Electricity: Things college won’t tell you
It’s 2020 as I write, the end of 2019 the year of confusion the result of many years of compounding confusion, where truth is lies and lies is truth. Mainstream news is fake, ranting, infantile foot stompers and stupid problem tanglers, do gooders who cause more division than harmony. Cheats and crooks and an unashamed desire for possessing wealth, covetousness, greediness, an insatiable desire for gain. None of this is new but 2019 was a bumper year. Science is not immune, it’s own version of the above has been smouldering for a century or more. Fake electricity combined with hubris, a brand of conceited smugness that knows it all even when proven wrong. Top-down theories supported by metaphysical numbers, equations that don’t equate. The antediluvian Atomism versus Aetherism fiasco, even though modern atomism has the subatomic particle to make it look like something new. Nothing changes it just gets worse and physics is in the kind of chaos reserved for all those who sneer at logical common sense.
Physicists avoid electricity like the plague, the phrase “quantum electronics” is rarely if ever used. Wiki doesn’t have an entry. If you look for a book on the subject you may find just one and it’s old. To find reasons for the more modern electric dissent one must look back to the discovery of the electron and the theories of Einstein. Both had their roots in electrical theory while both split away because electricity did not conform to the new science. There has therefore been no research into the true nature of electricity for more than a century.
Einstein banished the aether underpinning claiming it was unnecessary after centuries of science and philosophy. But physics was to discover it couldn’t function without it and a number of alternative aethers have been theorised with various names: Dirac’s sea, zero point energy, quantum fluctuations, anything but the forbidden word. It goes on and on ad nauseam in a desperate search for justification of the pseudo-word “spacetime”. The two words it’s made from both mean nothingness. Space being the absence of matter. Time being the absence of an explanation of what it actually is. The drive for counter-intuitive complexity is a mental slurry that the physicist lives to wallow in.
In the beginning, there was just Chaos. From the void emerged Erebus, the god of darkness, and Nyx, the goddess of the night. Their primordial children were Aether, the god of the heavenly air, and his sister Hemera, the goddess of the day and earthly light.
Wiki: …According to the successful electromagnetic aether theory based upon Maxwell’s electrodynamics, this all-encompassing aether was endowed with energy and hence very different from nothingness. The fact that electromagnetic and gravitational phenomena were easily transmitted in empty space indicated that their associated aethers were part of the fabric of space itself. Maxwell himself noted that: “To those who maintained the existence of a plenum as a philosophical principle, nature’s abhorrence of a vacuum was a sufficient reason for imagining an all-surrounding aether… Aethers were invented for the planets to swim in, to constitute electric atmospheres and magnetic effluvia, to convey sensations from one part of our bodies to another, and so on, till a space had been filled three or four times with aethers.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy#Early_aether_theories
His advice fell on closed minds and they changed his equations.
Wiki again: Luminiferous aether or ether (“luminiferous”, meaning “light-bearing”) was the postulated medium for the propagation of light. It was invoked to explain the ability of the apparently wave-based light to propagate through empty space, something that waves should not be able to do. The assumption of a spatial plenum of luminiferous aether, rather than a spatial vacuum, provided the theoretical medium that was required by wave theories of light.
The aether hypothesis was the topic of considerable debate throughout its history, as it required the existence of an invisible and infinite material with no interaction with physical objects. As the nature of light was explored, especially in the 19th century, the physical qualities required of an aether became increasingly contradictory. By the late 1800s, the existence of the aether was being questioned, although there was no physical theory to replace it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether
This is where Einstein came in and physics breathed a sigh of relief. Einstein removed the thorn in the side that was aether and this is the sole reason he was so popular with the administrators of science. Having removed the aether, he cancelled the propagation of light in the aether and made it the speed of light in a vacuum, something it never was. In doing so he transferred the properties of the aether to the vacuum that previously had no properties. Basically the aether became the vacuum. A vacuum cannot have properties or it’s not a vacuum, hence the confusion we now have, a confusion that made Einstein into a genius and a superhero and physics into a dolt.
