Theories reducing to Coulombian electrodynamics, relativistic electrodynamics doesn't
CfCS
NEW DRAFT
Theories reducing to Coulombian electrodynamics, relativistic
electrodynamics doesn't
_______________________________________________________________________
A new research draft (40+ pages) is available for download.
Very important physical and philosophical consequences arise from
this work.
This draft analyzes the internal consistency of different theories of
electrodynamics, their compatibility with Coulombian electrodynamics,
and their confrontation with experiments and observations.
The rigorous analysis shows that the Coulombian limit of relativistic
field electrodynamics given in textbooks and papers is both
mathematical and physically incorrect. This is in agreement with
earlier result showed in Phys. Rev. E (1997, 53, 5373; 1998, 57,
3683).
Moreover, it is showed that only four theories of the analyzed sample
give the exact Coulombian limit in a consistent way.
If the results of this draft are confirmed then, contrary to a common
myth, relativistic field electrodynamics will be no longer a covering
theory of all electromagnetic experiments and observations, but a
disjoint theory valid for certain kind of relativistic effects!
This disjoint, non-covering, character is illustrated in this Research
draft when showed that relativistic field electrodynamics fails to
correctly account for the topology of the binary interactions in a
system of point charges, whereas Coulombian electrodynamics —and
compatible theories— give us the correct topology.
Finally, this Research draft introduces the new post-relativity theory
and discusses its possibilities and advantages over current theories.
This Research draft is dedicated to the memory of the physicist
Charles-Augustin De Coulomb. His deep insights on the nature of the
electric interactions remained unnoticed in the works of very
important physicists as Maxwell, Einstein, Lorentz, Dirac, Wheeler,
Feynman, and many others. And them remained unnoticed until
mathematicians and physicists have started to show the deficiencies of
the field formulations of electrodynamics 190 years after that Coulomb
passed away!
NEWS AND BLOG:
______________
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/canonicalsciencetoday/canonicalsciencetoday.html
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/canonicalsciencetoday/20091103.html
METADATA, REFERENCES, AND DOWNLOAD:
___________________________________
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/drafts.html
MMM
"CfCS" <nor...@canonicalscience.org> wrote in message
news:3b4784e7-c734-4772...@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
_______________________________________________________________________
"An astounding brokethrough buy a google-posting fractional witt"
Uncle Al
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> NEW DRAFT
>
> Theories reducing to Coulombian electrodynamics, relativistic
> electrodynamics doesn't
> _______________________________________________________________________
Classical physics is wrong. Vote "Jackson" when at electrodynamic
voting places.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
alie...@gmail.com
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> NEW DRAFT
>
> Theories reducing to Coulombian electrodynamics, relativistic
> electrodynamics doesn't
Coulomb's electrodynamics fails in the relativistic limit.
Relativistic electrodynamics fails in the quantum limit.
Quantum electrodynamics fails in the... oh, wait, it doesn't fail.
Mark L. Fergerson
Salmon Egg
<3b4784e7-c734-4772...@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
CfCS <nor...@canonicalscience.org> wrote:
> A new research draft (40+ pages) is available for download.
>
> Very important physical and philosophical consequences arise from
> this work.
>
> This draft analyzes the internal consistency of different theories of
> electrodynamics, their compatibility with Coulombian electrodynamics,
> and their confrontation with experiments and observations.
I do not want to have a closed mind. But 40 pages is a hypnotic or
opiate. I doubt that I could make it through the third page if that
much. If you really do have an revolutionary theory, state its essence
as briefly as possible. Do not try to be all-encompassing. Try to make
the short summary of such quality as to make the reader eager to go from
one paragraph to another. If you cannot do that, your theory will
languish. The theories you are trying to replace seem to work very well.
I am not eager to invest the effort to understand yours unless there is
a payoff,
Bill
--
As the years go by, dying just before having to fill out a tax return has merit.
CfCS
Coulomb's electrodynamics is a non-relativistic theory and
relativistic electrodynamics is a classical theory.
Quantum electrodynamics mixes the quantum and relativity. It fails in
several situations described by Paul Dirac, Richard Feynman, Steven
Weinberg, Ilya Prigogine, Larry P. Horwitz, Ernst Stueckelberg, E. C.
G. Sudarshan, and other important authors.
The above draft only analyzes classical theories but quantum
electrodynamics will be analyzed in the future draft «Theories
reducing to quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics doesn't» listed
in the drafts site:
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/drafts.html
Paul Dirac said against quantum electrodynamics:
«For these reasons I find the present quantum electrodynamics quite
unsatisfactory. One ought not to be complacent about its faults»
CfCS
> In article
> <3b4784e7-c734-4772-9faf-6b3a7018e...@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
The 40+ page full draft analyzes seven theories of classical
electrodynamics. There is a Executive Summary that is 5 pages long.
The abstract is reproduced in the following link:
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/publicationzone/drafts.html