Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

· Home
· Forum
· Special Sections
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 253 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here

  • (August 7, 2024 - August 11, 2024) 2024 ExtraOrdinary Technology Conference

  • Hot Links

    American Antigravity

    Closeminded Science


    ECW E-Cat World


    Integrity Research Institute

    New Energy Movement

    New Energy Times



    Science Hobbyist

    T. Bearden Mirror Site


    Want to Know

    Other Info-Sources
    NE News Sites
    E-Cat World
    NexusNewsfeed ZPE
    NE Discussion Groups
    Energetic Forum
    Energy Science Forum
    Free_Energy FB Group
    The KeelyNet Blog
    OverUnity Research
    Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
    Vortex (old Interact)
    Magazine Sites
    Electrifying Times (FB)
    ExtraOrdinary Technology
    IE Magazine
    New Energy Times

    Interesting Links

    Click Here for the DISCLOSURE PROJECT
    SciTech Daily Review
    NEXUS Magazine

    The Classical Electron Problem
    Posted on Monday, October 25, 2004 @ 21:20:17 GMT by vlad

    Science In the hydrino yahoo group John Barchak writes: There is a very interesting paper named "The Classical Electron Problem" by Tepper L. Gill, W. W. Zachary, and J.Lindesay. This paper seems to indicate that there are many open issues even if you accept a totally classical physics.

    Here is a quote from this paper: "Thus, the major problem facing us in the twenty first century is to construct a quantizable classical theory which satisfies the first two postulates of Einstein in some reasonable form and includes Newtonian Mechanics."

    In this paper, we construct a parallel image of the conventional Maxwell theory by replacing the observer-time by the proper-time of the source. This formulation is mathematically, but not physically, equivalent to the conventional form. The change induces a new symmetry group which is distinct from, but closely related to the Lorentz group, and fixes the clock of the source for all observers. The new wave equation contains an additional term (dissipative), which arises instantaneously with acceleration. This shows that the origin of radiation reaction is not the action of a "charge" on itself but arises from inertial resistance to changes in motion. This dissipative term is equivalent to an effective mass so that classical radiation has both a massless and a massive part. Hence, at the local level the theory is one of particles and fields but there is no self- energy divergence (nor any of the other problems). We also show that, for any closed system of particles, there is a global inertial frame and unique (invariant) global proper-time (for each observer) from which to observe the system. This global clock is intrinsically related to the proper clocks of the individual particles and provides a unique definition of simultaneity for all events associated with the system. We suggest that this clock is the historical clock of Horwitz, Piron, and Fanchi. At this level, the theory is of the action-at-a-distance type and the absorption hypothesis of Wheeler and Feynman follows from global conservation of energy.

    The paper is found at: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0405131

    Regards John B.



    Security Code: Security Code
    Type Security Code

    Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

    Related Links
    · More about Science
    · News by vlad

    Most read story about Science:
    100 miles on 4 ounces of water?

    Article Rating
    Average Score: 4
    Votes: 1

    Please take a second and vote for this article:

    Very Good


     Printer Friendly Printer Friendly

    "The Classical Electron Problem" | Login/Create an Account | 1 comment | Search Discussion
    The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

    No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

    Re: The Classical Electron Problem (Score: 1)
    by vlad on Tuesday, October 26, 2004 @ 20:50:33 GMT
    (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
    Peter Zimmerman writes: I would say off hand that nobody promised you that classical physics was a completed subject. There is a great deal in Maxwell's Equations and special relativity that has required exploration for a long time, in part because it could be fun and in part for the new light (pun intended) it could throw on other problems.

    This looks very interesting, and when I have a little time, I would like to read it.

    As most of you know, Maxwell's Eqn's are all derived from experimental results, the most controversial or enigmatic of which is that for some reason nobody has ever seen a magnetic monopole. It is very interesting to rewrite Maxwell so that div(B) is unequal to zero, postulating magnetic charge, and then to look at how other more advanced parts of standard E&M play out. The world would look somewhat different. The escape hatch is that the monopoles could be very heavy, and so could only be created in rare high energy events. That allows you to recover E&M as we know it while still admitting the possibility of magnetic charge.

    It has always seemed to me quite ugly that electric charge exists but magnetic charge doesn't -- and that the greatest set of classical field equations simply make it "impossible" by defining the divergence to B to = 0 everywhere. When I was a youngster it was my version of Einstein's extra term in GR.

    I know that "CQM" wouldn't allow you to do the work, but Paul Dirac wrote some very pretty old papers about the existence of monopoles in a QED framework.

    Note: I do not expect to live to hear of a valid discovery of a monopole. I have already lived through two apparently very good experiments that *seemed* to have detected them (Blas Cabrera at Stanford and a Berkeley emulsion group), and don't want to go through the community elation followed by the community let-down again.



    All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
    Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.