what is charge?

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed? Chronicles of scientific misbehavior. The role of heretic-pioneers and forbidden questions in the sciences. Is peer review working? The perverse "consensus of leading scientists." Good public relations versus good science.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

what is charge?

Unread postby Alphane » Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 pm

What is charge?
Alphane
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:51 pm

Basic definitions...

Unread postby MGmirkin » Sat May 17, 2008 12:43 am

Alphane wrote:What is charge?


Probably depends on how you mean the question and who you ask... For something approximating a standard definition of various things, Wikipedia is slightly helpful. Though it's not always concise or necessarily accurate (due to the fact that anyone can change anything at any time for any reason), so take things with a grain of salt...

I'd say you might want to read the following inter-related entries (they were helpful to me wayback to get the extremely basic conceptual definitions straight in my head):

(Elementary charge)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_charge

(Electric charge)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_charge


(Charge carrier)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_carrier

(Electron)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron

(Proton)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton

(Neutron)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron

(Ion)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion


(Static electricity)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_electricity

(Electric current)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current


(Magnetic field)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field

(Electromagnetic field)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_field

(Electric field)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_field


(Conductor)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_conductor

(Semiconductor)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor

(Insulator)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulator_%28electrical%29

I know, I know, lots of reading. But, good places to start nonetheless. you can mostly ignore the more technical parts of the articles and just read the conceptual pieces. If I have time, I may copy the relevant descriptions. But I don't have time at this particular moment for that much copying / pasting / re-linking...

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law
User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby StevenO » Sat May 17, 2008 12:53 am

Alphane wrote:What is charge?

The smallest stable structure of standing EM waves, an oscillating sphere, structured as a tetrahedron, either waving inside out (+) or outside in(-).

Image
First, God decided he was lonely. Then it got out of hand. Now we have this mess called life...
The past is out of date. Start living your future. Align with your dreams. Now execute.
User avatar
StevenO
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby MGmirkin » Sat May 17, 2008 1:33 am

StevenO wrote:
Alphane wrote:What is charge?

The smallest stable structure of standing EM waves, an oscillating sphere, structured as a tetrahedron, either waving inside out (+) or outside in(-).


Got a reliable cite on that?
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law
User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby bboyer » Sat May 17, 2008 2:01 am

Alphane wrote:What is charge?


The question of a lifetime, imho. Short answer, no one really knows. Best concept I've been able to come up with personally to fundamentally describe it for myself is "difference" (of whatever flavor).

In non-mathematical terms one of the best places to start with is here, I think (Bill Beaty's page): WHAT IS "ELECTRIC CHARGE?"

What you'll probably get in answer to this, however, will be something akin to:

"The number of equations, that equal 10, is directly proportional to the number of mathematicians involved." (not sure who said that tho' it was quoted in an online book by j.Newcombe Hodges, so may have been him)
There is something beyond our mind which abides in silence within our mind. It is the supreme mystery beyond thought. Let one's mind and one's subtle body rest upon that and not rest on anything else. — Maitri Upanishad
User avatar
bboyer
 
Posts: 2410
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:50 pm
Location: Upland, CA, USA

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby StevenO » Sat May 17, 2008 5:55 am

MGmirkin wrote:
StevenO wrote:
Alphane wrote:What is charge?

The smallest stable structure of standing EM waves, an oscillating sphere, structured as a tetrahedron, either waving inside out (+) or outside in(-).

Got a reliable cite on that?
~Michael Gmirkin

It's a bit of a long story, but it is a logical conclusion from the Xavier Borg story that I linked in the APM thread:
http://www.blazelabs.com/f-p-conv.asp
Unknown to many of us, it is a fact that Einstein rejected the discrete point particle and stated that matter must be spherical entities extended in space. He writes "Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept "empty space" loses its meaning. Since the theory of general relativity implies the representation of physical reality by a continuous field, the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundamental part, nor can the concept of motion. The particle can only appear as a limited region in space in which the field strength or the energy density are particularly high." Erwin Schroedinger understood the requirements of particle structure when he wrote in 1937: "What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just 'Schaumkronen'. ('Schaum' means foam, 'Krone' means crest). He believed that quantum waves were real, not probability distributions with a hidden particle wondering inside, and that the particles are formed by the appearence of crests over the sea of energy. He clearly saw that abolishing the discrete point particle would remove the paradoxes of 'wave-particle duality' and the 'collapse of the wave function'.

No atoms had even remotely been seen visually until 1985, when IBM Research Almaden Labs was the first to use an electron tunneling microscope to actually photograph the organization of molecules of germanium in an ink-blot. Here what we see from this experiment are indistinct, fuzzy spherical objects that appear to have some non-spherical geometric qualities to their shape and are in an extremely geometric pattern of organization, which was definitely a surprise for conventional science. How could the random nature of atoms described by the Heisenberg principle, ever result in such an ordered pattern? Perhaps the probability distributions are not 'distributions' at all. The image shown below was artificially colored orange and green to allow the eye to discriminate between the two types of atom that were seen:
Image
Actual photograph of atoms of germanium in an ink-blot.
Furthermore, when quantum physicists have studied the electrons of the atom, they have observed that they are not actually points at all, not particulate in nature, but rather form smooth, teardrop-shaped clouds where the narrowest ends of the drops converge upon a very tiny point in the center.

