On Jun 15, 12:03*pm, Darwin123 wrote:
In terms of the aether theory, please explain the following.
1) The formula,
F=qV x B,
*where F is the force vector on an electrical charge, q is the amount
of electrical charge, V is the velocity of the electrical charge, x is
the cross product and B is the magnetic field.
* * Note F, V and B are 3D vectors, q is a scalar, and x is a binary
vector operation.

In terms of the Aether Physics Model, the equation is written:

forc = chrg * velc * mfxd

The force is equal to the electromagnetic charge of the electron times
its velocity times the magnetic flux density of the medium the
electron is moving through. The electromagnetic charge relates to the
electrostatic charge by the relation:

e^2 = e.emax^2 * 8pi * a

Where e is the elementary charge, e.emax is the electromagnetic charge
of the electron, and a is alpha, the electron fine structure
constant.

e.emax^2 is another way to express chrg.

chrg = e.emax^2

So if you have an electromagnetic charge of one coulomb squared moving
a velocity of .8c through a medium of one tesla, then it would be
equal to:

1 coul^2 = 7.145 x 10^36 chrg
.8 c = .8 velc
1 tesla/e.emax = 3.324 x 10^-9 mfxd (single dimension charge units
must be converted to distributed dimension charge units)

1.9 x 10^28 forc = 7.145 x 10^36 chrg * .8 velc * 3.324 x 10^-9 mfxd

1.9 x 10^28 forc = 6.411 x 10^26 newton

The values I chose were large whole MKS units so you could get a quick
intuitive grasp of the equation.

I'll break question 1 down into less mathematical components.

2) When an electrical charged particle moves through a magnetic field,
why is the force vector perpendicular to the velocity vector?

Because the Aether has geometry, the electromagnetic charge has
inherent geometry, so you would map your fields based upon discrete
geometry. The geometry can be mapped with calculus and is completely
induced from an analysis of known constants. The electromagnetic
charge geometry shows the current force vector is perpendicular to the
velocity vector, but also in opposition to the magnetic flux density.

3) When an electrical charged particle moves through a magnetic field,
why is the magnitude of the force proportional to the velocity?

Electrons are toroidal shaped structures, which move along their
magnetic axis. The faster the electrons move, the more resistance is
encountered, and so the electrons spread out sideways, thus increasing
the current. The spreading sideways puts a corresponding pressure on
the magnetic flux density in the local environment. In other words,
the increase in velocity increases the apparent resistance, which
increases the current. The increase in current causes an increase in
the density of the magnetic field.

4) Why is the magnitude of the force vector proportional to the
electrical charge at all?

Because the electron has geometry, and this geometry depends upon two
distinctly different manifestations of charges. Modern electrical
theory only recognizes the elementary charge (electrostatic charge)
and treats the electromagnetic charge as a relativistic effect.
Further, modern electrical theory has the dimensions of charge wrong
in most, but not all, units. This causes trouble with certain
relationships of units. The Aether Physics Model fully quantifies the
two different types of charges and corrects the error of single
dimension, charge-based units.

* * * *I would appreciate any explanation based on the mechanical
properties of aether.

The Aether Physics Model further explains the mechanical properties of
the Aether he
http://www.16pi2.com/files/NewFoundationPhysics.pdf

Dave

On Jun 21, 12:38 pm, David Thomson wrote:
On Jun 15, 12:03 pm, Darwin123 wrote:

In terms of the aether theory, please explain the following.
1) The formula,
F=qV x B,
where F is the force vector on an electrical charge, q is the amount
of electrical charge, V is the velocity of the electrical charge, x is
the cross product and B is the magnetic field.
Note F, V and B are 3D vectors, q is a scalar, and x is a binary
vector operation.

