Zyxzevn wrote: ↑
Fri Dec 27, 2019 12:26 pm
He makes several mistakes in his presentation.
He just omits the electric field without good justification, and
mixes up some forces to make his idea appear fine.
Nah, he did not omit the electric field. That presentation is one of the absolute best historical presentations chronicling the advent of electrical engineering from its experimental foundations and the subsequent usurpation of the theoretics behind electrical phenomena by relativity. In this presentation Eric Dollard utilizes the approach of Charles Proteus Steinmetz as in:
"Unfortunately, to large extent in dealing with dielectric fields the prehistoric conception of the electrostatic charge (electron) on the conductor still exists, and by its use destroys the analogy between the two components of the electric field, the magnetic and the dielectric, and makes the consideration of dielectric fields unnecessarily complicated.” - Electric Discharges, Waves and Impulses: Charles Proteus Stienmetz
See Also: Introduction to Dielectricity & Capacitance
by Eric P. Dollard
See Also: Steinmetz Analogy Between Magnetic and Dielectric
- Lori Gardi
Steinmetz realized that no; one cannot have "energy storage" in the form of a "field" just willy-nilly sitting in the Space without there being some aspect (of said Space) that functions like a Dielectric ('polarizable substance'). Humanity cannot store electric energy without the 'substances' constituting Capacitors. This is one of those areas of thought wherein relativistic thinking has Electrodynamic Theory looking quite idiotic. How is it that relativity can abscond with the Aether concept, reconstruct the principle into a bizarre "space-time fabric", then use that to supposedly account for gravitation affects by "bending" - and then, simultaneously leave Electrodynamic Theory bereft of its foundation?? Talk about a Jedi Mindtrick!
This then becomes the reasoning behind Eric Dollard likewise reversing the relationship between the so called “Insulator” (a dielectric”) and that which may be said to “obstruct’, ‘reflect’, or reject becoming 'inwardly polarized' - the wire. For, the “electricity” flows ‘into’ the Dielectric whereas the wire ‘obstructs’ (does not permit) an ‘inward’ flow. Not so complicated when one also considers the words of Oliver Heaviside when saying:
Now, in Maxwell's theory there is the potential energy of the displacement produced in the dielectric parts by the electric force, and there is the kinetic or magnetic energy of the magnetic force in all parts of the field, including the conducting parts. They are supposed to be set up by the current in the wire. We reverse this
; the current in the wire is set up by the energy transmitted through the medium around it
… - The Electrician January 10, 1885
Also, in the book “Tesla: Man out of Time”
by Margaret Cheney, Chapter 21: Radar, between pages 260-263, explains an interesting picture for the acceptance of the relativity idea - it begins with “In any event Edison had his hands full feuding with the Navy bureaucracy and cold smoldering the “perfessers” who had begun clamoring for a piece of that new taste treat, the federal research pie.”
The book presents in some four pages what it took E. Dollard 3hours to explain - how the “line between practical men (engineers) and theoreticians (physicist)”
were drawn in a quest to get those funds. All that was needed was an event claiming to ‘substantiate’ the notions of the theoreticians, the “prefessers” as Edison liked to call them, and the throne of “practical men” (experimenters like Edison, Tesla, Pupin, A. Bell) was usurped. It has been mathematical "beauty", particle accelerators, big bang, black holes, string theory, many worlds, time travel, thought experiments, twins in space (or not) etc. - ever since with no end in sight.
Is Theoretical Physics Wasting Our Best Living Minds On Nonsense?
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden