Scalar waves, is this a complete fabrication?

Ulysees

Many of you will have heard of these. Does anyone knowledgeable on conventional electromagnetics, suspect there may be some truth in it?

berkeman

Wikipedia.org labels Scalar Wave theory as pseudoscience. You need to provide some credible references (preferably in refereed professional journals), or this thread will be deleted. We do not permit crackpot theories here on the PF.

Ulysees

Why don't you transfer it into the scepticism and debunking section. Hopefully some experts from here will give it an informed assessment.

berkeman

Sounds like a reasonable idea, as long as Ivan is okay with it. Moved from EE to S&D, at least for now.

NoTime

Frankly, I'm with berkeman with this.
Barring your location of a credible reference there is nothing to discuss.
Experimental error is easy to achieve.
An actual odd result is a different matter.

Ulysees

So this section is for credible references?

Now you got me excited. You have observed personally an odd result in electromagnetics that does not match current physics? What was it?

berkeman

I think his comment was posted as I was moving this thread from EE to S&D. S&D still has rules, however, so be sure to check them to see what documentation you should provide.

Not strictly electromagnetics, but the solar neutrino issue was a puzzle for many years of experimental observations, and was only solved recently:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/neutrino/missing.html



.

dlgoff

You must have watched the NOVA program on neutrinos last night. Very good.

NoTime

Berkeman beat me out the gate
Not in electromagnetics, well ok, I think the self focusing of a high power laser is pretty odd.
At least I've never seen a good explanation.

There is also the sticky in this section which has quite a list.

Ulysees

Here's another such case perhaps. The dynamical Casimir effect, that is claimed to indicate fluctuations of vacuum and standing scalar waves between two mirrors, or something like that:

http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/t/publicati...it_Casimir.pdf

Count Iblis, I hope you have some insights on this.

Phrak

Using only the classical Maxwell equations on the spacetime of general relativity, I obtain a current-charge wave propagating at c, accompanied by a Coulomb wave (scalar to you folks). I was looking for charge-current density solutions that satisfied Laplace's equation. I'd have to look again to see if there were a standing wave solution in the potential that didn't transport charge or contain charge.

Ivan Seeking

We can only reference published works.

Ulysees

A Coulomb wave is a wave of the Coulomb field or E-field? Isn't that a vector field?

Tom Bearden's scalar waves are supposed to be longitudinal. Is your Coulomb wave so?

What about the current-charge wave, is it longitudinal?

Ulysees

How do we debunk something if we do not reference it?

Ivan Seeking

I was talking about the post above mine. If we have a formal reference, we can use it, but personal theories will result in the thread being locked, and penalty points will be assigned.

Phrak

I try to imagine what physics would be like without mathematics. I think it would be like this "scalar wave" business. A lot of guys coming up with ideas and swapping lies 'cause math is hard.

In leaving out the rather vague notion that fields originate on charge and that charge is associated with massive matter, using only Maxwell's 4 equations, after 5 or so pages of rather dense calculations I come up with a non-physical result. Reading these posts, it occured to me that a standing wave may cancel the charge density and leave a propagating coulomb potenital in place.

Ivan- Nothing new is invented, nor publishable. I was simply doing a little survey of classical electromagnetism. I'm certainly not advancing a 'personal theory'.

I've read some of the wikipedia article on this scalar potential. If it's accurate there's nothing in common with this goofy notion of bubbles between magnets 'n stuff.

Ivan Seeking

Okay, but please avoid speculation or personal derivations. Something like this requires that we stick to papers publilshed in mainstream journals.