In terms of the Aether Physics Model, the equation is written:

forc = chrg * velc * mfxd

The force is equal to the electromagnetic charge of the electron times
its velocity times the magnetic flux density of the medium the
electron is moving through. The electromagnetic charge relates to the
electrostatic charge by the relation:

e^2 = e.emax^2 * 8pi * a

Where e is the elementary charge, e.emax is the electromagnetic charge
of the electron, and a is alpha, the electron fine structure
constant.

e.emax^2 is another way to express chrg.

chrg = e.emax^2

So if you have an electromagnetic charge of one coulomb squared moving
a velocity of .8c through a medium of one tesla, then it would be
equal to:

1 coul^2 = 7.145 x 10^36 chrg
.8 c = .8 velc
1 tesla/e.emax = 3.324 x 10^-9 mfxd (single dimension charge units
must be converted to distributed dimension charge units)

1.9 x 10^28 forc = 7.145 x 10^36 chrg * .8 velc * 3.324 x 10^-9 mfxd

1.9 x 10^28 forc = 6.411 x 10^26 newton

The values I chose were large whole MKS units so you could get a quick
intuitive grasp of the equation.

I'll break question 1 down into less mathematical components.

2) When an electrical charged particle moves through a magnetic field,
why is the force vector perpendicular to the velocity vector?

Because the Aether has geometry, the electromagnetic charge has
inherent geometry, so you would map your fields based upon discrete
geometry. The geometry can be mapped with calculus and is completely
induced from an analysis of known constants. The electromagnetic
charge geometry shows the current force vector is perpendicular to the
velocity vector, but also in opposition to the magnetic flux density.

I do not know what you mean by the magnetic flux density. I
believe you mean the magnetic field. The force in the current is not
in opposition to the magnetic field. The force on the current is
perpendicular to the magnetic field.
Please explain to me why the force on the charge is perpendicular
to both the magnetic field and the velocity of the electric charge.
However, you brought up to other questions.
1) What does the magnetic field mean in terms of the aether?
2) What does it mean to be in "opposition to the magnetic flux
density?"

On Jun 23, 6:05*pm, Darwin123 wrote:
* * I do not know what you mean by the magnetic flux density.

Magnetic flux density is magnetic flux per area.

I believe you mean the magnetic field.

No, the magnetic field is a completely different unit.

If you apply magnetic flux density to a volume, then you are looking
at a magnetic field.

The force in the current is not
in opposition to the magnetic field.

I agree. The force in the current is in opposition to the magnetic
flux density. The denser the magnetic flux becomes, the greater the
force of the current must be to pass through it.

* *Please explain to me why the force on the charge is perpendicular
to both the magnetic field and the velocity of the electric charge.

That is not my position. My position is that the force on the charged
electron is in opposition to the magnetic flux density and
perpendicular to the current velocity vector. This is because
magnetic flux has tubular geometry. The magnetic flux tubes tend to
run parallel to the current. The electron is essentially a toroid
moving along its polar axis. The large radius of the toroid is moving
parallel to the magnetic flux tubes. The faster this toroid moves,
the more force it applies perpendicular to its velocity and thus
increases the magnetic flux density. Think of a bunch of parallel
straws in a bundle. Then put a ring around a portion of the bundle
and move it along the path of the straws. The ring will attempt to
displace the straws as it passes them by pushing perpendicular to its
velocity. Now imagine that the ring expands its large diameter and
contracts its small diameter as it speeds up. The faster the electron
moves, the more perpendicular force it produces.

However, you brought up to other questions.
1) * * What does the magnetic field mean in terms of the aether?

The Aether is quantified as a fabric of quantum rotating magnetic
fields. The magnetic field IS the Aether. The magnetic field is thus
evidence of the Aether's existence.

2) * What does it mean to be in "opposition to the magnetic flux density?"

I hope I have explained it clear enough in the preceding paragraphs.
It is helpful to understand the structures and behaviors of both the
electron and the magnetic flux density and watch how the two interact
with each other. Matter is interacting with environment. It is
similar to a fish moving through water. As the fish speeds up, the
water density near the surface of the fish would increase if the water
were elastic and the fish were inelastic enough. In the case of the
fish, the water actually flows faster around the fish's surface. In
the case of the electron, the flux tubes have to squeeze tighter to
allow the electron to pass by.

Dave

On Jun 23, 11:56 pm, David Thomson wrote:
On Jun 23, 6:05 pm, Darwin123 wrote:

I do not know what you mean by the magnetic flux density.

Magnetic flux density is magnetic flux per area.

I believe you mean the magnetic field.

No, the magnetic field is a completely different unit.

If you apply magnetic flux density to a volume, then you are looking
at a magnetic field.

The force in the current is not
in opposition to the magnetic field.