Not so the pioneers of the telegraph and wireless telegraphy, those on the job, who had time and again proven the invaluable worth of aether theory. Pioneers referring to Clerk Maxwell, Oliver Heavisde, C.P. Steinmetz, Walter Russell, J.J. Thomson, Nikola Tesla, William Crookes and Michael Faraday These were the the men who gave us the electronic technology we enjoy today – cast aside for Einstein and the electron that gave us nothing useful. Electronic test equipment is reading the same today as it was before the electron was known. Nothing changed. In Einstein’s famous formula E=mc2, energy is undefined, as is mass. Einstein’s use of the word stationary is undefinable as everything is moving, there is no *stationary* point in the whole universe. This makes anything he did completely unengineerable. Nothing changed.
Maxwell’s Equations are not Maxwell’s
Wiki: But it wasn’t until 1884 that Oliver Heaviside, concurrently with similar work by Josiah Willard Gibbs and Heinrich Hertz, grouped the twenty equations together into a set of only four, via vector notation. This group of four equations was known variously as the Hertz–Heaviside equations and the Maxwell–Hertz equations, but are now universally known as Maxwell’s equations. Heaviside’s equations, which are taught in textbooks and universities as Maxwell’s equations are not exactly the same as the ones due to Maxwell, and, in fact, the latter are more easily forced into the mold of quantum physics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Maxwell%27s_equations
Maxwell was gagged, all mention of the aether was ignored and deleted.
A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field
Wiki: A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field: Of this paper and Maxwell’s related works, fellow physicist Richard Feynman said: “From the long view of this history of mankind – seen from, say, 10,000 years from now – there can be little doubt that the most significant event of the 19th century will be judged as Maxwell’s discovery of the laws of electromagnetism.”
I seriously doubt Feynman ever read it.
Wiki again: Albert Einstein used Maxwell’s equations as the starting point for his Special Theory of Relativity, presented in The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, a paper produced during his 1905 Annus Mirabilis. In it is stated: “the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good”
and “Any ray of light moves in the “stationary” system of co-ordinates with the determined velocity c, whether the ray be emitted by a stationary or by a moving body.” (All bodies in the universe are moving.)
Maxwell’s equations can also be derived by extending general relativity into five physical dimensions.
Maxwell’s Equations are not Maxwell’s
Wiki: Less well known is that Heaviside’s equations and Maxwell’s are not exactly the same, and in fact it is easier to modify the former to make them compatible with quantum physics. The possibility of gravitational waves was also discussed by Heaviside using the analogy between the inverse-square law in gravitation and electricity.
They’re still working on that one.
“The idea of electricity as a flow of ‘electrons’ in a conductor was regarded by Oliver Heaviside as “a psychosis”. This encouraged Heaviside to begin a series of writings.
Wiki: At the time of his death, Steinmetz held over 200 patents. A genius in both mathematics and electronics, he did work that earned him the nicknames “Forger of Thunderbolts” and “The Wizard of Schenectady”. Steinmetz’s equation, Steinmetz solids, Steinmetz curves, and Steinmetz equivalent circuit theory are all named after him, as are numerous honors and scholarships, including the IEEE Charles Proteus Steinmetz Award, one of the highest technical recognitions given by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers professional society. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Proteus_Steinmetz
Steinmetz also escaped the badmouth of science, he is “The Wizard of Schenectady”.
Even though he said, “Unfortunately to a large extent in dealing with dielectric fields the prehistoric conception of the electro-static charge, the ‘electron’, on the conductor still exists, and by its use destroys the analogy between the two components of the electric field, the magnetic and dielectric. This makes the consideration of dielectric fields unnecessarily complicated” – C.P. Steinmetz (Electric Discharges, Waves and Impulses)
Walter Russell was the first (maybe) to call the universe an “Electromagnetic Wave Universe” in 1921.
