Thread: Eric P. Dollard
View Single Post
 
Old 04-03-2012, 08:50 PM
garrettm4 garrettm4 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Orbiting Sol somewhere in the Milky Way
Posts: 178
"Electric Field E" is NOT "Electric Field Q"

Forewarning, what you are about to read is HIGHLY theoretical, full of personal bias, and is likely to contain numerous errors, read at your own risk.

Lamare,

I don’t wish to create an argument, but I thought I would give a few comments to the reply you gave to my recent post. It is plain to for all to see that we both use different types of analysis and we also rely heavily on different systems of electrical engineering. I get the feeling that you are more of a “physicist”, deeply concerned with material and “immaterial” PARTICLES and “quantum madness”, rather than a “electro-mechanical engineer”, who is deeply concerned with electrical forces, fields & gradients along with mechanical forces and gradients. I would say you’re like a Richard Feynman type “quantum physicist”. I would like to say (if I may be so bold) that I am more of a (lesser) Steinmetz type of engineer. The two distinct logic systems used by both parties are usually not compatible, they overlap on many levels and appear on the “effective level” to be the same, BUT at the “fundamental level” they are vastly different.

I use Inductive-Logic and Functional Thinking when working on a problem, these can lead one to postulate erroneous answers, but for the sake of discussion let’s use them to derive some conclusions as to why we both agree to disagree on the “meat and potatoes” of the Tesla Transformer and the characteristics of Longitudinal Energy.

In the standard “Maxwellian Electrodynamics” as used and taught today, which has been turned into Ensteinian dogma, the “electric field vector” is E (volts per meter), the “magnetic field vector” is H (amperes per meter) and the Poynting vector (electro-magnetic energy) is S (volt-amps per meter square). This is only a SMALL PART of what is going on, there is NO WAY THAT THESE ALONE CAN DESCRIBE PURE LONGITUDINAL ENERGY, (most transverse situations can be described by the above though). Let’s continue this topic further on, after we cover a few pertinent points.

Let’s look at the STEINMETZ POINT OF VIEW. Steinmetz came up with his OWN IDEA OF REALATIVITY and DISCARDED MAXWELL, quite interesting if you ask me. Steinmetz also incorporated large amounts of Heaviside’s work (which had many disagreements with maxwells theory) and developed a new type of engineering perspective of the Electric Circuit and Transmission Lines. Steinmetz had a more advanced (in my opinion) way of looking at things because he was an engineer that ACTUALLY MADE THINGS and ACTUALLY DEALT WITH VERY LARGE POWER SYSTEMS (multi-megawatt). This is something we all take for granted, we each believe a book can teach us everything, well experience cannot be taught via paper, it is something that only blood, sweat, and tears with actual application can produce.

From the portions I have read of his various books, Steinmetz has built his own “sand box” a system of logic and mathematics separate from Maxwell (but does contain some Maxwellian concepts). In this system we have the Electric Field as POWER not Volts per Meter, using the Dollard symbolism it is denoted with Q (which is actually the “electric flux” of the field and does not necessarily denote any one specific vector), where the Poynting vector S denotes the TEM PORTION of the Electric Field Q. The Dielectric Field Psi is denoted with G (that’s right CAPITAL G, lowercase g was for conductance). Dielectric energy isn’t necessarily VOLTS (e, proportion) it can also be AMPERES (I, induction) this is a fundamental point that separates it from the “electric field vector E” used today. Also the Magnetic Field Phi isn’t necessarily AMPERES (i, proportion) it can also be VOLTS (E, induction) once again this is different from “magnetic field vector H” used today. With these differences, we slowly develop the “QUADRA-POLAR” view of electricity starting with Steinmetz’s and carried further with Mr. Dollard with incorporation of the Bewelly transformer theory. This is also where the four distinct co-efficients L, M, K & C come into play.

Now back to the first topic, the orthogonal E, H and S vectors as used today CANNOT describe the WHOLE SITUATION. There are TWO counter ROATATING S vectors. Also, the orthogonal E & H vectors don’t directly represent the Dielectric and Magnetic fields. The USUAL understanding of these vectors ONLY GIVES THE TRANSVERSE portion of whats going on. If the two counter rotating S vectors sum to a Zero-Vector what does it mean to modern “physics”? What does the NON-orthogonal alignment of the E and H vectors mean to modern physics? What does non transverse propagation mean to modern physics? To be honest I don’t know, but it would seem (to me) that we can’t use modern physics to describe these things.

The “Electric Field vector E”, as taught today has little to do with anything Steinmetz or Mr. Dollard have written about, and mostly pertains to the MAXWELLIANS who use it as a voltage gradient (V/M). The "ELECTRIC FIELD Q", as given by Steinmetz and Mr. Dollard, ISN’T JUST TRANSVERSE ENERGY it contains LONGITUDINAL ENERGY as well. The constituent field axes of a Transverse wave are like the corners of a cube each axis is at 90 degrees to one another. This is seen in the directions of the ELECTRIC FIELD (Q) and its constituents the MAGNETIC FIELD (Phi) and DIELECTRIC FIELD (Psi) all being ORTHOGONAL TO ONE ANOTHER. Oppositely, the constituent field axes of a Longitudinal wave are all along ONE AXIS. This is a fundamental point that shouldn’t be over looked.

I am not saying I have an answer to the problem of the non-periodic solution of a “longitudinal dielectric wave” (or the significance of the Electric Field Q when in the pure Longitudinal Mode). What I am saying, is that just as with TEM waves (TE, TM & TEM), THERE IS MORE THAN ONE MODE OF PROPAGATION with longitudinal waves (LD, LM & LMD). The Magnetic Field is present in TWO of the longitudinal modes; only in ONE mode is the longitudinal dielectric field “free” or independent of the (transverse) magnetic field. If your focus is solely on the LD wave, what you say makes more sense, but REMEMBER it ISN’T the only Longitudinal mode of propagation. I wish you luck in your endeavors, and hopefully someone can tidy up the confusion around longitudinal waves WITHOUT involving “quantum madness”, “scalar insanity” or other absurd farces.

Garrett M
__________________
 

Last edited by garrettm4; 04-06-2012 at 06:35 AM.