View Single Post
  #94   Report Post  
Old November 11th 08, 01:58 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Frank Frank is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 19
Default "Unwashed" hams and "washed" hams

Frank, a couple of years ago I explained the inter weaving of Gauss
law of statics with that of Maxwell. I twas this that met the most
resistance of the this group.They seemed to see staics as something
divorced from electromagnetics and thus one could not use equations
of one with respect to the other. Thus when it was shown
that the statics mathematics equated with Maxwells laws every body
said that was not valid.


I don't understand the above comments since Gauss' laws for electric
and magnetic fields are the 3rd and 4th of Maxwell's equations. In
fact the equations for static and the time-varying case are identical,
as follows, in point form:

DEL dot D = rho, and;

DEL dot B = 0

(Paul and Nasar, pp 199, 200.)

The above is identical to that found in the classic EM text:
"Electromagnetic Theory", by Julius Adams Stratton of MIT; published
in 1941. There is nothing new in any of this.
Probably the development of a wave equation from Maxwell's
equation was a bit of overkill to make a point.

The text you supplied made specific reference to this mathematical
interplay whilst talking about quasi
statics tho they never did the interface that I did. It was this
rejection at the beginning that set the stage
for years long rebuttle to the ideas that I put forward. To this day
pretty much all are of the position that interfacing
statics with dynamic fields or time varying currents was totally
invalid which I put down to the education they received some 50 years
ago.
It was for that reason I was delighted to see a modern book that
treated the subject with startling clarity.


The "Quasi-static" referred to above only effect displacement
current in Ampere's law.

About 2 years ago a white paper was put out by two scientists that
covers the Aether and its driving relationship
to the Universe as well as revisiting the thinkings of the past with
which they outlined questions that the present aproach
seem to gloss over, as well as the revolving constituents( not foam)
of the fast moving and revolving Aether and comparing present day
.............................................


What are the references to the above mentioned paper?

73,

Frank