Re: experimental implications - Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity.
From: Evgenij Barsukov (e-barsoukov2_hate_spam_at_ti.com)
Date: 10/05/04
- Next message: Paul Draper: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Previous message: Paul Draper: "Re: Reaching Light Speed,"
- In reply to: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: experimental implications - Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Next in thread: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: experimental implications - Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Reply: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: experimental implications - Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 11:06:29 -0500
Eugene Stefanovich wrote:
>
>
> Evgenij Barsukov wrote:
>
>> Coming back to our previous discussion, the most prominently testable
>> result of your theory is the instantaneous coulomb interaction.
>>
>> There might be a different method to test this result indirectly,
>> by testing theories derived under explicit assumption of retarded
>> interaction.
>> One of the most well known of these are based on Lienard-Wiechert
>> Potential,
>> that is explicitely derived under assumption of coulomb force propagating
>> at speed of light (for example description here:
>> http://www.phys.unm.edu/~duric/phy536/15/node2.html
>>
>> One of experimentaly measurable results derived from Lienard-Wiechert
>> potential
>> is sichrotron radiation. I wonder if your theory can produce the same
>> predictions
>> as that based on Lienard-Wiechert potential regarding to radiation,
>> and if answer
>> is yes, why same result would not be produced in Lienard-Wiechert
>> derivation if
>> field propagation speed would be set to infinity?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Evgenij
>>
>
> Hi Evgenij,
>
> I appreciate your attempts to move this discussion into domain
> of experimentally verifiable facts. I think this is the most
> productive approach. Because at the end of the day we learn about
> nature through experiments. Theory provides some guidance and
> interpretations, but all facts come from observations.
> The speed of propagation of interactions is obviously one such fact
> (or fiction?) which has been long neglected by experimentalists.
>
> The synchrotron radiation is emitted when charged particle is
> accelerated. It is also called bremsstrahlung. The emitted photons move
> with the speed "c". I am not quite sure how this radiation may
> help to distinguish between instantaneous and retarded forces
> between particles. Do you have a reference discussing the relationship
> between Lienard-Wiechert potentials and synchrotron radiation?
Actually after looking more at this problem I realized that
L-W potential might not be helful for distunquishing between
your theory and traditional one, because the sumary field produced by retarded field
and field of electromagnetic disturbance are equal to central spherical electrostatic
field just as it would be in case with instantaneous propagation of
coulomb force.
More about it here: http://users.powernet.co.uk/bearsoft/P5Nedmb.html
Btw Bruce Harvey appears to agree with your conclusions,
through his derivations are not as detailed.
This makes me wonder if all other experimental observables of thraditional
electrodynamics would be equivalent to that of your theory for same reasons.
In fact experiments that relay on L-W potential being correct would also
confirm that coulomb force field (regardless of its origins as sum of two
retarded electrostatic + electromagnetic or instantaneous electrostatic)
are indeed propagating instantaneously. And while it is not obvious,
the same spherical field around particles should allow instantaneous
signaling (unless the electromagnetic disturbance produces information
loss equal to amount of signaled information).
But in this case you need to have different ways to deal with electromagnetic
disturbance, as it also produces experimentaly observable results. If I am
not mistaken you are already doing that by producing photons. Could you
clarify a bit what is the mechanism of radiation (photon production) in your
theory as applied to simple case of say accelerated movement of 2 charged
particles?
Regards,
Evgenij
-- __________________________________________________ *science&fiction*free programs*fine art*phylosophy: http://sudy_zhenja.tripod.com ----------remove hate_spam to answer--------------
- Next message: Paul Draper: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Previous message: Paul Draper: "Re: Reaching Light Speed,"
- In reply to: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: experimental implications - Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Next in thread: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: experimental implications - Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Reply: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: experimental implications - Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|