“To describe an electron as a negatively charged body is equivalent to saying that it is an expanding-contracting particle. (See Tesla below) There is no such condition in nature as a negative charge, nor are there negatively charged particles. Charge and discharge are opposite conditions, as filling and emptying, or compressing and expanding are opposite conditions.” – W. Russell
Thomson was an aether physics man, adhering to Faraday’s “tubes of force” unlike his contemporaries. I dare say most will find this surprising as they have been taught that Thomson discovered the electron, which I suppose he did. Thomson’s experiments gave substance and engineering possibility to electricity. His work with inertia is hardly known. Thomson appears as a man with two identities, a foot in both camps, whether this was thrust upon him or he chose his own path I don’t know. Truth be told he was more akin to Nikola Tesla than the mainstream.
JJ Thomson developed the “Ether Atom” ideas of M. Faraday into his “Electronic Corpuscle”, this indivisible unit. One corpuscle terminates on one Faradic tube of force, and this quantifies as one Coulomb. This corpuscle is not an electron, it is a constituent of what today is known incorrectly as an “electron”. (Thomson relates 1000 corpuscles per electron) In this view, that taken by W. Crookes, J.J. Thomson, and N. Tesla, the cathode ray is not electrons, but in actuality corpuscles of the Ether. – E. Dollard
Also consider the J.J. Thomson concept of the “electron” (his own discovery). Thomson considered the electron the terminal end of one unit line of dielectric induction. “Electrons as a separate, distinct entity…doesn’t really exist, they are merely bumps in something called a ‘field’.” – Dr. Steve Biller
“The electron: may it never be of any use to anybody! J. J. Thomson”
— A popular toast or slogan at J. J. Thompson’s Cavendish Laboratory in the first years of the 1900s, as quoted in Proceedings of the Royal Institution of Great Britain, Volume 35 (1951), p. 251. Said to have been posted on the Cavendish Lab wall
It has to be remembered that in order to carry-out his electron finding experiments Thomson had to have at his disposal all of the electrical components and circuitry we have today. This same circuitry worked perfectly well with the arrival of the transistor.
There are countless detractors of Nikola Tesla most of whom belong to mainstream science for obvious reasons. Others are space cadets and pseudo-sceptics who hang on every word uttered by physicists. The latest doubter I’ve come across is here:
“Kathy Loves Physics & History”
Tesla Fact vs. Fiction: Why the Public Perception is Wrong. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6331JXvOUGY
The lady says she researched it by “reading primary material”, when she also actually did the rounds of YouTube gathering Tesla garbage. She makes it sound like it’s Tesla’s fault. “Ready to hear the real story”? “Lets Go.” she says, “Tesla invented alternating current (AC) and powered the world.” She then goes on to find previous inventors of AC to prove he didn’t do it. The trouble with this is that Tesla never claimed to have invented AC. When asked which of his discoveries he was most proud he answered “The rotating magnetic field”, this was his AC induction motor, the AC generator still used today, unimproved from the original. It’s about what she leaves out, in fact there are dozens of website that contain complete tosh about Tesla, just like her own. Then we have “Tesla’s Wardenclyffe Tower transmitter was stopped because it didn’t work and Marconi’s did.” It’s never mentioned that Marconi stole all of his ideas from Tesla and others. Tesla had demonstrated wireless transmissions well before Marconi and was disinterested in his efforts.
She fails to mention that the first radio transmissions were debunked by members of the Royal Society, no less: Wiki: On February 20, 1880 he (David Hughes) demonstrated his technology to representatives of the Royal Society including Thomas Henry Huxley, Sir George Gabriel Stokes, and William Spottiswoode, then president of the Society. Stokes was convinced the phenomenon Hughes was demonstrating was merely electromagnetic induction, not a type of transmission through the air. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Edward_Hughes
It was as if Faraday didn’t exist, him being a permanent fixture at the society at the time. They managed to delay wireless for a decade. Brilliant!
