| Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 
      12:14:02 -0500  
        
        
        Jim, 
        
        
          
        
        
        Took a brief look, and 
        can see you are struggling to "get at it where it lives".  Some 
        constructive comments: 
        
        
          
        
        
        You are quite correct 
        in going after the action of the vacuum/spacetime/ether, whatever one 
        wishes to call it.  The best way to approach it is to realize that 
        quantum field theory and general relativity already do this quite well 
        (but nothing is perfect!). 
        
        
          
        
        
        The problem with the 
        classical electrodynamics (CED) is that it still assumes a MATERIAL 
        ether, from the old days.  There has to be at least a modifier on the 
        front end of "material", so that one would have something like "virtual 
        matter" ether or "virtual particle flux" ether.  That will get you into 
        particle physics and quantum field theory. 
        
        
          
        
        
        CED also of course 
        assumes that all EM fields, EM potentials, and every joule of EM energy 
        in the universe comes from the associated source charge(s).  It is 
        easily shown that a charge continuously pours out real, observable EM 
        energy (real photons) in all directions, establishing its associated EM 
        fields and potentials and their energy, expanding at light speed. 
        
        
          
        
        
        However, CED also 
        assumes there is absolutely no input of EM energy to the source charge!  
        So it assumes that every EM field, EM potential, and joule of EM energy 
        in the universe has been freely created out of nothing at all.  And of 
        course that is a total violation of the conservation of energy law.  
        Either we lose energy conservation, or one must explain that input 
        energy (which already exists in particle physics since 1957, as I 
        discuss in a place or two on my website). 
        
        
          
        
        
        The problem with 
        particle physics, however, is that the Standard Model used in particle 
        physics also excludes gravity.  So it is far from complete, only 
        accounting for the strong force, weak force, and EM force. It also has 
        other substantial problems; see Gordon Kane's nice little synopsis, "The 
        Dawn of Physics Beyond the Standard Model," Scientific American, June 
        2003, p.  68-75. 
        
        
          
        
        
        To get even closer, 
        see the various unified field theory publications by Mendel Sachs, since 
        his is in general engineerable, and not just mathematical.  The best 
        work (for the future) is work just being completed by 
        Myron Evans of the 
        AIAS, who has discovered a rather astounding "master equation" gathering 
        it all in.  It seems that just about all the other branches of physics 
        can be derived from this single equation -- but the entire mathematical 
        complexities of all the various forms of mathematics folded in there is 
        very sophisticated, even though the equation is rather simple looking.  
        It contains, however, some incredibly powerful congealing of several 
        forms of mathematics and physics.  So it is extraordinarily powerful.  
        But again, it is also engineerable and testable.  So we will be seeing 
        more of it in the future.  The first preliminary paper has been approved 
        for publication in Found. Phys. Lett., and a much longer and deeper 
        paper is in preparation now. 
        
        
          
        
        
        Anyway, you are 
        correct that one must get out of the standard electrical engineering and 
        standard Maxwell-Heaviside electrodynamics.  Much better systems of 
        electrodynamics have long been available in particle physics. 
        
        
          
        
        Best wishes, 
        
        
        Tom Bearden 
        
           |