On Sep 12, 10:35*am, Art Unwin wrote:
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 !
*Until you can determine whether that is correct or not you cannot
move forward.
As yet, nobody has disproved that statement with counter facts. If you
cannot explain that simple fact
you surely cannot understand Newtons laws and how the use of such laws
provide the presence
of eddy current which provides a skin depth of mechanical resistance.
I use the term mechanic
*because I recognise the importance of the four forces in the standard
model and the Grand Universal Theory.
So until you are able to concentrate and tackle the Gauss and Maxwell
connection that I started with
there is no hope for you to procede in a scientific matter, and that
goes for every body, not just you.
Best regards
Art

To it would be nice if physics was so tidy that there could be shown a
neat relationship of the 4 forces, thus the birth of a new Grand
Unification Theory. Einstein would have liked to find the unifying
factor but he dies before he could accomplish that. He never claimed
that there had to be a iuifier, only that physics was of such an
orderly nature that it would seem consistent that there should be a
unification.

Art is acting on the assumption that there MUST be a unifier. The CERN
scientists postulate that some particle such as a theoretical higgs
boson could be discovered and observed as the "God particle" that
imparts matter to other particles which creates mass, matter being
pervasive in the universe but mostly in its invisible dark form. From
that they say that we could begin to study the relationship of this
higgs boson to the other seeminly unrelated forces and find a grand
unifier.

To me, the concept of a unifier is NOT something that necessarily has
to exist. Maybe there is no unifier and in fact, the student of
quantum physics does not see physics as being completely orderly as a
student of astrophysics sees it. At the quantum level, the universe is
highly random and probabilistic. Any forces we have identified at that
level, and future forces we discover, do not have to be unified by any
theory; that is not the way I see things either. I see no reason for
scientisits to chase after this holy grail (other than by doing so at
low cost and in their spare time so as not to waster resources) and I
see the likelihood of anyone finding it at 10% at best. There is no
observation or calculation that states a unifier must exist,

For all the good that will result in the future from the CERN
accelerator, looking for a unfier based on new studies of a "higgs
boson" (God) particle is a Hail Mary pass that in all likelihood will
not succeed. Let's not be dissapointed when it doesn't. For HF
antennas, most is already known which needs to be known by application
of known EM principles, the study of which has infinitely less
likelihood of pointing to a grand unifier as Art repeatedly attempts
in these postings. However, he is doing it in his spare time and at no
cost to society thus fulfilling what I think is the amount of
resources should be expended in finding the grand unifier.