I agree. The force in the current is in opposition to the magnetic
flux density. The denser the magnetic flux becomes, the greater the
force of the current must be to pass through it.

Please explain to me why the force on the charge is perpendicular
to both the magnetic field and the velocity of the electric charge.

That is not my position.
However, that is my question. All the experiments indicate that
there is something called a magnetic field and the force is
perpendicular to it. If you can give me a relationship between the
"magnetic flux density" and the "magnetic field," I could relate your
answer to my question. Right now, I asked one question and you
answered a completely different question.

My position is that the force on the charged
electron is in opposition to the magnetic flux density and
perpendicular to the current velocity vector.
1) What is the relationship between magnetic flux density and
magnetic field?
2) Is the magnetic flux density perpendicular to the magnetic field,
and if so in what specific direction perpendicular?
Note there is more than one direction perpendicular to a given
vector or a given pseudovector. So specifying perpendicular by itself
still contains a bit of ambiguity.
This is because
magnetic flux has tubular geometry.
This is going to make your connection to magnetic field more
complicated. However, I am listening. This has to be good.
The magnetic flux tubes tend to
run parallel to the current.
Good. Got it.
The electron is essentially a toroid
moving along its polar axis.
Also good. Got it.
The large radius of the toroid is moving
parallel to the magnetic flux tubes. The faster this toroid moves,
the more force it applies perpendicular to its velocity and thus
increases the magnetic flux density. Think of a bunch of parallel
straws in a bundle. Then put a ring around a portion of the bundle
and move it along the path of the straws. The ring will attempt to
displace the straws as it passes them by pushing perpendicular to its
velocity.
If the magnetic flux density is uniform, the direction of the
force will change around the toroid. The sum of the forces on the
current will cancel out so there is no force. There is no net force on
the current. Yet, in fact we see a net force on the current.
One way around this is to define the magnetic field in terms of
the inhomogeneity of the magnetic flux tubes. No doubt you will show
this when you present the relationship between magnetic flux density
and magnetic field.
Now imagine that the ring expands its large diameter and
contracts its small diameter as it speeds up. The faster the electron moves, the more perpendicular force it produces.
On all sides, if the magnetic flux density is constant. The total
force on the electron is zero.

However, you brought up to other questions.
1) What does the magnetic field mean in terms of the aether?

The Aether is quantified as a fabric of quantum rotating magnetic
fields. The magnetic field IS the Aether. The magnetic field is thus evidence of the Aether's existence.
The magnetic field is not uniform through space. Light propagates
through regions where the magnetic field is zero. Therefore, the
magnetic field is not the aether.

2) What does it mean to be in "opposition to the magnetic flux density?"

I hope I have explained it clear enough in the preceding paragraphs.
No.
It is helpful to understand the structures and behaviors of both the
electron and the magnetic flux density and watch how the two interact
with each other. Matter is interacting with environment. It is
similar to a fish moving through water. As the fish speeds up, the
water density near the surface of the fish would increase if the water
were elastic and the fish were inelastic enough. In the case of the
fish, the water actually flows faster around the fish's surface. In
the case of the electron, the flux tubes have to squeeze tighter to
allow the electron to pass by.
Maybe this will help. The fish has fins. In most fish, the
pectoral fins are used for steering, the tail fins for propulsion, and
the other fins are used for stabilization. When the fish wants to
turn, it needs a force perpendicular to his velocity. So it adjusts
the angle of of its pectoral fins to push against the water, so as to
create a force perpendicular to its velocity. Its brain has a strategy
for adjusting the angle to give its path the curvature it needs.
If there were no pectoral fins on the fish, the fish couldn't
steer. Yes, the pressure on the fish would increase as it swims
faster. However, the force would be equal on all sides. So the fish
would continue in a straight line.
The picture of your ring doesn't have the equivalent of pectoral
fins. I can not see how the total force on the ring can be
perpendicular to its velocity or to the magnetic field. Your electron
needs pectoral fins, and a strategy on how to use them. Making the
electron a toroid alone won't help. The electron in your model needs
more structure.
Maybe you should read more about fish, as well as physics.
Fishyics!

Darwin123 wrote:

The magnetic field is not uniform through space. Light propagates
through regions where the magnetic field is zero. Therefore, the
magnetic field is not the aether.

