ENERGY SCIENCE ESSAY NO. 12
A NEW RESEARCH THEME: ARE YOU SEEKING A THESIS TOPIC?
Copyright, Harold Aspden, 1996
In this Essay I suggest a suitable theme for the research
student in search of a project worthy of a Ph.D.
Introduction
One of the most fundamental problems confronting
the physicist is the understanding of the forces that act on electrical charge
in motion. If you think the answer is all wrapped up in something called the
Lorentz force law, then you need to sort out your ideas! I will address this
discussion to the professors of physics who have a special interest in the
theories which relate to electrodynamics and the forces at work in the
interaction of moving electric charges.
The specific issue that concerns
me is not so much the electrodynamic forces which act on charge moving as a
visible transporter of electric current, but rather the forces on the charges
moving as if they are hidden in an electrically neutral, but ever-active,
ionized medium. This medium is not necessarily one in which there are ionized
atoms, but can be the subtle background medium of the multitude of conduction
electrons in a block of copper, for example. It could even be the medium we call
the 'vacuum', given some latitude in our perception of the physical world and
remembering that Maxwell did introduce us to an arena of scientific interest
that we have neglected and pushed aside as we 'bask' in the cool shadow cast by
the Einstein monument.
If you think I am ignorant of the orthodox methods
of explaining why there appears to be no overwhelming 'free electron
diamagnetism' in copper, for example, then take note of the above reference to
'methods'. Years ago, when I surveyed this subject I counted some three quite
different ways in which this anomalous phenomenon is explained in the scientific
literature. They were all different and mutually inconsistent, which I saw as
evidence that the subject was wide open and still in need of clarification. You
see, the problem was that physicists knew something as an experimental fact but
yet their theory, as confirmed by several other experimental facts did not fit
with that absence of 'free electron diamagnetism'. It seemed that any odd-ball
theory that could slide over the problem could be accepted, given that other
more interesting problems attracted one's research interest. So, all I am saying
is that it is time to put things in order.
I have already, in Lecture No.
17, hinted at the subject I now introduce. I declared towards the end of that
Lecture that I had long wondered why it is that the magnetic field of a
permanent magnet can penetrate through a block of copper without the numerous
free electrons in motion within that copper reacting to screen such fields
virtually in their entirety. I said that the answer I adopted long ago, is the
following:
When an electron in motion reacts to a magnetic field it is a
quantum event, meaning that maybe it will and maybe it won't, this being
determined by whichever affords the optimum response from an energy
equilibrium viewpoint.
This, therefore, is the subject I commend
as a worthy research project for a budding Ph.D. student. It is a pursuit that
offers enormous potential and one I would have welcomed as my indoctrination
process in my younger years. There is a bridge that needs to be constructed as a
link between the quantum world and what is of practical importance in electrical
science. It would be foolish to think that no mistakes have been made in
interpreting certain phenomena in electrodynamics, and one should not live in
awe and be overwhelmed by the alleged power of quantum theory or the theory of
relativity, given that, notwithstanding the contributions of Paul Dirac, there
are so many mysteries that seek solution.
So, I will venture here to
pursue, in outline, the topic that I raised in Lecture No. 17 and I hope that it
will arouse interest and warrant being taken up by someone as a Ph.D. research
project.
Force or Energy?
Which would you rather believe, (a) that
there are laws which tell you the force which is exerted on an electric charge
moving in a magnetic field or (b) that there are energy-dependent factors which
govern how a charge moves in a magnetic field? Well, you can say that the choice
is irrelevant if the answers are always the same and serve us well in their
practical application. However, you will, I hope, have doubts if I can draw your
attention to certain anomalies that our physics fraternity has chosen to 'sweep
under the carpet', as it were.
When quantum physics took root in the
early decades of the 20th century, we found that we had to break faith with the
natural logic and experience of physics, as based on what we could see and
denmonstrate in our hands-on bench-type testing of electrical apparatus using
standard electrical measuring instruments. We were, in effect, asked to rely as
much on certain abstract theoretical notions as upon measurement data and regard
such notions as fact, if they seemed to work, notwithstanding the lack of sense
and logic in the formulations involved.
What seems to me to be a curious
circumstance is that physicists persist in declaring their belief in the
validity of the Lorentz force law, notwithstanding their admission that their
efforts to relate the force of gravitation and the electrodynamic force, their
Holy Grail of a 'unified field theory', is still eluding their efforts. Force
equations are surely not the way Nature goes about regulating its affairs.
Energy is what counts! If, in Nature, the optimum energy deployment implies
action of some kind, then that action is what one sees and it could well be
something that contradicts the predictions based on man-made laws of
physics.
What sense is there is studying the effects of a magnetic field
on an electron moving as part of the electron beam in a cathode-ray tube and
then applying that knowledge to determine the effects the magnetic field has on
a neutral plasma of electric charge. Overall, there can be no net electrodynamic
force on a neutral plasma, but yet there is action and deployment of energy in
some way, especially if the strength of that magnetic field changes.
