[Physics] Mathematical proof Maxwell's equations are incorrect?

[Arend Lammertink]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 1:13 PM Tom Hollings <carmam at tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>

> I think that gravity is EM in nature (there is a chapter in BB's web page which goes into that - http://www.alternativephysics.org/book/Gravity.htm), and explains rather neatly some aspects of the behavior of distant galaxies. I think it highly unlikely that it is a push force. I have explored that possibility and discounted it. If it is a push force it must originate from outside the universe!?

Not necessarily. I believe the pushing force is one and the same as
what we consider to be "the electric field", which I believe to be a
longitudinal dielectric "Tesla" wave with a frequency equal to the
characteristic frequency of the particle that emits it. For the
electron, according to Paul, this works out to about 160-180 GHz,
IIRC.

So, what I think is that the source for this pushing force is actually
distributed all across the Universe:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background
"With a traditional optical telescope, the space between stars and
galaxies (the background) is completely dark. However, a sufficiently
sensitive radio telescopeshows a faint background noise, or glow,
almost isotropic, that is not associated with any star, galaxy, or
other object. This glow is strongest in the microwave region of the
radio spectrum."

"Precise measurements of the CMB are critical to cosmology, since any
proposed model of the universe must explain this radiation. The CMB
has a thermal black body spectrum at a temperature of 2.72548±0.00057
K.[4] The spectral radiance dEν/dν peaks at 160.23 GHz, in the
microwave range of frequencies, corresponding to a photon energy of
about 6.626 ⋅ 10−4 eV. Alternatively, if spectral radiance is defined
as dEλ/dλ, then the peak wavelength is 1.063 mm (282 GHz, 1.168 ⋅ 10−3
eV photons). The glow is very nearly uniform in all directions, but
the tiny residual variations show a very specific pattern, the same as
that expected of a fairly uniformly distributed hot gas that has
expanded to the current size of the universe. "


Paul's work on this is included in his paper:

https://vixra.org/abs/1310.0237


See attached image for relevant part.

Problem I had is that I couldn't find the 3kT anywhere, but I
eventually found this, as I wrote to Paul a while ago:

"I also found a rather interesting paper regarding black body
radiation in relation to aether theory:

http://www.etherphysics.net/CKT1.pdf

"It is shown that Planck’s energy distribution for a black-body
radiation field can be simply derived for a gas-like ether with
Maxwellian statistics. The gas consists of an infinite variety of
particles, whose masses are integral multiples n of the mass of the
unit particle, the abundance of n-particles being proportional to
n^−4. The frequency of electromagnetic waves correlates with the
energy per unit mass of the particles, not with their energy, thus
differing from Planck’s quantum hypothesis. Identifying the special
wave-speed, usually called the speed of light, with the wave-speed in
the 2.7oK background radiation field, leads to a mass 1/2 × 10−39(kg)
for the unit ether-particle, and an average number of about 360 ether
particles per cubic centimetre in the background radiation field,
whose density is about 0.2 ×10−30(kg)/m3."

I find the number of 360 ether particles per cubic centimetre hard to
believe, so there may be errors in there. Either way, it also uses the
E=3kT and explains that this is because there are 6 degrees of
freedom, while your h(nu)=3kT comes a bit out of the blue, which is
why I found this paper when searching for 3kT.....
-:-


> Don't you just love these discussions.

Yep, I do. Been all across the internet looking for a place where one
can have constructive dialog, only to eventually find that place on my
own mailing list. Imagine that!

Best regards,

Arend.

>
> All the best,
> Tom.
>
>
> > On 27 April 2020 at 17:55 Arend Lammertink <lamare at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > An  interesting read, indeed, and well explained with clear graphics!
> >
> > I guess I better remove the reference to Van Flandern from my paper, then. :)
> >
> > Noted the following:
> >
> > "If the above reasoning is correct and gravity does move at a finite
> > speed and without pointing at a ‘ghost image’ of an attracting body,
> > this tells us something about the nature of gravity:
> >
> > 1) That it is radiated at a fixed speed relative to its source rather
> > than to an observer or hypothetical background aether. That is, if
> > gravity moves at speed g (relative to its source) and the source were
> > moving at speed v (relative to an observer), the speed of the
> > gravitational field relative to the observer will be g+v.
> >
> > 2) That the orientation of the field – i.e. the angle it was emitted
> > at – is important and is preserved within the field.
> >
> > 3) That the direction of force will be along the direction that the
> > field was emitted at rather than the direction it impacts a target
> > body."
> >
> >
> > It still needs to propagate trough the medium, which means it has to
> > be a wave, which leaves two options:
> >
> > 1) EM waves, the waves we are familiar with;
> >
> > 2) Longitudinal "Tesla" waves.
> >
> >
> > Option 1 would be highly unlikely, and we know how to detect these,
> > which leaves only option 2.
> >
> > Given the anomalies around superconductors, I believe it is probable
> > that the source for the graviational force is related to the
> > characteristic frequencies of the electron, proton and perhaps neutron
> > and thus that it is a pushing force, which is caused by the
> > shadowing/attenuation of a planetary body.
> >
> > If it were a pushing force and carried by longitudinal dielectric
> > waves, there would have to be standing waves in order to obtain a
> > pulling force. Can't rule it out, was actually what I first thought,
> > but now my money would be on a "pushing" force "shadowing" type of
> > gravity, a so-called LeSage "wave" model:
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Sage%27s_theory_of_gravitation#Wave_models
> > "In 1900 Hendrik Lorentz wrote that Le Sage's particle model is not
> > consistent with the electron theory of his time. But the realization
> > that trains of electromagnetic waves could produce some pressure, in
> > combination with the penetrating power of Röntgen rays (now called
> > x-rays), led him to conclude that nothing argues against the possible
> > existence of even more penetrating radiation than x-rays, which could
> > replace Le Sage's particles. Lorentz showed that an attractive force
> > between charged particles (which might be taken to model the
> > elementary subunits of matter) would indeed arise, but only if the
> > incident energy were entirely absorbed. This was the same fundamental
> > problem which had afflicted the particle models."
> >
> > To me, the question of whether or not Tesla's longitudinal waves exist
> > is almost certainly: Yes. In my paper, there are quite a lot of
> > references which support the idea of the existence of a
> > faster-than-light wave phenomenon, including Tesla himself, of course.
> > So, this seems a perfect match.
> >
> > However, it should be noted that such a gravity model only explains
> > the gravitational force around a (large, planetary) body and does NOT
> > extend all the way down to the (sub)molecular scale.  This is an
> > important detail, because the assumption that gravity works the same
> > on any scale is what led to the invention of the imaginary "strong"
> > and "weak" nuclear interactions, IIRC.So, as we can now understand,
> > those two forces were invented in order to balance a force that does
> > not really exist the way they thought it did.
> >
> > Paul Stowe also wrote about something like this:
> > http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Paul_Stowe/Mirror/le_sage.htm
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Arend.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Stowe_CMB.png
Type: image/png
Size: 234322 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20200428/11f45c39/attachment.png>