Buy Music 

Trippin? 

Check Yourself 

Ephemerids 
One Day like Today...

Welcome 
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here. 


Einstein knew that Doppler in Lorentz give asymmetric results so he........  
Contributed by Mathew Orman on Sunday, February 09 @ 14:34:37 PST 
The EM wave's propagation speed is infinite at the center of radiation
(center of radiating antenna)
and gradually decreases into speed of c at the end of near field.
For the magnetic field emitted by coil inductor antenna which is
substantially smaller than the wavelength,
the effect of infinite speed of change of the field gradient shows no
decries throughout the near field range.
As observed in the experiment ( no variation in signal phase with distance
from the center of coil).
This spells The End of Einstein's era.
The Einstein's theory has now been proven False!
Sincerely,
Mathew Orman
ps.Some detail are listed below

Franz Heymann wrote:
> From Wabnig's last note on the subject, it appears thatgengineers and
> physicists have different concepts of "near" and "far" fields.
> The physicist's near and far fields are the two field terms associated
> with an elementary dipole oscillator, as I indicated.
You are right, that there are shades of meaning
the the words "near field". I think of it thus:
The field around the dipole can be decomposed into
two pieces. An evanescent part and the rest of it.
Near the dipole, the evanescent part is strong, but it
dies out more quickly with distance than the other part.
This corresponds roughly to near field and far field.
In Ormand's case, the nonpropagating evanescent part
dominates the rest, so it is no surprise that as he
moves his pick up coil around he sees no phase shift.
By any definition, he is completely immersed in the
near field.

Thank you for reading and or replying
If you are one in a million, there are 6000 people just like
you.
Local optimization almost never yields global optimization.
Opinions expressed here are my own and may not represent those of my
employer.

Franz Heymann wrote:
> You have snipped withoutsaying so.
Sorry Franz, I thought it was obvious and did not
change the meaning. I've always used the convention
that if I only snip from the beginning and the end
(no snipping in the middle so as to juxtapose words
that weren't) it is not necessary to explicitly say so.
I will endeavor to be more careful when I quote you,
but let me apologize in advance if my old habits
sometimes return.
> The part you snipped contains the correct inference that since both
> the fields contain the same timedependence, namely
> (tr/c)
> That is sufficient to prove that both fields are propagated with phase
> speed c.
> No further arguments can change that fact.
Franz, you broke the total field into two pieces that
you called near field and far field and showed that each
when considered separately appears to travel at c. That
is a useful but arbitrary separation of the field into
components.
I broke those components up into more components
and showed that some of the apparently propagating
components actually canceled each other. I combined
them to show that the composite resembled a
non propagating field for small r. Or to put it
another way, I can also separate the total field into
two arbitrary components with one being a non propagating
component which I call the near field.
The difference is that my near field expression
suggests that the phase of the near field is constant
and not a linear function of r, whereas a casual
examination of your expressions suggest that the phase
would be a linearly increasing function of r at all
distances.

Thank you for reading and or replying
If you are one in a million, there are 6000 people just like
you.
Local optimization almost never yields global optimization.
Opinions expressed here are my own and may not represent those of my
employer.


Franz Heymann wrote:
> H_phi = [ lambda A / (2 pi r^2) cos w(tr/c)]  A/r sin w(tr/c)
> where A depends on the amplitude of the dipole moment
looking in Balanis, "Antenna Theory",1997, p207
he has the near field and far field with the same
multiplier, so dropping common multiplicative constants
and letting w/c = k what is left is
= (1/kr) [ 1 / kr] cos(wtkr)  1/kr [1  1/(kr)^2] sin
(wtkr)
using trig identities
= (1/kr) [ 1 / kr ] [ cos(wt) cos(kr) + sin(wt)sin(kr)]
 1/kr [1  1/(kr)^2] [ sin (wt)cos(kr)  cos(wr)sin(kr)]
= (1/kr) [ 1 / kr ] [ cos(wt) cos(kr) + sin(wt)sin(kr)]
1/kr [1  1/(kr)^2] [sin (wt)cos(kr) + cos(wr)sin(kr)]
gather similar terms
= (1/kr) cos(wt) [cos(kr)/kr + (1  1/(kr)^2)sin(kr) ]
+(1/kr) sin(wt) [sin(kr)/kr  (1  1/(kr)^2)cos(kr) ]
assuming r => 0,
approximate cos(kr) = 1  (kr)^2
sin(kr) = kr
= (1/kr) cos(wt) [(1  (kr)^2)/kr + (1  1/(kr)^2)(kr) ]
+(1/kr) sin(wt) [(kr)/kr  (1  1/(kr)^2)(1  (kr)^2) ]
= (1/kr) cos(wt) [1/kr  kr + kr  1/kr ]
+(1/kr) sin(wt) [1 +(kr)^2 + 1/(kr)^2 ]
= (1/kr) sin(wt) [1 +(kr)^2 + 1/(kr)^2 ]
and since we've lost the cos(wt) term, what is left looks
like a non propagating constant phase field.

Thank you for reading and or replying
If you are one in a million, there are 6000 people just like
you.
Local optimization almost never yields global optimization.
Opinions expressed here are my own and may not represent those of my
employer.
//==========================================================================
One 20 cm 5 turns rectangular coil driven with ac low impedance power source
(HP 33120A waveform generator plus CMOS high current pushpull driver).
One sensing coil 10uH connected to the input of high speed comparator 500ps
rise/fall time.
The driving power source frequency set at 1MHz.
Osciloscope HP 54602A channel 1 mentors the ac power waveform and triggers
the scope.
The channel 2 is connected to the output of the comparator.
Set the sensing coil 33 cm from the rectangular coil on axis maximum
coupling.
Store the sensed waveform.
No move the sensing coil to the distance of 3 cm.
Rotate the coil and observe the signal from it.
When you match the amplitude with the stored waveform press the store button
again.
It stores the second waveform.
According to Einstein the should be about 1ns delay between the two
waveforms.
I didn't see the delay.
Mathew Orman



 

0
"Einstein knew that Doppler in Lorentz give asymmetric results so he........"  Login/Create Account  0 comments 

The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. 