Read
about this in your textbooks and you will perhaps find the kind of comment that
says, there is no energy transfer if the magnetic field is changed very slowly.
To a practically-minded person this almost suggests that the author of such an
idea does not know the difference between 'energy' and 'power'. Einstein is one
of the culprits on this account. He once declared that there could be no
radiation of energy if an electron was accelerated slowly and used this to
justify how electron mass increased with speed according to his relativistic
formula, the point being that energy had to be conserved to get the right
answer. Do you believe that an electron has a mass that can vary, not just
according to its speed, but according to the history of its acceleration? This
is the sort of thing that has been 'brushed under the carpet' and it is no
wonder there are so many unanswered questions in fundamental
electrodynamics.
Consider, for example, the Neumann Potential. Is this
something historic or is it of importance in modern electrodynamic teaching?
Well, I could go on, but I am not going to develop this into that thesis I hope
some student will undertake. So, I will move rapidly now and plot the research
path that I would recommend.
The theme is to concentrate on energy, not
force. Then one does need to explore the physical basis of the Neumann
Potential. It is the subject of Tutorial
Note No. 4 in these Web pages. It concerns energy potential and leads to an
inverse-square law of attraction force as between moving electric charges that
share mutually parallel motion.
From there one needs to move on to the
formulation of a generic force law that includes the Lorentz force as a special
case, one avoided by gravitation, which is a special case of a different kind,
still embraced by the generic force law. That leads the student to what I
described in my paper in the Journal of the Franklin Institute 1969a.
Then, to jump directly into the problem at hand, the next scientific paper to
inspect is one entitled 'Instantaneous Electrodynamic Potential with Retarded
Energy Transfer', Hadronic Journal, v. 11, pp. 307-313 (1988). This paper is
also to be found in the book 'Aether Science Papers', published in 1996,and is
of record in these web pages as [1988a].
The
derivation of the Neumann potential from first principle analysis is presented
on p. 310 of the paper as equation (5). As an energy expression it is:
W = (ee')(v.v')[r]/2r2and it corresponds to a
force:
F = -(ee')(v.v')[r]/r3where v and v' are the
velocities of electromagnetic charges e, e', respectively, r is their distance
of separation and [r] their vector distance of separation.
This is an
inverse square of attraction force for interaction of charges of the same
polarity moving mutually parallel. It is the basis of the gravitational force
and the electrodynamic force, but in the latter case we have the complications
which arise from the presence of numerous other charge interactions, ever
present in the scenario of what we call the 'magnetic field'. The experience on
which we formulate the laws of electrodynamics stem from an observation that an
electric charge subjected to a magnetic field will move in a helical path so as
to have a component of motion in a reacting circular orbit. The reaction opposes
the 'action' of the magnetic field, but extracts no energy from that field,
given that the field is not varying in strength.
Now, what this really
means, as is fully explained in those background references just mentioned, is
that, in addition to that force F just formulated, there are two separate force
components acting on the charge that are induced by a kind of inertial response
which ensures no net transfer of energy between the Neumann potential and the
kinetic energy of the interacting charges, meaning the charge in question and
those that are the source of the magnetic field. The three force components
feature in Maxwell's famous treatise on Electricity and Magnetism but you do not
see this explained in modern textbooks, which develop the Lorentz force law by
adoption of Einstein's ideas. In fact, the Lorentz force law drops one of the
three force components and is really an abbreviated vector-product version of
what is, in reality, an expression including the current element vectors as two
scalar-products. By dropping that third term, possible if the problem at hand is
restricted to interactions involving current flow around a closed circuit, the
scope for developing the link with gravity vanishes and takes with it all
prospect of field theory unification. It further destroys the basis for energy
transfer as between the field medium and real matter. Therefore, it is not
surprising that physicists have lost their way and cannot make sense of the
efforts of those of us who talk about gaining access to the sea of energy that
pervades the field medium which they call 'space-time'.
The point at
issue concerning those two additional force components, which I labelled [A] and
[B] on p. 310 of that Hadronic Journal paper, is that these two forces can
assume the directions v and v', respectively, if they are to set up the inertial
effects that result in the electrodynamic actions we observe. However, that is
an optional reaction and it is this prospect that I am now saying warrants
special research. The key words that apply here are those at the bottom of p.
310 where I wrote:
"There is nothing to be gained by writing [A] as -[B], as that
denies the induction process that we know exists, so we now look at the
alternative. ... This is where I developed the argument that led to the
full formulation of the electrodynamic law generic to the force of gravity and
the Lorentz force."
Now, clearly, seeing this in retrospect,
I erred in saying 'there was nothing to be gained' by pursuing that alternative
case. Indeed, the argument now developed turns on this very point. If the
deployment of energy involved in the electrodynamic actions between charges in
motion can optimize by taking advantage of the option as between bringing those
force components [A] and [B] to bear or by not invoking the inertial reactions
implicit in those forces, then the action will be so determined. That, plus a
condition that no system of electric charge can develop rotation solely by
virtue of its internal electrodynamic self-interaction, is the basis of a
comprehensive understanding of electrodynamic phenomena.
