On Jan 4, 10:35*am, "Dave" wrote:
"Art Unwin" wrote in message

...

Many a post has been written since that day castigating the very idea
of equivalence to Maxwell,w
even questioning the propriety of the mathematics. So far nobody has
concurred with Dr Davis
with respect to the math that he presented. You David stated that the
mathematical stance taken was illegal

i said that his addition of 't' to the equation was unnecessary since the
law already applies for all time. *and it is a perfectly good static law as
it is, and that is how it is applied in maxwell's equations already. *you
have failed completely to show any good reason why maxwell's equations, as
published in so many places and used for so many years, are not complete and
correct as they are. *you keep handwaving and trying to add in the weak
farce and your magical levitating diamagnetic neutrinos with no mathematical
support... just a lot of handwaving and bloviating. *but don't let me stop
you, i enjoy the rants and off the wall pronouncements, keep it up, its
great fun to watch!

My positions

I have never said that Maxwells laws with correction is incorrect.
Period

The correction added was the weak force as dictated by Newtons laws on
equilibrium

Foucoults discovery of eddy currents solidified the addition of
Maxwells correction

By additins to Gaussian law of statics to make it a dynamic field is
equal to the
Laws of Maxwell thus justifying the presence of particals instead of
waves

Dr Davis provided the mathematics to show that the extension to Gauss
equals Maxwells laws
Antenna programs by adhering to Maxwells laws include the four std
forces one of which
is the weak force This group as a unit denied the viability of what
was presented

The above is proven via optimizer programs that result in tipped
verticle radiators
Computer programs based on MoM provide a closer approximation with
respect to radiation than
designs of planar designs because they utelise the existance of the
weak force.

Laws of continuity do not apply to fractional radiators as closed a
circuit is
provided by current flow thru the center

There is no basis for introducing reflections from the end of a
radiator
which has sporned a illigitamate science of it's own

Nobody to my knoweledge has pointed to the Gaussian law of statics to
supplant the
presence of waves with that of particles which also extends to light

Eddy currents use is shown universally as a levitating force on
diamagnetic materials
a methos used in sorting materials in scrap recovery yards.

Neutrinos / particles have an accepted appearance on this Earth via
migration from the Sun
and which does contain mass.

Now David the above brings you back to the reality and not your
wandering, there is no hand waving !
If you wish to be specific about a particular point or add a statement
that you wish to be added to the above
as pointing to a basic difference in the facts then be my guest. This
newsgroup is intended for the discussion of antennas and radiation a
position I respect.

I recognise that with the above statements I am overturning facts that
are presently accepted where all the statements is a continuity
of showing that the law of statics when made into a arbritary dynamic
field in equilibrium provides for the addition
of equilibrium and particles together with particle spin provided by
the action of the weak force in the science of radiation


Art Unwin KB9MZ........xg (uk)