There are no Electron Orbits! Bohr's model, which started the notion of electrons traveling around the nucleus like planets has misled a lot of people and scientists. If you have learned such an idea, forget about it immediately. Instead, all calculations and all experiments show that no satellite-like orbital motion exists in the normal atom. Instead, there are standing wave patterns, very similar indeed to the polar plots of antenna radiation patterns. For example, see the case M=0 and L=0, where the standing wave pattern is entirely spherical, this being equivalent to a pure isotropic antenna radiation plot. Similarly for M=1, L=1, the pattern is exactly the same as that of a half wave dipole, and so on. No one ever asks or requires for an antenna's radiation pattern to be formed of orbiting electrons, and yet we know that the standing wave generated from a typical radio antenna, posseses inertia, and can act upon external matter by means of radiation pressure. The electron path is NOT around and far off the nucleus, nor is the atom made up of 99.999% empty space!. Instead, the center of the electron pattern is also the center of the proton pattern. This is the normal situation of the H atoms in the universe; they have spherical symmetry, not orbits. You see, particulate matter is not requirement to generate the effects known to define matter.

To complicate things further, we have got the particle-wave dual nature enigma. The classical double slit diffraction experiment using a beam of electrons instead of light, shows us that we still get a diffraction pattern. The interpretation of this is that matter travels as a wave. Further more if we arrange a setup for light to enter the slits one photon at a time, or even one electron at a time, in both cases, we still get a build up a diffraction pattern over time. One interpretation of this result is that a single photon or electron goes through both slits and interferes with itself. Thus the common statement accepted by todays textbooks is that "matter acts as both a particle and as a wave." This statement obviously leaves a lot of holes in physics, since no mechanism is defined for how the transformation from one entity to the other is actually done. So, is matter a particle or a wave in nature?. Actually none of them, both the wave and particle models are flawed and/or incomplete models for subatomic particles as will be shown in this research section.
<...>
Image
The realities of mainstream science...

(I was planning to write an article on electron models as an example of progressing insights in QM/EM but writing a good story takes time).
First, God decided he was lonely. Then it got out of hand. Now we have this mess called life...
The past is out of date. Start living your future. Align with your dreams. Now execute.
User avatar
StevenO
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby StevenO » Sat May 17, 2008 6:16 am

Mathematical proof that the electron is a spherical electromagnetic standing wave

Let's find the 'mass' of a spherical standing wave having the same diameter and charge of the electron:

Starting from the equation for the capacitance of an isolated spherical charge: C= 4.pi.e0.r
The total internal energy stored in an electromagnetic standing wave = Electric field energy + Magnetic field energy, where Electric field energy = Magnetic field energy, hence:
Total internal energy E = 2 * Electric field Energy = 2 * Magnetic field energy ... so it's enough if we solve for one of these to get the total internal energy for an electron.

Total internal energy E = 2 * Electrical Energy = 2* (1/2QV) = QV ... where V=Q/C

Total internal energy E = Q2/C ... substituting for C, we get

Total internal energy E = Q2/(4.pi.e0.r),

Substituting for Q=electron charge=1.602E-19 Coulombs, r=classical electron radius= 2.8179E-15 m, and e0 = permittivity of free space = 8.854E-12 F/m
Total internal energy E = 8.18735E-14 Joules

Using E=mc2, we get

Electron standing wave mass = 9.1096E-31kg ... which is the known electron mass.

This clearly shows that what we call electron mass is nothing but the electromagnetic effect of a spherical standing wave.
First, God decided he was lonely. Then it got out of hand. Now we have this mess called life...
The past is out of date. Start living your future. Align with your dreams. Now execute.
User avatar
StevenO
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby junglelord » Sat May 17, 2008 11:55 am

The smallest stable structure of standing EM waves, an oscillating sphere, structured as a tetrahedron, either waving inside out (+) or outside in(-).


I do not agree with that. The smallest structure of a standing wave, of any type, is the spiral vortex. Nature is self evident in this law. This spiral vortex golden mean form produces the tetrahedron and all platonic solids. That is a fact of Zome geometry, and geometry in general, it is the fundamental factor in sacred geometry. All forms come from the spiral vortex, not from the tetrahedron. The flexibility of the EM charge toroidial form can become any platonic solid shape.
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord
User avatar
junglelord
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby junglelord » Sat May 17, 2008 7:10 pm

Two Charges of APM, Electrostatic, and Strong Charge EM. Spherical nucleus and waving toroidial electrons.
SOTA pages 206-207-208

Electrostatic Force Law
the coulomb law is a law governing the force between electrostatic charges. Experiment showed that the distance squared was inversely proportional to the amount of the electrostatic charges. Coulomb notice that the above law does not hold when the charges become very close to each other. This is because the strong charge begins to take over. The boundary between the electrostatic charge dominance and the electromagnetic charge dominance is gradual. The balance between these two forces results in the "weak interaction".

