ready for the reality it presents. Springing the truth at the wrong time can have devistating results. If I were to approach all the three year old children I see and explain to them that Santa Claus is not real, the results would be less than favorable I assure you.

Here is a new thing you have not read before but the world will throw the idea aside because it is not real to them. There is a fifth state of matter beyond the plasma. In this state material composed of 2D surfaces that occupy a 3D volume (like a 2 sphere for instance) collapse into a deflated surface like taking the air out of a ball and flattening it. The surface is still 2D, but space is no longer displaced. Since the space is no longer displaced, it no longer has gravity. This is one of the differences between matter and energy, the displacement of space - energy does not displace space, but matter does. The greater the displacement, the greater the mass. Like an air bubble in the ocean where there is localized pressure around it that is greater than at a distance, so it is with spatial displacement. But even with that knowledge, there is yet a missing thing that explains precisely why gravity is a weak force and that missing thing unifies everything. It will be revealed in time.

Looking at Google Sky, I Would like to know what that is:

13h 50m 49.0s
-8° 36' 13.8"

Why did they block out the Infrared? What is being hidden there?

[Joit]

Seems like you found a black hole or something, the upper Corner from this thing is at
13h50m43.88s -8° 35'07.55"

But at the Picture from mk1 are some Areas also what dont match at the corners,
and i would not trust really Google Earth, what they show.
Some said allready that they overwork some Areas.

[Harvey]

Seems like you found a black hole or something, the upper Corner from this thing is at
13h50m43.88s -8° 35'07.55"

But at the Picture from mk1 are some Areas also what dont match at the corners,
and i would not trust really Google Earth, what they show.
Some said allready that they overwork some Areas.

It is very interesting that if you overlay the Historical Map, there is a very big Asterisk right there. And there is big Microwave Energy There and Infrared Energy there, but no visible light. What did the Historical Map Artists see?

(You have to zoom in for transparent overlay)

[Joit]

Maybe something like this