By admitting
that an excess of energy seeking transfer to the reacting system of charge in
the field medium will set those [A] and [B] force components in a mutually
cancelling mode, we have introduced that quantum scenario into the
electrodynamic interaction.
To explain this, imagine you hold a magnet
and it produces a magnetic field in a region of vacuum, or near vacuum, as
inside an evacuated thermionic tube. Ignoring the 'matter' aspect of the
problem, suppose I say that there are electric charges inside the space within
that tube, all dashing around as a kind of neutral-overall gas. You see that as
something in the 'aether' if you wish or you can give it meaning by thinking of
the charge which accounts for Maxwell dispacement current. The question is
whether those charges react or not to the presence of that magnet.
Well,
I am sure they will react and do so to the precise extent that they half-cancel
the applied magnetic field, in the manner already explained above. (The
half-cancellation theme is my discovery that 2 minus 1 is 1, meaning that if all
magnetic fields are twice as strong as we think they are based on their known
source but are alyways half-cancelled by an unknown reaction then 1 suffices as
an answer until we confront the gryomagnetic ratio factor of 2, when 2 minus 1
has to become the right answer!) However, what precludes them from all
reacting together so as to swamp the applied field and virtually kill it
completely?
The answer to this lies in that Neumann potential, because
the sum of all the Neumann potential terms applicable to those reacting charges
that exist unseen and undetected inside the space within that vacuum tube will
be zero, once they have adjusted to the presence of the magnet. Therefore, there
is no action able to induce reactions that demand a transfer of energy from the
source of that magnetic field. Those [A] and [B] force components must all then
cancel one another, meaning that there are no forces acting to speed up or slow
down the vacuum charges and no corresponding reaction forces on the charges
within the magnet. In short our quantum hypothesis is vindicated and explained
by formal electrodynamic analysis as developed from that Hadronic Journal
paper.
Discussion
The scope for onward study of the theme suggested
here is enormous as it opens an unexplored avenue in orthodox physics. The
standard theory of quantum-electrodynamics, with its Feynmann diagrams and
assumptions that are melded into a mathematical framework with little relevance
to energy as such, deals with certain abstruse phenomena. Yet it cannot account
for gravitation. Nor can it explain the process of electriomagnetic induction
discovered by Michael Faraday. How is energy fed into a solenoid by a current
stored in the space within that solenoid so as to be returned on demand when the
current is switched off?
The answer lies in what I have described above.
So I am saying that a magnetic field acting on what you see as empty space is
really governing the reaction of charges moving around unseen in that space. I
am saying that a magnetic field need not act on electrons moving though it,
meaning that they need not be deflected at all, if the reaction energy in that
field is already sufficient to feed the return of the field energy when the
field is switched off. That is a breakthrough in our way of thinking about
electrodynamic phenomena.
If I were a Ph.D. student interested in this
theme I would research it in two ways, initially. I would ask if there are
instances where an electron can be affected by a magnetic field when moving in
near proximity with the field but not through it, which seems just as unorthodox
as saying that there are instances when, moving though the field, it is not
affected by it. Also, I would ask how the reaction might be affected when
reacting charges of different properties are present.
The first of these
topics would cause me to consider the Aharanov-Bohm effect. The second topic
would cause me to consider the Nernst Effect, as introduced in Lecture
No. 17. However, I would also study the whole background history of what is
called 'free electron diamagnetism', which is surely a chapter of errors, given
what is here proposed. Last, but not least, the argument must converge on the
energy of the field medium and that challenging question of whether we can
harness it for useful purposes.
The theme here, given that the case is
made for the presence of the half-field reaction condition, is whether one can
do anything to take that energy from the field environment and apply it to
useful ends, before needing to restore the field equilibrium. Look at this with
a lump of iron in mind. The quantum underworld keeps the iron fully magnetized
in its internal system of magnetic domains. If I apply a magnetizing field I
will augment that state of magnetism but the effort in storing energy in the
reacting charge moving as free conduction electrons in the iron or in the space
underworld will be shared by that quantum activity. Therefore, something must
happen to the energy involved. The iron must get hotter or cooler and whatever I
do is augmented by action of the 'free energy' world.
What all this means
is that more research needs to be directed into 'magnetocaloric phenomena', with
an eye to something that might be practical on the energy front.
That, in
summary, is the pursuit which I commend to someone looking for a worthy project
for investigation in an academic environment. My hope is that there will be
those who engage in such research. If your professor thinks that what I am
suggesting is wrong, then ask him to tell me why. Where does my analysis fail?
If your professor says that he, or she, is unaware of my writings on this
subject and is far too busy to spend time studying such writings, then you must
weigh that response for what it is worth.
My onward efforts to take this
theme forward will be recorded in these Web pages as I proceed. The following
links will take you to: Main
Index, Essays
Index, and Lectures
Index.
Harold Aspden