She does say, “Tesla didn’t believe in the electron, he thought relativity was pseudoscience.” Well, she got that one right! I think he called Einstein a fuzzy haired idiot?
Nikola Tesla November 1928 interview: “On the whole subject of matter, in fact, Dr. Tesla holds views that are startlingly original. He disagrees with the accepted atomic theory of matter, and does not believe in the existence of an “electron” as pictured by science.”“To account for its apparently small mass, science conceives of the electron as a hollow sphere, a sort of bubble, such a bubble could exist in a medium as a gas or liquid because its internal pressure is not altered by deformation. But if, as supposed, the internal pressure of an electron is due to the repulsion of electric masses, the slightest conceivable deformation must result in the destruction of the bubble! Just to mention another improbability…” – Nikola Tesla Article: “A Famous Prophet of Science Looks into the Future” (Popular Science Monthly)
The collective opinion of all the above, the highest authorities on the subject of electricity:
They said and I paraphrase:
‘All electromagnetic radiation is perturbations (disturbances) in a medium, compression and rarefaction – compressing and expanding (a 3 dimensional wave). The wave has no material properties of its own but those of the medium it propagates within. It proceeds from a source that may be a candle or a star, a TV transmitter or a loudspeaker as in sound. There is no difference between a sound and a beam of light, both propagate in the same way. Only frequency separates sound from light. The electromagnetic field is a wave in a medium – aether. The field has no material existence, no particles, it is an effect transmitted by the aether caused by a source of energetic vibration. The only thing that is been transmitted is energy, so how does the energy become particles? And the only thing that can be described as resembling particles is the wave itself consisting of a compression and a relaxation of the pulses that make-up the wave.’
Maybe this is where the quantum guys went wrong?
Wiki: From a classical perspective in the history of electromagnetism, the electromagnetic field can be regarded as a smooth, continuous field, propagated in a wavelike manner; whereas from the perspective of quantum field theory, the field is seen as quantized, being composed of individual particles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_field
The only quantisation is the compression/rarefaction of individual waves in the medium, particles are unnecessary. The justification is that particles become waves and waves become particles. How? Science has no answer.
‘There is no negative energy and therefore no negative electricity, it is attracted from more charge to less like water running downhill.’
Particles are a scientific addiction supporting materialism, a philosophical system which regards matter as the only reality in the world. This being the case how do they explain SPACETIME neither space nor time are material?
‘A DC electric generator is a mechanically spinning rotor inside a magnetic field -producing stator. The rotor is made of iron with conductor windings that supply the output. The output is as a result of the rotor passing through the magnetic field. There is no contact between rotor and stator and no exchange of particles. The output flows, as above, on the outside of the conductor as a *dielectric magnetic field*, a wave in the aether medium around the conductor.’
Consider: Albert Einstein stated:
“In the theoretical treatment of these electrons we are faced with the difficulty that electro-dynamic theory of itself is unable to give an account of their nature.” “For since electrical masses constituting the electron would necessarily be scattered under the influence of their mutual repulsions, unless there are forces of another kind operating between them the nature of which has hitherto remained obscure to us.” “Relativity”, by Albert Einstein, Random House Publisher, 1916, page 50…
Eric Dollard replys
…These facts have been known from the initial invention of the “Vacuum Tube” by Sir William Crookes, leading to the extensive experimental work into atomic science by J. J. Thompson, and Nikola Tesla. It is here seen that the so-called electron is only a shadow, its apparent physical mass is only an electrical momentum. There is no rest mass to an electron. It is given here the electron is no more than a broken loose “hold fast” under the grip of the tensions within the dielectric lines of force. They are the broken ends of the split in half package of spaghetti. Obviously this reasoning is not welcome in the realm of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. Are we to believe that Einstein had no prior knowledge of the most prominent theoretical and experimental work of his time?