It is not the aether, but it is certainly a physical entity emerging
from the aether/Quantum vacuum/Spacetime or whatever you want to call
it.

Actually, that perpendicular thing reminds me of Bernouilli's principle.

--
Florian
"Toute vérité franchit trois étapes. D'abord elle est ridiculisée.
Ensuite, elle subit une forte opposition. Puis, elle est considérée
comme ayant toujours été une évidence." - Arthur Schopenhauer

On Jun 24, 10:31*am, Darwin123 wrote:
* *Please explain to me why the force on the charge is perpendicular
to both the magnetic field and the velocity of the electric charge.

That is not my position.

* * *However, that is my question.

If you want an explanation for something you believe and I don't, then
I think you need to be the one to provide it.

All the experiments indicate that
there is something called a magnetic field and the force is
perpendicular to it.

All the physicists have a problem in understanding the difference
between a magnetic field, magnetic flux density, and magnetic field
strength. Magnetic flux density and magnetic field strength are
routinely spoken of as though they were the magnetic field, when they
are only particular views of the magnetic field. It is like saying a
car is velocity because it moves. A car is a car, velocity is
velocity. A car is not velocity. A magnetic field is not magnetic
flux density.

If you can give me a relationship between the
"magnetic flux density" and the "magnetic field," I could relate your
answer to my question.

The unit of magnetic field in single dimensional charge MKS units is
equal to kg m^3 / sec coul. The unit of magnetic flux density in
single dimensional charge MKS units is kg / sec coul. In distribute
dimensional charge MKS units the magnetic field is equal to kg m^3 /
sec coul^2, and the magnetic flux density in the same system is kg /
sec coul^2.

Magnetic flux density makes no reference to the volume of the whole
magnetic field. Magnetic flux density is merely a measure of how
tightly the magnetic flux tubes are packed.

My position is that the force on the charged
electron is in opposition to the magnetic flux density and
perpendicular to the current velocity vector.

1) * *What is the relationship between magnetic flux density and
magnetic field?

It is as I just stated, and stated earlier. The magnetic flux density
is just one of many properties of the magnetic field.

2) Is the magnetic flux density perpendicular to the magnetic field,
and if so in what specific direction perpendicular?

The magnetic flux density would be a scalar quantity of the magnetic
field. The only vector is the increase/decrease of magnetic flux
density. When comparing the magnetic field to the magnetic flux
density, we have to look at the magnetic field as an object and the
magnetic flux density as a property of this object. The magnetic
field is, of course, a non-material object, but an object nonetheless.

* * * Note there is more than one direction perpendicular to a given
vector or a given pseudovector. So specifying perpendicular by itself
still contains a bit of ambiguity.

Magnetic fields have many properties, and it is the properties which
possess the vector quantity, not the magnetic field at large. That is
why physics focuses on the properties of the magnetic field, rather
than the unit of magnetic field, itself.

* * * If the magnetic flux density is uniform, the direction of the
force will change around the toroid. The sum of the forces on the
current will cancel out so there is no force. There is no net force on
the current. Yet, in fact we see a net force on the current.
* * * One way around this is to define the magnetic field in terms of
the inhomogeneity of the magnetic flux tubes. No doubt you will show
this when you present the relationship between magnetic flux density
and magnetic field. *Now imagine that the ring expands its large diameter and
contracts its small diameter as it speeds up. *The faster the electron moves, the more perpendicular force it produces.

* * On all sides, if the magnetic flux density is constant. The total
force on the electron is zero.

You are looking at the situation from the perspective that there is
only one type of charge in the electron. There are, in fact, two
quantifiable types of charges in the electron. These two types of
charges are geometrically related to each other, yet are two
completely different manifestations of charges. Also, the Aether is
the source of electrostatic charge, while the subatomic particle's
existence creates the electromagnetic charge. The Aether has an
electrostatic dipole, whereas the subatomic particle has a magnetic
dipole. The Aether is existing in a five-dimensional frame of
reference, whereas the subatomic particle is existing in a four-
dimensional frame of reference. The Aether interaction of four-
dimensional matter with a five-dimensional Aether also causes various
deformities, which are constantly changing. The wobble measured as
the particle g-factor, is one important effect caused by this
interaction of different coordinate systems. Talking about the
homogeneity of magnetic flux density requires a simultaneous
understanding of all of these factors. It is not as simple as the
straw analogy I gave. The straw analogy was given at your request,
because you wanted a way to discretely visualize the vectors.

