On Sep 12, 11:39*am, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...
On Sep 12, 6:18 am, "Dave" wrote:

"Art Unwin" wrote in message

David, what I have stated is based on known laws and phenomina and
started with the recognision
that applying a time varying field and radiators to a Gaussian field
equates to Maxwell's laws.
Right from the start you could not concentrate on proving or
disproving that statement !

around and around we go... i quoted the required passages from jackson and
ramo/whinnery/vanduzer to show that adding time to gauss'es law was
incorrect. *the law is time independent, meaning it does not require a time
term, it applies for all time instantaneously and it is properly included in
maxwell's equations as is. *your addition of *'t' is not necessary. *proof
is not necessary, it is by definition and intuitively obvious to anyone with
the proper background.

Oh David I extended it to make it dynamic by adding a time varying
current where it duplicates Maxwells law
Find a ham who is conversant with physics and mathematics bring him
forward on your behalf for debate.
Tell him what you want debated say, what is stated above. Do that and
you will do a service for ham radio.
Warn him that the question as to whether a static field can be
transformed to a dynamic field quoting any book
that says you can't. He will then refuse to appear. End of story.
Art...is it still raining? Are you still all wet?