Relativity and Absolute Space: A Reconciliation?

[masudr]

A slight error in this discussion is that since a wire is electrically neutral, electrons really move relative to the positive ions; so in a frame where the electrons are at rest, there will be positive ions moving in the opposite direction.

For this reason, I recommend we use a beam of charged particles and look at that in different frames, as opposed to a wire.

 

[ZapperZ]

Sorry a wire, through which no current is traveling, or a wire where there is no electrons?

An electrons' dipole moments? what is it? I know the electron has an intrinsic magnetic moment, or an inherent polarity that gives reason of that intrinsic magnetic moment, and intrinsic means it cannot be vanished by a relative movement.

My best regards

EP

Take a stationary line charge. Now unless you are also claiming that Gauss's law is also wrong and an "idealization", find all the field due to that line charge.

Now, someone else is moving with velocity v in the direction that this line charge is oriented. This person sees instead, a moving line of charge, i.e. a current! Thus, via Maxwell equation alone, that person detects a magnetic field.

Now, which part of those two do you not understand, or don't you agree?

Thirdly, NO ONE is claiming that one can transform away a dipole field. You keep asking for the magnetic moment due to the electron spin to be transformed away. Even transforming the relativistic maxwell equations do not result in that! So stop with this nonsense already.

Lastly, and again, this has been mentioned earlier, is that you keep forgetting that we DO transform such a thing in particle accelerators. There are many instances where the dynamics, especially when the particles are undergoing several beam "acrobatics", is simpler when it is solved in the particle's reference frame! In such a condition, the beam self-energy from the magnetic field is transformed away and allows for many of the dynamics to be solved. We then tranform back to the lab frame and use the result! If such a thing is wrong or an "idealization", we would have a ton of wrong results that simply will not match our experiments.

I have asked you before to cite valid references to back your claim. You produced no such thing. I believe that we have been MORE than patience and given you more than enough opportunity for you to air your "opinion" on this matter dispite of your continuing violation of the speculative personal theory guidelines that you have agreed to.

Therefore, this thread is done, and nothing of this nature can be discussed in the main physics forum. Any further issues related to this can only be done in the IR forum.

Zz.