Re: Wire Length (fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Gerry Reynolds <greynolds@xxxxxxxxxx>



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 08:23:24 -0700
From: Gary Peterson <g.peterson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Steffen Finger <s.finger@xxxxxxx>, Steffen Finger <S.Finger@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Wire Length (fwd)

Bart asked:
> . . . what is wrong with the current laws of
> physics and what is new?

Consider this proposition:
There are differences between the wave equation according to Laplace and the 
wave equation according to Maxwell which result in an inconsistency.  In the 
Laplace equation Maxwell's damping term is missing while the divergence E 
factor does appear.  From the comparison of coefficients of both wave 
descriptions, mathematically, Maxwell's damping term can be seen to 
correspond to Laplace's divergence E factor.

In the physical example of a radio antenna, induced eddy currents in the 
conductor are known to be associated with broad-band RF noise.  As long as 
the wave equation according to Laplace is used while adhering to Maxwell's 
theory at the same time, this can be easily explained.  The problem arises 
in the way that Maxwell's equations alone handle the E-field in the 
dielectric or air directly adjacent to the circulating eddy currents.  While 
the motion of the eddy currents is described as being rotational, the 
associated E-field is not described by Maxwell as being rotational.  A 
contradiction arises because the antenna noise exists in the region adjacent 
to the conductor, but if the Maxwell description is applied, then the 
antenna noise cannot exist.  This contradicts actual experience, since 
measurements show that all antennas do produce some noise.

Maxwell's equations dictate that as the reason for wave damping only E-field 
vortices should be considered, but the equations just describe the eddy 
currents that occur in the electrically conducting parts of the antenna.

In regards to divergence phenomena in dielectrics:
1. Noise is factored out of the Maxwell-derived field theory.
2. The noise part in the wave equation has to be put to zero (div E = 0).
3. The wave descriptions according to Maxwell and according to Laplace are 
inconsistent and contradictory
4. The dielectric losses of an antenna cannot be found physically nor 
calculated with the Maxwell-derived wave equation.
5. Also the dielectric losses of a capacitor are not identified as eddy 
current losses.  (The present interpretation is that these losses are the 
result of defects in the insulating material).
6. That capacitor losses correspond to a generated noise power is not 
identified.
7. The dielectric constant  E (epsilon) has to be written down in a complex 
form to explain the occurring losses, resulting in an inner contradiction 
that is hidden in a complex constant.

Respectfully submitted,
Gary Peterson,
after Konstantin Meyl, et al


> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Subject: Re: Wire Length (fwd)
>
> Hi Jared,
>
> Out of curiosity and NOT to get anyone's feathers ruffled or to be a
> "stinker". I am actually curious:
>
> I realize that you are looking at coils from a different perspective
> than the norm and I don't discredit you for doing that. I think that is
> refreshing.
>
> However, when you post, it's simply here's my formula for wire length.
> If you have the ability to spell out in layman's terms what is new to
> your physics, could you please state out the new physics so that the
> rest of us on the list who are not so "educated" can understand what you
> are saying? In other words, what is wrong with the current laws of
> physics and what is new?
>
> Take care,
> Bart