Tweet
I will give a deept look at it.
Thank you!
Thank you!
-
-
Attn: tswift
F.Y.I.
In an attempt to amplify my previous statement: "There are two development roads one can follow. Either the (a) iterative "cut and try" method, or, what I'll term, (b) the mathematical engineering physics route; or preferably a healthy slice of both (a) plus (b)," consider:
Taken, in part, from Jim Branson 2013-04-22, Quantum Physics 130, University of California San Diego [UCSD];
Preface
Extracts:
Electron Self Energy
Electron Self Energy
Even in classical electromagnetism, if one can calculates the energy needed to assemble an electron, the result is infinite, yet electrons exist. The quantum self energy correction is also infinite although it can be rendered finite if we accept the fact that out theories are not valid up to infinite energies.
The quantum self energy correction has important, measurable effects. It causes observable energy shifts in Hydrogen and it helps us solve the problem of infinities due to energy denominators from intermediate states.
The Dirac Equation (part 1)
The Dirac Equation
Our goal is to find the analog of the Schrödinger equation for relativistic spin one-half particles, however, we should note that even in the Schrödinger equation, the interaction of the field with spin was rather ad hoc. There was no explanation of the gyromagnetic ratio of 2. One can incorporate spin into the non-relativistic equation by using the Schrödinger-Pauli Hamiltonian which contains the dot product of the Pauli matrices with the momentum operator. ...
These \bgroup\color{black}$\pm$\egroup sign in the exponential is not very surprising from the point of view of possible solutions to a differential equation. The problem now is that for solutions 3 and 4 the momentum and energy operators must have a minus sign added to them and the phase of the wave function at a fixed position behaves in the opposite way as a function of time than what we expect and from solutions 1 and 2. It is as if solutions 3 and 4 are moving backward in time.
If we change the charge on the electron from \bgroup\color{black}$-e$\egroup to \bgroup\color{black}$+e$\egroup and change the sign of the exponent, the Dirac equation remains the invariant. Thus, we can turn the negative exponent solution (going backward in time) into the conventional positive exponent solution if we change the charge to \bgroup\color{black}$+e$\egroup. We can interpret solutions 3 and 4 as positrons. We will make this switch more carefully when we study the charge conjugation operator. ...
NOTE: Difficult to quote science formulas, etc. on this forum - too primitive to handle expressions, sorry - too messy and quite clumsy to fool with.
The first and third have spin up while the second and fourth have spin down. The first and second are positive energy solutions while the third and fourth are ``negative energy solutions'', which we still need to understand. ...
The Dirac equation naturally conserves total angular momentum but not the orbital or spin parts of it. The solutions are not in general eigenstates of any component of spin but are eigenstates of helicity, the component of spin along the direction of the momentum. ...
A calculation of Thomson scattering shows that even simple low energy photon scattering relies on the ``negative energy'' or positron states to get a non-zero answer. If the calculation is done with the two diagrams in which a photon is absorbed then emitted by an electron (and vice-versa) the result is zero at low energy because the interaction Hamiltonian connects the first and second plane wave states with the third and fourth at zero momentum. This is in contradiction to the classical and non-relativistic calculations as well as measurement. There are additional diagrams if we consider the possibility that the photon can create and electron positron pair which annihilates with the initial electron emitting a photon (or with the initial and final photons swapped). These two terms give the right answer. The calculation of Thomson scattering makes it clear that we cannot ignore the new ``negative energy'' or positron states. ...
The Dirac Equation (part 2)
The Dirac Equation
To proceed toward a field theory for electrons and quantization of the Dirac field we wish to find a scalar Lagrangian that yields the Dirac equation. ...
The Dirac field and Hamiltonian can now be rewritten in terms of electron and positron fields for which the energy is always positive by replacing the operator to annihilate a ``negative energy state'' with an operator to create a positron state with the right momentum and spin. ...
There is an (infinite) constant energy, similar but of opposite sign to the one for the quantized EM field, which we must add to make the vacuum state have zero energy. Note that, had we used commuting operators (Bose-Einstein) instead of anti-commuting, there would have been no lowest energy ground state so this Energy subtraction would not have been possible. Fermi-Dirac statistics are required for particles satisfying the Dirac equation. ...
Lots of math and a bit of reading, I know, but this is where the (b) route part starts to shine, especially when combined with the (a) part!
It all might be out there already? Maybe we just haven't connected all the dots yet!
