Re: Superluminal deBroglie Pilot Waves & Magnetoelectrism
From: Mark Palenik (markpalenik_at_wideopenwest.com)
Date: 02/28/05
- Next message: tj Frazir: "Re: Terraforming the Moon"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Q-on: "Superluminal deBroglie Pilot Waves & Magnetoelectrism"
- Next in thread: Mark Palenik: "Re: Superluminal deBroglie Pilot Waves & Magnetoelectrism"
- Reply: Mark Palenik: "Re: Superluminal deBroglie Pilot Waves & Magnetoelectrism"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:52:01 -0600
"Q-on" <physicsofchi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1109601425.658951.129050@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> http://www.pbase.com/image/40276371/original
> (Table 8.6 Proposed Maxwellian Equations for Etheric matter)
>
> http://www.pbase.com/image/40276407/original
> (Table 8.5 Amended Maxwell's Equations with Symmetry Parameters)
>
> http://www.pbase.com/image/40276417/original
> (Table 8.4 The Classical Maxwells Equations)
>
> Guys, Debunkers. Pls. attack this message on theoretical
> grounds.
So not only did he make up equations for so called "etheric" space, but he
felt it necessarry to change the regular Maxwell's equations, which
correctly predict electromagnetic phenomena?
For example, he says that Div(B) != 0, which is demonstratably false, since
Div(B) is *always* 0.
for his "physical" equations to even be logically consistant, div(delta'*gm)
= -d/dt(deltad*pm). He never states this, but everything falls apart
without this. Now, lets construct a wave equation based on his "physical"
equations.
laplacian(E) = curl(-dB/dt - delta'*gm) = mu(d(ge)/dt + epsilon*d^2D/dt^2) +
curl(delta'*gm) or in a vacuum:
laplacian(E) = 1/c^2*d^2E/dt^2 + curl(delta'*gm)
now, he never tells us what delta' or gm are, but if it's some sort of
density, I'm betting it can be distributed in a way that has a non-zero
curl, producing the wrong wave equation.
Looking at his equations closely, he seems to think that pm should be some
sort of magnetic analog of pe, the electric charge density. What he doesn't
realize is that there's *already* a magnetic analogue of th electric charge
density. It's called j, the current density, but div(B) is not equal to j.
Then, he tried to add some sort of electric analogue to the current density
to the equations for the electric field, not realizing that there already is
such a thing, called the charge density, but it doesn't appear in the
curl(E) = -dB/dt equation.
It is very clear that he does not even begin to understand the Maxwell
equations.
- Next message: tj Frazir: "Re: Terraforming the Moon"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Q-on: "Superluminal deBroglie Pilot Waves & Magnetoelectrism"
- Next in thread: Mark Palenik: "Re: Superluminal deBroglie Pilot Waves & Magnetoelectrism"
- Reply: Mark Palenik: "Re: Superluminal deBroglie Pilot Waves & Magnetoelectrism"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|