Also, Field Theories in Word:http://rbduncan.com/fieldtheory.doc
& Field Theories in Adobe pdf:http://rbduncan.com/fieldtheory.pdfFitzpatrick's 1966 book showed the relative motion laws of A. Ampère unified the forces.
This was the way the site --below-- looked many years ago. - - Dan Fitz.
Page 4. of 7 pages.
Back to Page 1. - - to Page 5.
Continued from Page 3.
This constancy of not only the speed of light, but rather the constancy of all action at a distance is the key that we have been looking for.
Let's take another look at Figure 1. and the wires C D and C' D'.
We are going to make the assumption that since we are not going to change the size of the electrons flowing through the wires and since the electrons traveling towards the right in wire C D will be approaching the electrons in wire C' D' almost at the speed of light, then how can we reconcile the fact that the speed of light, or more correctly, the speed of action at a distance between the electrons in wire C D and C' D' will have to be the same as that between the electrons of wires A B and A' B' when those electrons are going in the same direction, as compared to those electrons in the opposite directions in the bottom two wires?
Instead of the electrons in wires C D and C' D' contracting when they approach each other, as Einstein tells us, the electrons in the bottom wires take another course that is just as effective, they merely move away from each other at right angles to their forward movement and in this way the speed of light or rather the speed of action at a distance remains a constant and of course the wires containing these move away from each other with their fast moving electrons.
Utilizing this constancy of action at a distance as our key, we are now able to answer very many more questions about our universe. . Later we'll see the cause of the earth's magnetism.
We will see centrifugal force, the gyroscope and pendulum in a different light as well.
We will understand what inertia really amounts to.
We will learn why Einstein pictured our universe as unbounded but yet finite.
The answer to why we see the stars that are farther and farther away receding from us faster and faster will be answered as well.
In later pages we will be able to visualize mass and energy being the same thing thus conforming to Einstein's E= MC2.
In the next chapter, however, we will show that the faster a particle travels, the greater is the illusion of its negative charge but if this speed is a combination of a forward and rotary speed then we will have the illusion of a positive charge.
The explanation that we have given which shows the speed of the electron, compared to the inactivity of the nucleus, gives us the illusion of positive and negative charges, will suffice for most of the world of electrostatics but it is not enough when we are moving free particles through a magnetic field.
Such an example we have below in Figure 6.
Here we have a piece of radium inside of the hollow depression in the lead block as shown. . Around this we have a strong magnetic field.
We then find that the beta particles (high speed electrons) are traveling at speeds from 10% to 99.8% of the speed of light.
These are bent to the right in the above drawing (Figure 6.)
This seems correct because they should try to orbit along with the electrons that are producing the magnetic field.
What about the alpha particles, however?
These are high speed helium nuclei.
They dislodge electrons from the molecules of any gas that they collide with, then becoming ions.
The ions, thus produced, will bend to the left as in the above drawing.
This is opposite to the direction that the beta particles bend. . How can we give an answer to this effect?
The answer is found in examining the ion that is produced when the alpha particle has acquired an electron.
The strong magnetic field will make the electron orbit around the alpha particle in the same plane as the magnetic field produced by the electrons in the electromagnet that we are using to get our magnetic field.
The same basic action occurs here also because the speed of forward movement is added to the speed of rotation of the electron around the alpha particle and the whole rotating unit is pulled to the left.
Since we have no way of knowing all of the various combinations of orbiting particles that may occur, it seems that the fog tracks that scientists have observed in the cloud chambers will have to be re-evaluated giving a different concept of anti-matter.
We become even more certain of our conclusion that the positive charge is an illusion when we examine the scattering of alpha particles by thin metal foils in the new light of our Law of Relative Motion.
If the earth were magnetized uniformly throughout, it would be necessary for it to have a certain uniform distribution of magnetic flux throughout its entire volume.
We find, however, as we dig into the surface of the earth, these layers are not magnetized (taking an average) to such an intensity. . We know also that the temperature increases the farther a person goes into the depth of the earth.
The Curie point for iron being 860 degrees Centigrade is reached at a depth of sixty miles.
This leads us to believe that there could be no residual magnetism whatsoever below this sixty miles.
All of this seems to indicate that the magnetism of the earth cannot be caused by large magnetic deposits.
Experiments have also been made by measuring the downward variation in deep mines, in the earth, of the magnetic component.
The evidence obtained in this way is found to be more on the side of the scale indicating that the earth's magnetism was caused from above and not from below.
Another factor that interests us at this stage of our inquisitive study of the earth's magnetism is that daily figures from various magnetic observatories around the world are being recorded every three hours and the results sent to a coordinating office at de Bilt, Holland. . The figures that we observe at this coordinating office are being composed of the following parts:
1. A basic steady field that composes 1/4 to 1/3 of the total magnetism of the earth.
2. A field that shifts yearly.
3. Daily increases and decreases.
4. A field that increases and decreases with the lunar month.
The daily variation also seems to pick up in intensity, day after day, finally reaching a peak at the observation station as summer time approaches.