Strong Force Law
The strong force law is unknown to modern physics. According to the standard model, the strong force is in physics, the force that holds particles together in the atomic nucleus and the force to hold quarks together in elementary particles. this is said to be accomplished by "gluons".

However, the strong force carrier in the Aether Physics Model is the electromagnetic charge, or strong charge. The strong charge quantifies as the angular momentum of the onn times the conductance of the Aether. Therefore the eletrostatic charge is constant with each onn (sub atomic particle), but is individual for each sub atomic particle with the Strong charge due to the angular momentum. The strong force of the proton calculates using the strong force law, which is similar to that of the electrostatic force law and the gravitational law. As in the case of the electrostatic law, the product of two strong charges calculates from a single dimension of each charge. Since the binding force causes the protons and neutrons to have large small radii and small large radii, the onta appear spherical. Thus, the coulomb constant instead of the Aether unit constant is the force mediator.

The strong force law for free protons and free neutrons would probably integrate the Aether unit constant with the coulomb constant. This is because free protons and free neutrons are more toroidal in shape. However, once they bind, they become spherical in shape.

The free proton has a very small, small radius, and a very large, large radius. Thus, a single hydrogen atom is both very thin and very wide. However, as soon as protons and neutrons bind, the strong charge causes the onta to contract. The large radius becomes much smaller and the small radius becomes a much larger. This causes the geometry of the strong charge to form from toroidal to spherical and geometry.

As long as the total surface area of the onn (sub atomic particle, electron, proton, neutron) remains exactly one quantum length squared, the onn can assume any shape without violating conservation of angular momentum, mass, energy or any other percieved conservation law.

When onta are relatively far apart, the coulomb electrostatic constant mediates a spherical geometry charge. When protons and neutrons are contracting, coulombs constant still mediates spherical geometry charge. The change of shape from toroidal to spherical does not appear to occur to bound electrons within Atoms, which have a mass of about 1836 times less than the proton and neutron.
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord
User avatar
junglelord
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby Solar » Sat May 17, 2008 9:53 pm

junglelord wrote:Two Charges of APM, Electrostatic, and Strong Charge EM. Spherical nucleus and waving toroidial electrons.
SOTA pages 206-207-208


Strong Force Law
The strong force law is unknown to modern physics. According to the standard model, the strong force is in physics, the force that holds particles together in the atomic nucleus and the force to hold quarks together in elementary particles. this is said to be accomplished by "gluons".

However, the strong force carrier in the Aether Physics Model is the electromagnetic charge, or strong charge.


Now we're talkin'!!
"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
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1306
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby junglelord » Mon May 19, 2008 7:56 am

This work by Buckminster Fuller states the Tetrahedron is the basic configuration of atomic stucture.
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergeti ... etics.html
However I still think all forms come from the golden mean and pi, and this is not disputed with teterahedron symmetry, but rather supports it.
:D
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord
User avatar
junglelord
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby junglelord » Mon May 19, 2008 11:23 am

Characteristics of the Tetrahedron - Buckminster Fuller / Synergistics
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergeti ... ml#986.061
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord
User avatar
junglelord
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby junglelord » Mon May 19, 2008 1:25 pm

Jitterbug of the tetrahedron and the backward time line of APM, Aethermetry non mass, and all that stuff related to my understanding of the universe, quantum 2 spin totals and our perception of the world via 1 spin photons (1/2 of reality)...Man lives in the sunlit world of what he believes to be reality. But there is, unseen by most, an underworld, a place that is just as real, but not as brightly lit... a Darkside."

This folded model also demonstrates the tetrahedron "turning itself inside out," for the three petals can be opened and flattened out again, and then folded back in the opposite direction, creating the mirror-image or "negative" tetrahedron. Fuller then reminds us that "unity is plural and at minimum two" and every system has an invisible negative counterpart. "Negative Universe is the complementary but invisible Universe" (351.00). Such digressions are unavoidable; for Fuller the implications of a model are always multifaceted, one observation plunging into another, layers upon layers, intertwined.
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/marksomers/110.html
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord
User avatar
junglelord
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby saul » Tue May 20, 2008 2:08 am

Charge is a divergence of electric field.
saul
 
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:06 am

Re: what is charge?

Unread postby StevenO » Tue May 20, 2008 1:07 pm

saul wrote:Charge is a divergence of electric field.

Well....that would amount to circular reasoning. Electric fields are the results of interaction between multiple charges.

The problem to understand basic charge is that it can best be described as space itself moving in three-dimensional time. Imagine something that simultaneously rotates in three dimensions in place. Since one-dimensional time is a common human and scientific misconception it might take a little while to grasp the concept...but it is really not different from three dimensional space.
First, God decided he was lonely. Then it got out of hand. Now we have this mess called life...
The past is out of date. Start living your future. Align with your dreams. Now execute.
User avatar
StevenO
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:08 pm

Next

Return to The Future of Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests