Physics
I have
been dealing with electromagnetism for 44 years now, and still I do not have a
clear understanding of the real nature of these phenomena.
Having
built many EH antennas I am struggled by the main
problem: what happens of all the power that I send to the antenna ? about 20 dB
are missing; it means that, if I send 100W, 99W disappear and only 1W is
radiated. But the EHs are cold: there is no evidence of any warming part. By
the contrary my old Hustler coil based did
show very clearly where the lost power goes: after few minute of use you
can’t touch the coil because it is
hot !
So since
few years I am trying to dig in else body works to build up my proper vision of
the Universe.
In this
page I will try to explain my vision up to date. (November 2006)
I have to
thank Mr. Henry H. Lindner for
having made me clear the distinction between “Ptolemaic” theories
and “Copernican” ones:
A
Ptolemaic theory describes the world from the point of view of the observer,
being this a man or some of his instruments.
A
Ptolemaic theory can be sufficiently precise for the most of the engineering
problems as was the Ptolemy one: the earth immobile with sun, moon, planets and
stars moving around it. The right amount of precision can be reached applying
corrections and complexity. They describe the universe in a subjectivistic way.
To quote Mr. Lindner:
subjectivistic
description: The
observer merely describes his experiences—what he senses with and without
instruments. Since no physical Cosmos exists or can be known, he can only
relate these events to his own frame of reference or coordinate system (CS).
A Copernican theory tries to make a model of
what the universe is supposed to be, and from this model are derived deductions
to explain the observed phenomena. They try to be objectivistic; always quoting
Mr. Lindner:
objectivistic
description: The
observer posits a Cosmos and Cosmic entities and CS(s) that play a unique and
causal role in what he experiences. He relates his measurements and experienced
events to these Cosmic CS(s).
I have to
thank Mr. R. A. Santilli for having made me
understand the difference between “External” systems and
“Internal” ones.
In
external systems are present only forces active at distance like, in the solar
system only gravitation is responsible of the movements of bodies. The same
applies with electrostatic and magnetic forces up to simple atoms.
On the
other side, internal systems, obey to
short-range,
nonlinear, nonlocal, and non-Hamiltonian effects
quoting
R.A. Santilli. It means that the physic I have been teached at school is not
applicable to the inside of massive bodies like planets, stars or atomic
nuclei.
The new
mathematic invented by Mr. Santilli is of paramount importance to study those
systems.
Einstein’s
relativity, Quantum Mechanics and Maxell electromagnetism are useful and applicable only to External
systems
Furthermore
Einstein’s
relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Newton
gravitation and Maxell electromagnetism are Ptolemaic theories
I mean
that they just try to describe what is perceived without even making hypothesis
on the causes of phenomena. Remember the Newton’s
sentence: “Hypothesis non fingo” when asked about the reasons of
gravitational attraction.
I do not
doubt about the capability of human brain to understand the reality of Cosmos;
as a fan of Konrad Lorenz I believe that
a real Cosmos exists outside of our mind and that the philogenetic evolution of
our brains has provided us with a suitable tool to understand it.
So I need
something more basic to satisfy my curiosity.
Recently I did fall on the site of Mr. Myron Evans were I have found a really good Ptolemaic External unification of Relativity and QM. I am still reading
with great pleasure the book, by Laurence G.
Felker, which
is an excellent tutorial on the subjects I am interested in.
The main point is: as bent of spacetime produces
gravitation, a torsion of the same, like an helix, is the cause of
electromagnetism.
I recommend too the Ptolemaic
External
use of quaternions as done by Mr. Douglas Sweetser who
reaches another unification. Also for this case my study is in progress.
As Mr.
Santilli says, this millennium in physics will be devoted to study aether. If
the space can be bent or whirled than it has to have a structure.
Since may
years I know the theories of Mr. Walter
Cassani . The first of his book on my shelves is dated 1984 with title “La
teoria Ondulatoria del Campo”; the last that I have is “Albert
aveva ragione: Dio non gioca a dadi” dated 1998.
Just few
weeks ago I did fall by accident on the site of Renato
Palmieri which was for me
another revelation.
These two
theories are quite similar, even if they have different starting point.
At
present I know better the Walter Cassani’s theory; this is a Copernican theory in the
sense discussed above and it is suitable to investigate Internal systems. It starts
from a discrete model of a 4-dimensional aether named “Schild’s
lattice”, after the mathematician Alfred Schild who invented it, and
develops explications for all the known phenomena of physic and more.
Renato
Palmieri admits an aether but, does not make hypothesis on it. He upholds that
the only force in the universe is the gravitational force (Copernican statement). The
difference between electromagnetic fields and gravitational ones is just the
frequency, being very low for gravitation and high for electromagnetism. The
elementary particle, named “absolute atom” produces vibrations in
aether of whirl type based on the Archimedean spiral and the golden ratio
1.618….
I
like the discrete aether ! …after all in the reality Achilles outruns the
tortoise in the race organized by Zeno !!
Besides a
discrete aether has the notable property of being “NOT
LINEAR”.
This is what is really needed for the existence of strange attractors that
produce stable configuration in the space-time.
I like
vortices, like Democritus ! When I shave I see a vortex in the basin; if I open
a door with impetus the dust on the floor whirls.
Vortices
are so common that must have a fundament in all physical phenomena.
W.
Cassani and R. Palmieri, in their theories, identify three-dimensional vortices
as the basic structure of elementary particles.
Mr. M.
Evans beyond torsion, postulates the “very strong” principle of
equivalence which says that everything is space-time. This takes directly to
Cassani and Palmieri. He says also that
Mass ≡ Frequency which take directly to Palmieri. So, there must
be something good here !
Also
Santilli says “In this way, gravitation results as a mere additional
manifestation of electromagnetism….there is no need to introduce a new
interaction to represent gravity“
in his book EHM-III-Ch1.pdf at page 64.
Similar
ideas are expressed by Douglas Sweetser even if my understanding is poor at
present.
So things
seem to converge ! My dream is to have all these bright person here in my
house, sat around a table with a big dish of maccheroni al ragł in front,
discussing all these subjects. I have few bottles of old wine reserved for this
occasion. I am sure that after the third glass they will find a common
agreement ! ☺
Coming
back to EH antennas, since one year I am aware of the theory of Vladimir I. Korobejnikov whose
generalization of Maxell equations for an helical movements of electrons takes
to a component of the magnetic field in the direction of propagation Hz .
Now after
a first rush on the work of Mr. Evans, with big surprise, I have found the same
result, (called B(3) ): ą More convergence !
For a
critic on Maxell equations and a different view on photons and electromagnetism
I recommend the site of Doct. Kanarev http://Kanarev.innoplaza.net