FINLast edited by Solarlab; 05-24-2017, 03:23 AM.Comment
-
Wow, this is AWESOME! I think you may have found exactly what I'm talking about. As in, there is truly a "time-reversed" solution and "negative" energy is completely real but so easy to miss because it looks and acts almost just like regular electricity. My college physics days are a few years behind me but I can brush up, the information is out there. I have been reviewing relativity recently through Yale's Open CourseWare, but I see a goodly chunk of Physics 201 deals with quantum mechanics. It'll take me a few weeks but I will work on getting up to speed so I can formulate my theories in those terms. Although, at a first glance it appears that a lot of the hard work has already been done! Wouldn't that be terribly ironic for mainstream physics, to have the solution already at hand for decades and yet completely ignored and unknown....Originally posted by Solarlab View Post
Yale Open Courses - Fundamentals of Physics II
Open Yale Courses | Fundamentals of Physics IIComment
-
Aluminum screen
Hi guys!
Im curious if some of you have already play with aluminum as a screen or mirror
Like say in the PDF ? And if so if you whant to share your experiment..?
Thank you!Comment
-
more Dirac ...
F.Y.I.
Paul Dirac was awarded a Nobel Prize for his work in discovering the Positron. This area of discovery may also have considerable significance in helping explain and characterize FE/CE.
Discovering the positron
[timeline by CERN]
https://timeline.web.cern.ch/timelin...g-the-positron
Quantised Singularities in the Electromagnetic Field
by P. A. M. Dirac
Published 1 September 1931.DOI: 10.1098/rspa.1931.0130
http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.o...21/60.full.pdf
Of interest: ss 3. Nodal Singularities. {page 66 of the journal}
... "as a result of which our theory becomes mathematically equivalent to the usual one for the motion of an electron in an electromagnetic field and gives us nothing new. There is, however, one further fact which must now be taken into account, namely, that a phase is always undetermined to the extent of an arbitrary integral multiple of 2 pi. This requires a reconsideration of the connection between the k's and the potentials and leads to a new physical phenomenon."
"The condition for an unambiguous physical interpretation of the theory was that the change in phase around a closed curve should be the same for all wave functions. ..."
ss 5. Conclusion {all}
Also, consider:
"The Dirac equation naturally conserves total angular momentum but not the orbital or spin parts of it. The solutions are not in general eigenstates of any component of spin but are eigenstates of helicity, the component of spin along the direction of the momentum." {a small closed curve}
From: The Dirac Equation
The Dirac Equation
Dirac's Prediction of the Positron: A Case Study for the Current Realism Debate
MIT Press Journals
" ... He (Dirac) found that if Vo < E+mc^2 then the transmitted wave decays exponentially in Region II, with some proportion reflected back,—just as one would expect if it obeyed the Schrodinger equation. However, if Vo > E+mc^2 then the transmitted wave is a plane wave in Region II which, normalized to respect the continuity condition, is directed toward Region I, so that the total reflected current appeared to be greater than the total incident current. This result seemed to be pure nonsense, and was deeply troubling from the point of view of contemporary atomic theory which (prior to the discovery of the neutron) explained the neutral charge of the nucleus by the hypothesis of electronic nuclear confinement. ..."
"Bohr wrote to Dirac in late 1929 posing this difficulty and expressed his concerns that a wide scale conceptual revolution would be required to resolve it. Dirac confronted the problem in his reply by proposing his ‘hole’ theory, which interprets the transmitted wave as the current of a positive particle moving right. His reasoning appeared as follows:
• Electrons may transition to negative energy states by spontaneous emission of radiation. However, low (negative) energy states will be stable against further descent since to jump back up requires incident high energy radiation.
• Since electrons are fermions they obey the Pauli exclusion principle so a state can be occupied by at most one electron. Suppose that (nearly) all of the stable low (negative) energy states are occupied. This forces positive energy electrons to remain in positive energy states.
• The negative energy electrons will have uniform (infinite) density so the net electromagnetic field is zero. Only deviations from uniformity will be observable.
• ‘Holes’ in the negative energy state distribution will act like they have positive energy, but with opposite (positive) charge. These are protons, which are annihilated when an electron drops into the corresponding negative energy state.
..."
As well, when considering the above, bare in mind the physical "Grenade (a.k.a. Telescope) Coil."
Misc:
http://physics.gu.se/~tfkhj/TOPO/DiracEquation.pdf
5.9 Spin and Helicity
6.3 Maxwell’s Equations
6.6 High energy e−μ− → e−μ− scattering
7.5 Charged Currents
NOTE: Since this chat board is near impossible to use for anything more than short text submissions; I will likely curtail further posting.
Thanks for reading - good luck with your projects and studies!
