Subquantum Field Theory & Field Model of Electron

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on advanced theoretical physics, specifically the concept of a unified field described as a Faraday-Maxwell field. It emphasizes the importance of the Maxwell-Lorentz equations, which are satisfied by introducing new subquantum field sources that require higher dimensionality. The dialogue highlights that particles and fields are manifestations of interactions between these fields and their sources. A historical reference to Göttingen's Tragedy illustrates the challenges faced by physicists in understanding atomic structures and the nature of time and space. One participant shares their experience in the field, noting a long-standing struggle with the particle-field interaction and introducing their polytronic model, which aims to explain atomic structure through a ring of linear energy vibrating at specific frequencies. The conversation reflects a shared interest in exploring these complex themes and encourages collaboration on theoretical calculations.
Gobols
Hello!

Judge yourself. The unified field is a Faraday–Maxwell field. Maxwell–Lorentz equations (ML-equations) for potentials in standard four-dimensional form are satisfied precisely. This is achieved by involving new subquantum fundamental field sources, strict definition of which requires higher dimensionality. Subquantum charged currents in the right side of ML-equation correspond to virtual vacuum currents QED but are determined independently...

All particles and fields – they are just visible exhibitions of interaction between the field and its sources!

http://www.ltn.lv/~elefzaze/

Göttingen's Tragedy as Choice of History

Born did not manage to find something more convincing then an atomistic instinct of so wide a range of experimenters, the instinct guarding the immunity of static pattern of electron and rejecting strongly a certain liquid of Levi-Civita (and Minkowski)...

http://www.ltn.lv/~elefzaze/?mj=0602

Alexander.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Alexander!
I had read the first eight articles of yours paradigm.
I think, that the theme of interaction of particles and fields for a long time turned into a headache for physicists. I actively was engaged for this theme per 70-s' and 80-s' years and had come to the conclusion, that without understanding of an essence of time and space, zero and perpetuity the theorists are hardly reached of successes.
Now I am engaged in the practical tasks. I try to understand structure of space in atoms and particles with the help of my polytronic model. The polytron is a ring of linear energy, which can vibrate with strictly installed frequencies.
Your current lines is practically the same.
I think, that our ideas are rather close.
Please, look at one my small calculation and express your opinion.
Vladimir
http://www.sibnet.ru/~polytron/em_interaction.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top