On Jan 3, 4:56*pm, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...
On Jan 3, 2:44 pm, "Frank" wrote:

David's where he contendes that Gaussian law of STATICS
is one of the basic laws that Maxwell applied/used without the
required proof..On top of which he denies the applicability of statics
with electro magnetics thus any mathematical aproach cannot be
applicable which is absolutely crazy

well art, here is your proof, from the same ramo whinnery and van duzer book
you like to quote....
compare equation (2) in section 2.09 with equation (1) in section 4.07.
note there is no time in either one of them... and section 2 is specifically
about stationary fields, while sectino 4 is maxwell's equations. *only 2 of
maxwell's equations actually are about time varying fields, those are
Faraday's law and Ampere's law. *The other two are Gauss's law taken
straight from the static case, and the equivalent for magnetic flux... both
of which are time invarient.

The thrust of this thread is solely on the difference of radiation
with respect to hollow radiators and solid radiators and it should be
kept at that to provide a reasonable answer as required in any formal
debate.

the only thing hollow about this debate is your head.

David
I bought that book because you refered to it some time ago where you
misrepresented
what you alluded to and now you are doing it again. In your method of
reading did the law that a radiator can be any shape, size or
elevation as long as it is in equilibrium? I can't conceive that a
mathematition of Maxwells staturer could have missed that observation
if as you say he extended gaussian law of statics. Perhaps you have an
answer for that also of the back of your head.
Your positions continue to be absurd from an engineering point of view
and nobody as yet has confirmed your position and what is really wierd
none have denied
Art