The great German mathematician Gauss, sensed that there was a possibility of two major magnetic fields covering the earth. . Gauss pointed out the way to analyze this situation. . More and accurate recordings since that time have enabled Schuster and others since to find that one fourth to one third of the earth's magnetism is a steady field and the rest seems to shift with the seasons and has greater intensity as daytime comes to the particular station recording the magnetism.
What does all this mean to us?
We can neglect the effect of the earth as a cause of the earth's magnetism and start looking for the answer in the relative movement of the earth in its surroundings.
As we hold a compass in our hands, let us utilize the Galileo-Einstein gift of relativity and imagine that the earth along with us, and of course our compass, is at rest.
The sun, moon and stars can be considered as rotating around us, rising in the east and setting in the west.
We find, if we have a flashlight battery and a loop of wire, that when we connect it to the loop of wire, this has an effect upon our compass when we place our compass inside this loop.
We find that when electrons are moving around the loop (going from - to +) and therefore around the compass in the same direction that the sun and moon and stars seem to go around the earth, then we are reinforcing the direction that the earth's magnetic field would ordinarily move the compass needle.
Here we ask--what is the difference between the electrons going around the loop of wire at a close range and very fast or the sun, moon and stars going around the compass slower but farther away but the mass of these being greater than the electrons?
In other words the spinning electrons in the compass needle will tend to line up the outside of their spinning circumferences in the same plane with the loop of wire with the electrons in it. . This will be in the same plane and in the same direction as the orbit the sun seems to make around the earth.
Our Law of Relative Motion does not distinguish between electrons moving around the compass or the sun moving around the compass as long as the path and direction remains essentially the same.
Since Einstein has shown us that the mass of an object increases as its speed increases then we can consider that the spinning electrons in the compass needle will sense that the slow moving, sun, moon and stars would be rotating around it with a certain amount of mass.
Our electrons in the loop of wire, though being less massive, would be closer, and these electrons would have their relative mass increased (as sensed by the compass) because of the electrons' additional speed through the loop.
The compass does not know the difference between the earth rotating in its surroundings or a loop of wire around the compass with electrons flowing through it.
Now as we go back to our observations from the recordings made at de Bilt. Holland, we can begin to understand what we have: . The basic steady field that composes 1/4 to 1/3 of the earth's magnetism is caused by the earth rotating in respect to the stars.
The other part of the magnetism is caused by the earth rotating in respect to the sun and the moon, the moon having only a small fraction if the variable field. . We can see plainly why different stations would report a difference in magnetism, this being caused by the earth being inclined at a 23 1/2 degree with respect to its orbit around the sun.
We can see also why the strength increases during the daytime.
In Figure 1. we saw the reason that the electrons in wires C D and C' D' repelled was because of the constancy of the speed of light or to put it more correctly the constancy of action at a distance being at the same speed as light and not at an instantaneous velocity.
Now, if we were to hold the wires together and they could not repel then there would be only one thing that the electrons could do and that would be to contract. . This contraction now is not quite in the same direction as Einstein's contraction. . Our contraction is at right angles to Einstein's contraction, but our contraction along with Einstein's contraction will keep a round object round and it will not become elongated as Einstein had supposed. . The whole essence of the matter is that objects get smaller all around and not just in the direction of their motion as we have been led to believe. . This is what is causing the redshift of our most distant stars.
The reason for this follows. . As the earth rotates and also revolves around the sun, and as the sun along with the planets move in relation to our galaxy, and our galaxy moves in relation to the other galaxies, these movements cannot be quite added and subtracted from each other as they could if space was Euclidean. . Instead we must assume that if we consider the earth at rest, then we must consider the things that are farther and farther out in space to be moving faster and faster (not away from us but merely in regard to us). . This movement, according to relativity, would make the time of the object moving seem to be a slower time than our time.
If light is being emitted from an object whose clock appears to us to be a slower clock, then we will see the frequency to be a lower frequency than the emitting object sees it.
For instance we would see light that was being emitted from that slower time star not as white light but as light in the red end of the spectrum.
We can even imagine stars or galaxies to have time slowed so much in relation to our time that they would be sending out light that we would be receiving as radio waves, provided that these galaxies were far enough away.
These then are the Quasars.
This also is the final answer to Olbers' Paradox.
It was the German astronomer Heinrich Olbers who proved that if space was Euclidean, and if the number of stars in the sky was infinite then we would be blinded with their light.
Is this not then the answer or a rather good representation of Einstein's relativistic universe that would be unbounded but yet finite?
The only stars that could possibly give us light, radio waves or any other radiation, as far as we are concerned, will be those whose lights we are receiving as low frequency radio waves.
Any stars or any matter farther out in the universe than these can not possibly have any effect upon our gravitational attraction, light or any other action where we must figure motion through our surroundings.
We must, however, take into consideration the mass of the universe, as a whole, up to this limit, when we make our relativistic calculations.
* * * Continued on Page 5. * * *
Click here for Page 5.
Click above for Page 5.
*~~~* *~~~* *~~~* *~~~* *~~~* *~~~* *~~~*