[Physics] Compatibility with and/or the properties of the Standard Model (SM)

[Arend Lammertink]

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:43 PM <mikelawr at freenetname.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Arend,
>
> You have said:This is why no
> propagation speed for the electric field follows from Maxwell and in
> order to fix that, Lorentz introduced a "retardation effect", which
> forced a propagation speed, c, upon the propagation of the electric
> field. However, the electric field is a longitudinal wave and not a
> transverse wave and therefore propagates considerably faster than the
> Herzian wave, the only wave predicted by Maxwell.
>
> But relativistic addition of velocities means that you can have a
> particle travelling at c along three axes and yet its total velocity is
> still only c. I have a published paper showing that this applies to any
> number of velocities (despite that there are no more than three axes to
> exist in!!). So if one velocity in your system is c, the other cannot be
> higher.

First of all, you have to let go of the idea of "curved space" a la
Einstein. See other posts/threads for why that is.

Secondly, yes particles are a manifestation of the EM field. Note the
M for magnetic, which implies rotation. Hence the idea that particles
(as well as photons) are some kind of vortex, either in a particular
"static" construction or in the shape of expanding/contracting
vortices, which I believe is probably the case for radio waves.

So, you have something like this as the basic "particle":

http://www.tuks.nl/img/dualtorus.gif

Since that is an electromagnetic (rotational) and not a dielectric
(irrotational) phenomenon, it follows that such a dynamic structure
cannot exceed the (local) speed of light, c.

What I'm arguing is that *besides* the electromagnetic waves, which
are vortices except in a relatively small area around an antenna where
you have an actual transverse surface wave, there is also a
"sound-like" longitudinal wave, the one Tesla worked with. And that is
the also one that has been missed by mainstream science so far,
because of mistakes in Maxwell's equations, but there is quite a lot
of evidence that supports the idea these are for real, do exist, and
do propagate faster than light, by a factor of either pi/2 or sqrt(3).
So, these propagate with a speed of about 1.6-1.7 times c.  Again, see
other posts/threads for more details. Dumped quite a lot of info
already, which will take time to digest.

So, what I'm also saying is that this longitudinal wave is what we
know as the electric field and is also what we know as gravity, that
is: the gravitational force that is experienced on the surface of a
planetary body.

I consciously add that note, because gravity is far from the only
force that is responsible for planets and galaxies to maintain their
orbits.  After all, orbits are rotational in Nature, which implies
that actually the magnetic force plays a dominant role in these
phenomena. It is very important to get this straight, because if one
assumes the galaxy is shaped by gravity alone and equates that force
to the gravitational force on the surface of a planet, one gets a hard
time figuring out how this all works.

David LaPoint performed a number of very insightful experiments in his
lab, which support the idea that the magnetic force is very important
on any scale, all the way from the very small to the very big:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siMFfNhn6dk

Don't play too much attention to the narrator, his theories and/or
claims. Focus on what is being shown and draw your own conclusions.
IMHO, very beautiful experiments well worth the time watching.

Greetz,

Arend.







> Cheers
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> On 2020-04-29 10:55, Arend Lammertink wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:31 AM Tom Hollings <carmam at tiscali.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Mike, most people on this forum will not get past peer review, for the
> >> simple reason that we go against mainstream "groupthink". We do not
> >> believe most of the mainstream theories which are out there. My
> >> speciality is Einstein's SRT, followed by GRT, and although I do not
> >> know as much about GRT as I do SRT, I know enough to get by. In any
> >> case, as GRT is built on SRT, if SRT fails, so does GRT. One of the
> >> main predictions of SRT is that no material body (and no information
> >> either) can travel faster than light.
> >
> >> See my web page :- http://problemswithrelativity.com/#lorentz  look at
> >> the fourth paragraph if you want to skip the intro, and tell me where
> >> my error is.
> >
> > "When Hendrik A. Lorentz devised his transformation formulae in 1890
> > he thought that they applied only to electrically charged bodies, but
> > Einstein incorporated them into his special theory of relativity
> > assuming that they applied to all bodies."
> >
> > This is interesting, see my answer in the thread "Do longitudinal FTL
> > "Tesla" waves exist and, if yes, how should they be modelled?"
> >
> > The very reason for the existence of the Lorentz transform is because
> > Maxwell forced the irrotational half of the Helmholtz decomposition,
> > the electric field [E], to have a curl, a rotation. This is why no
> > propagation speed for the electric field follows from Maxwell and in
> > order to fix that, Lorentz introduced a "retardation effect", which
> > forced a propagation speed, c, upon the propagation of the electric
> > field. However, the electric field is a longitudinal wave and not a
> > transverse wave and therefore propagates considerably faster than the
> > Herzian wave, the only wave predicted by Maxwell.
> >
> >
> >> Proponents of GRT say that the Global Positioning System would not
> >> work without GRT & SRT, but this is plain wrong, as any in depth
> >> investigation will show.
> >
> > Yep, the guy who actually designed the GPS system developed his own
> > variant of a Lorentzian aether, without which he could not get it to
> > work:
> >
> > http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Clock_Behavior_and_theSearch_for_an_Underlying_Mechanism_for_Relativistic_Phenomena_2002.pdf
> >
> > Lots of information in there, and there's also this presentation
> > wherein he shines some light on relativity and GPS:
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOQweA_J4S4
> >
> > Very interesting video, he touches upon many inconsistensies found in
> > relativists' arguments and papers. Well worth your time watching, if
> > you're interested in relativity.
> >
> >> We are told also that a Sagnac correction is built into the system,
> >> but why should that be? The Sagnac correction is for signals which go
> >> round a loop and back to the starting point, this plainly does not
> >> apply to the GPS, as all signals travel only one way - from the
> >> satellites to the receivers.
> >
> > The root of all of the probems are Maxwell's equations, as I've argued
> > extensively already.
> >
> > Greetz,
> >
> > Arend.
>