<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div>Hi Peter,<br><br><br></div>There is quite a fundamental problem in Maxwell's equations in that even though he started out at the aether hypothesis, he abstracted the connection to the underlying medium away. The problem is that there is a 90 degree angle between the motion of electrons (current) and the direction of the resulting magnetic field, which is a rotational phenomenon. <br><br></div>The reason for this 90 degree angle is because the electron has a vortex ring topology, whereby the propagation direction of the vortex ring is always perpendicular with respect to the radius of the ring. So, when a vortex ring propagates trough the aether, you get a resulting rotatational movement (the magnetic "field") around the direction of motion. <br><br></div>When we return to the aether hypothesis and realize that the magnetic field is a rotational phenomenon (mathematically expressed by the rot (or curl) operator) while we know transverse waves are impossible in a fluid medium, we come to the conclusion that the far field must consist of (expanding) ring vortices, while the near field is an actual transverse wave, occuring at the boundary between two media with a different density (the antenna and the air).<br><br></div>I have written an article about the history and background of a/o Maxwell's equations:<br><br><a href="http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/OnSpaceTimeAndTheFabricOfNature">http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/OnSpaceTimeAndTheFabricOfNature</a><br><br></div>And I've done an attempt to re-derive Maxwell's equations from a basic fluid dynamics aether model:<br><br><a href="http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/AnExceptionallyElegantTheoryOfEverything">http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/AnExceptionallyElegantTheoryOfEverything</a><br><br><br></div>Very interesting detail, IMHO, is that the Helmholtz decompositon is included in the vector Laplacian, which enables us to equate the E and B fields to two terms included in the vector Laplacian for the aether flow velocity field [v]. <br><br>This way, everything fits together like magic, while the whole thing transforms nicely under the good old Galilean transform and thus we won't need the Lorentz transform anymore, which demands a universally constant speed of light:<br><br><a href="http://etherphysics.net/CKT4.pdf">http://etherphysics.net/CKT4.pdf</a><br><div><div><div><div><div><br></div><div>At the same time, we eliminate the unwarrented "gauge freedom", which forms the basis for QFT, which is quite natural, since there is no "gauge freedom" in a fluid-like medium, including the aether, of course.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Besides explaining what the near and far fields are, we also introduce longitidinal "Tesla" sound-like pressure waves, which propagate at a speed of sqrt(3) times c, which undoubtly plays an important role in actually explaining Young's experiment.<br><br></div><div>Regads,<br><br><br></div><div>Arend.<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Peter Jackson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Peter@peterjacksonarchitects.co.uk" target="_blank">Peter@peterjacksonarchitects.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Calibri';COLOR:#000000">
<div>The gradual change from 90 degree phase shift you suggest ‘must’ happen
isn’t evidenced as far as I’ve found except in specific circumstances in diffuse
fields where it’s evidenced by birefringence (or to be precise
multirefringence). But there is another option which is consistent with
evidence. The whole change from near to far field, unexplained by Maxwell (or as
the transform from from Fresnel to Fraunhoffer) Can happen far more abruptly and
may be very important in advancing understanding generally. It has parallels in
both Special Relativity (The ‘Lorentz transformation’) and Quantum Mechanics
(the unexplained 90 degree phase shift in the sine curve pairs).</div>
<div>One simple mechanism, lets say at the surface of an antenna moving through
a field or similarly a planet moving through a heliospheric rest frame (is that
a dense ‘surface’ electron layer is propagated (as found in surface fine
structure & shocks), which a field particle absorbs EM radiation and
re-emits in it’s OWN LOCAL centre of mass rest frame. That gives a ‘Discrete
Field’ model of local physics with physical transitions between. Now do what
Maxwell recommends and use thought to find implications. Firstly Einstein’s
final 1952 concept of inertial systems as ‘fields in motion within fields’ makes
sense, then you should find all else falls into place. A bit shocking perhaps
but if you do what Maxwell suggests it’ll work.</div></div></div></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Physics mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Physics@tuks.nl">Physics@tuks.nl</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/physics</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div>