574
Vortices, an overlap of the overlap
The equations of transformation say:
(27.3) and
(27.4)
•
Experience/observation depends on the relative velocity v!
•
The field takes over the function of the aether (determines c) and
•
an aetherwind v x H is measured as a resting aether E and vice versa!
•
for v = c the equations of transformation turn into each
other and are identical [v = v
x
(x(t))].
•
for v < c a motion field E
v
depending on v is resulting
(28.6)
•
for v = 0 also E
v
= 0 .
•
the motion field overlaps the E-field
•
in the case of vortex fields the effect overlaps the cause and
itself is the cause for a new effect.
•
The overlap reaches to infinity, where each time is valid:
(28.7)
• the field Eo overlaps the motion field E
v
(28.8)
• for infinite overlap:
(28.9)
• results in the power series:
Fig. 28.2: Power series as a result of a vortex overlap.
: Grimsehl: Lehrbuch der Physik, 2.Bd., 17.Aufl. Teubner Verl. 1967, S. 130.
: R.W.Pohl: Einfuhrung in die Physik, Bd.2 Elektrizitatslehre, 21.Aufl.
Springer-Verlag 1975, Seite 72 und 76, bzw. 130.
: K. Simonyi: Theoretische Elektrotechnik, 7.Aufl. VEB Berlin 1979, Seite 924.
: E. Friebe: Die Vektorprodukte der Maxwell'schen Elektrodynamik, DPG-
Didaktik-Tagungsband 1995, S.396
Objectivity versus relativity
575
28.2 Vortices, an overlap of the overlap
Not with any approach until now the question concerning the aether could be solved. Only
the new field-theoretical approach proves with the unambiguous
and free of contradiction
clarification of the question concerning the aether its unmatched superiority. We hence
without exception work with this approach, which is anchored tightly in textbook physics.
The two equations of transformation on the one hand are the law concerning the unipolar
induction according to Faraday (27.1) and on the other hand the dual formulation (27.2),
which Grimsehl
calls convection equation. Grimsehl goes around the question for the
correct sign by means of forming a modulus. Pohl draws detailed distinctions of cases and
dictates the each time relevant formulation of the dual law
. The sign eventually should
be chosen according to the definition of the orientation of the field pointers. Also Simonyi
gives both equations and the each time appropriate experiments
.
If we assume the carrier of an electric field is moving with the not accelerated relative
velocity v with regard to the reference system used by the observer, then a magnetic H-
field is observed, which stands perpendicular both to the direction of the E-field and to the
direction of v. If the motion takes place perpendicular to the area stretched by E- and H-
field, then the H-field again is observed and measured as an E-field. There will occur an
overlap of the fields.
In spite of that we first consider the theoretical case, that no overlap is present, and the
observer as it were sees himself. The result is trivial: the relative velocity v must be the
speed of light v = c . (28.5) If considered at the speed of light, the two equations of
transformation turn into each other. They now are identical both mathematically and in
their physical expressiveness. For this case it actually is possible, to derive the dual law
straight from the Faraday law. For a wave propagating with the speed of light, to name an
example, the field strength propagating along is always equal to the causing field strength,
which depends on position.
If besides the evaluation of the values also the circumstance is considered that it concerns
vectors, then at this place a problem as a matter of principle of the Maxwell theory gets
visible, to which has been pointed occasionally, e.g. at the German Physical Society
.
The derivation of the speed of light from two vector equations requires, that c also has to
be a vector. The question is: How the velocity vector v suddenly becomes the scalar and
not pointing, in all directions of space constant factor c? Is therefore for mathematical and
physical reasons "the Maxwell theory in essential parts erroneous", according to a
statement of the German Patent Office
?
Now, the constancy of the speed of light is a fact, which even can be derived. We at first
will be content with the clue that for every observation with the speed of light, with the
eyes or a gauge constructed corresponding to our perception, the vector in all its
components each time is correlated to itself, by what actually the orientation of direction
gets lost. Under these for c and with equal rights also for v relevant circumstances we are
entitled to calculate further with the values.
An observer, who is moving with v slower than c, will besides the original E-field also
observe a motion field E
v
depending on the velocity v, which disappears, if v becomes
zero. What he catches sight of and is able to register with gauges in the end is the overlap
of both field components.