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

Modules
· Home
· Forum
· LATEST COMMENTS
· Special Sections
· SUPPORT ZPEnergy
· 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, 189 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

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

Events

Hot Links
Aetherometry

American Antigravity

Closeminded Science

EarthTech

ECW E-Cat World

Innoplaza

Integrity Research Institute

New Energy Movement

New Energy Times

Panacea-BOCAF

RexResearch

Science Hobbyist

T. Bearden Mirror Site

USPTO

Want to Know

Other Info-Sources
NE News Sites
AER_Network
E-Cat World
NexusNewsfeed ZPE
NE Discussion Groups
Energetic Forum
EMediaPress
Energy Science Forum
Free_Energy FB Group
The KeelyNet Blog
OverUnity Research
Sarfatti_Physics
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 UTC 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."

Abstract:
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.

 
Login
Nickname

Password

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:

Excellent
Very Good
Good
Regular
Bad


Options

 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 UTC
(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.

--pz



 

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.