FINLast edited by Solarlab; 06-03-2017, 05:50 AM.Comment
-
No, I haven't tried anything with the aluminum screening idea yet. I have read the Vasiliev PDF again more closely this time, it's kind of like a cookbook. There are some partial recipes and whole bunch of building block components, but not a completely detailed plan to follow. I agree with Vasiliev's approach that developing an understanding of the physics at work is absolutely crucial, because otherwise all one can do is follow someone else's recipe without understanding why. To paraphrase an old credit card commercial, "Plans to build a working Don Smith device.... incredibly valuable. Knowing what Don Smith knew? Priceless!" Still, it would be nice if Vasiliev gave more details.Originally posted by Wistiti View Post
So far all I've done with replication is to wind an asymmetric transformer of the kind referred to in the text. On page 99, figure 35 gives an illustration of a Kacher oscillator (basically the same as a slayer exciter, a low power CW solid state Tesla coil), combined with a C-shaped aluminum sleeve to pull energy up from the ground, with an output transformer in the ground line as I have referred to before. Many folks around this thread will probably recognize this as the same as Zilano's "radiant harvesting without diodes". I have tried this arrangement before without success, but in the text Vasiliev goes on to say (poorly translated from the Russian) "As soon as the ground rule of the circuit or use a standard transformer (not using a longitudinal winding), the construction stops working." So there is something important about using an asymmetric transformer, Zilano just described a 1-turn toroidal transformer by using two metal strips with a stack of ferrite cores, one inside and one outside. Vasiliev doesn't give any design information for the asymmetric transformer but he does give a picture, so I tried to emulate this. I had a 3-inch powdered iron core handy from previous experiments, so I built a small wooden jig to hold the turns while winding and rewound it Vasiliev's way. The core is a micrometals T300-52 core, 3"x0.5"x0.5" toroid, with 52 mix (about 75 permeability).
Once I have some more experimenting time I will rig this up to my slayer exciter and see what happens. If there is any hint of positive results it will probably be a useful exercise to play around with the number of turns in the circumferential/longitudinal winding to see how much of a difference that makes. I took a picture of the toroid as wound, note that there are only two contiguous wires that make up three windings. One wire wraps all the way around the circumference of the toroid for 8 turns, then makes a 90 degree bend (visible in the picture) and becomes a regular toroidal winding with 13 turns. The other winding is a completely standard toroidal winding with 13 turns.Comment
-
Yes, I agree! I think we have hit some real pay dirt here, this is a lever whereby establishment folks schooled and indoctrinated into conventional concepts, can begin to get a handle on our research here at forums like this. I think you struck gold with this discovery about the Dirac equation, it seems to directly confirm that "electrons", as we usually think of them, can have both a normal and a phase-conjugate character. There are four terms in the Dirac equation, the two "electron" terms and the two "positron" terms and they are all related. It's not too big a stretch even for physicists to admit that conventional electricity, carried through conductive metal wires by "electrons", can change character and be essentially a "positron" current, or some blend of the two characters at the same time. This isn't a positron in the conventional sense of an antiparticle to the electron, it's a positron in the sense Vasiliev uses the term and that it seems to appear in the Dirac equation. We essentially have this Janus electron, with two faces, two completely different sides to its character. Under the right conditions it will show you the other face.Originally posted by Solarlab View PostComment
-
Hi twsift!
Glad to see you are still working on it after all..... ;-)
Just let you know I am also slowly on it.( with the poor free time I have for now)
Lets us share our finding for the benefit of all......!!!
Sincerly
WistitiComment
-
Dots Connected...!!!
F.Y.I
So as not to leave this approach hanging - - -
With a very good degree of confidence I believe we now have a viable link between
the "practical application" and the "engineering science" underlying Ruslan's FE/CE
generator. Furthermore, there appears to be an accurate, usable, method of tying the
hardware and theory together using recent computer aided engineering (CAE).
Although not completely polished and vetted yet; a combination of Maxwell's equations
and slightly modified Dirac equations are providing good answers that correlate to
physical apparatus bench and insitu testing with the design parameters indicating some
very good development. This is still a work-in-progress but so far is very encouraging!
Briefly:
Analysis of Ruslan's device by physically modelling it in CAD - Solidworks - and
using EM analysis programs like CST, Ansys Electronics, FEKO, etc. they all came up
somewhat short. Under the (undisclosed) skin of these packages it appears, for the
most part, that they rely primarily on Maxwell's equations in one form or another and
can not be modified at the equation level. Note that since I do not have a working
model of Don Smith's device; it has not yet been a target for analysis.
Also, owing to the extremely long simulation times and huge meshing requirements
(e.g. meshing a telescope coil) even analyzing a scaled, symmetrically reduced, version
on a multi-core network took what felt like a lifetime and yielded little of any technical
or scientific value.
Another Approach:
Looking for a better analysis and integrated design approach, a colleague introduced COMSOL.
Offering a broader, more scientific oriented CAE suite this package allows complex "equation
modifications" as well as insitu inter-dicipline integration both internally and parametricly with,
for example, the physical Solidworks model. By modifying the Dirac equations and invoking
Maxwell's equations where needed,
preliminary analysis and design results so far look great!!!!
Conclusion:
In short - these results, and this approach, are of great value - and appears (so far at least) to
allow the "connecting-of-the-dots."
I will not attempt to provide any further details in this forum - too equation orientated
and far too expansive.
A great deal of related information and the long development approach is outlined to a large
extent in my previous posts (spanning several years) both on this forum and the OU forum,
as well as several foreign forums, should there be further interest. Much work still left to be done...
FINComment
-
Wow, you have really done a lot of work on this! I wasn't previously aware of the COMSOL software, if there is a way to make off-the-shelf software model overunity devices then THIS IS HUGE. I assumed it would be necessary to write new software from the ground up, which would be an unbelievably massive undertaking. In a former career a long time ago now, I was a computational modeling engineer with a Silicon Graphics Indigo workstation on my desk. I am quite familiar with finite element modeling software, is there any way you can write a white paper or at least a short "how to" describing what to do within COMSOL to achieve the results you're getting?Originally posted by Solarlab View Post
Unfortunately the COMSOL package appears to be high-dollar commercial software, any idea how much they want for a license?Comment
-
I like this approach.
Shooting fly with a rocket science.
Comment
-
Infinite density
Does not infinite density end the universe?Originally posted by Solarlab View PostComment
-
No White Paper - however...
F.Y.I.
No White Paper at this time but here is an example of using Dirac equations in COMSOL:
Relativistic Quantum Mechanics Applications Using The Time Independent Dirac Equation In COMSOL
A. J. Kalinowski *1 1 Consultant *Corresponding author: East Lyme CT 06333, kalinoaj@aol.com
https://www.comsol.com/paper/downloa...wski_paper.pdf
Consider 5.1 Model Parameters - in particular particle velocity (plane or cylindrical wave) where E [sub} p is particle energy (set up by HV - so called antenna of TT). This paper seeks steady state [SS] - I do not believe the telescope coil (the FE/CE system) peak performance operates at SS - TBD.
* recall briefly:
- {from previous post} "However, if Vo > E+mc^2 then the transmitted wave is a plane wave in Region II which, normalized to respect the continuity condition, is directed toward Region I, so that the total reflected current appeared to be greater than the total incident current."
- Tesla Transformer sets up HV pulses [particle {e} velocity/energy;
- Telescope coil {slow wave - long wire equivelant} operates in Standing Wave [SW] mode;
+ see Vyacheslav Gorchillin's site for FE/CE related details:
General - Google Translate
Calculations - Standing Waves in Long Lines - Google Translate
Again; analysis of SW using Maxwell only does not appear to yield equivalent measured results.
- Asymmetric system design in general; for a detailed discussion refer to
Vladimir Utkin notes or see https://translate.google.com/transla...j-texniki.136/ all the subjects by AAbramovich.
- There is lots more that I'm sure I have left out or do not yet know...
NOTE: My FYI's are meant to only provide some possible assistance in understanding and discovering the theory behind FE/CE. The information is not intended nor meant to be an "FE/CE Cook Book."
Sorry to disappoint the many "lurkers, lamers and nay-Sayers" here... but with a little work and perseverance I'm convinced you CAN figure it all out for yourself one way or the other!
Anyway; I must move on... Have a great day and good luck to you all.
FINLast edited by Solarlab; 06-04-2017, 11:56 PM.Comment
-
Bogaslaw and Bistander:
Attention: boguslaw and bistander
Your comments, or quotes, or whatever they are; do not seem to make any sense - in context that is.... ???
If they were just meant to be the "typical stupid stuff" then that would explain it!
? waste ?Comment
-
Infinite density
Hi Mr. Solarlab,Originally posted by Solarlab View Post
I've looked over the link to Dirac equation which you supplied. I cannot follow the math. Either I never had the prerequisites or it's been too long ago. However, infinite density, regardless of context, is something which I do understand. And it's not going to happen.
Anyway, thanks for some interesting posts.
biComment
Comment