The Aether is quantified as a fabric of quantum rotating magnetic
fields. *The magnetic field IS the Aether. *The magnetic field is thus evidence of the Aether's existence.

* * *The magnetic field is not uniform through space. Light propagates
through regions where the magnetic field is zero. Therefore, the
magnetic field is not the aether.

The magnetic field IS uniform throughout space in the sense that there
is always a magnetic field present. It may not be the magnetic field
associated with a magnet, the Earth, the Sun, the galaxy, or a
galactic globular cluster, but it exists nonetheless. This is well
understood by the presence of the permeability and permittivity
constants throughout all space. It is important to realize the
difference between a quantum rotating magnetic field and a macro
magnetic structure. It is like the difference between a subatomic
particle and a human body. The human body is composed of subatomic
particles, but subatomic particles are not composed of human bodies.
Similarly, the quantum rotating magnetic field (the infinitesimally
small whirlpools of Bernoulli, Fresnel, Descartes, and others) is not
the same thing as a magnetic field surrounding a magnet.

At any given location in the Universe, there are multiple overlapping
magnetic fields from various sources. These larger structures of
magnetic fields constantly tug at the quantum Aether units. It is
like a bunch of boats on a lake vying to affect the water molecules to
produce waves that correspond to each boat's wake. Sure, there are
moments when the boats are gone and the lake is mirror smooth, but the
water molecules are still there. The same goes for the Aether units.
There may be places in the Universe where there are no macro magnetic
fields, but the quantum rotating magnetic fields are still there and
ready to produce macro magnetic fields.

* * The picture of your ring doesn't have the equivalent of pectoral
fins.

That's because the electrons aren't fish. I didn't mean for you to
think they were. The only similarity between the fish swimming
through water was to highlight how matter moves through Aether. Rene
Descartes presented this concept, and it is fully quantifiable in the
Aether Physics Model. And by the way, snakes can swim without fins by
alternating the whole body sideways. Electrons follow the path of
magnetic flux tubes in free space. Instead of putting fins on the
electrons, the pathway of the current is changed and the electron
merely follows it. This, again, is evidence that the Aether is real.
If magnetic fields are merely mathematical abstractions and there is
no such thing as Aether, then electrons would always follow a
ballistic straight course through empty space.

I can not see how the total force on the ring can be
perpendicular to its velocity or to the magnetic field. Your electron
needs pectoral fins, and a strategy on how to use them.

No, the Aether interacts with the electron, and the electron interacts
with the Aether. Both can cause changes in the other. As I mentioned
earlier, it is important to understand the geometry of the Aether and
subatomic particles in order to understand how they interact. This
white paper provides a basic introduction to the quantified theory:
http://www.16pi2.com/files/NewFoundationPhysics.pdf

Making the
electron a toroid alone won't help. The electron in your model needs
more structure.

There is no need for me to make the electron into anything. It is
what it is. The electron's structure is entirely induced from the
constants of the physics it is involved with. It would also help if
you took the time to read my model before judging it. Then you could
actually point to a specific instance within the model that needs to
be addressed.

Dave

On Jun 24, 1:59 pm, David Thomson wrote:
On Jun 24, 10:31 am, Darwin123 wrote:
Where can I read more details in your "theory?" I read your posts
very carefully which is how I come with these questions. If you think
that I don't read your posts, then you are wrong.
The most important property of the magnetic field for our
discussion is the direction. If the magnetic field is the gradient of
the magnetic flux density, then I have no problem since a gradient has
a direction. Given that definition which you provided, the magnetic
field has direction. However, you also said that the magnetic flux
density forms tubes. The gradient of a "tube" distribution of density
is a series of vectors, perpendicular to the tube but pointing in all
radial directions from the center of the tube. Thus, the magnetic
field you described has no fixed direction.
The magnetic field that I asked about is the well known magnetic
field from science and engineering. This magnetic field does have a
definite direction. It sounds like you named something else as "the
magnetic field." However, that is secondary. Can you explain in terms
of the magnetic field most of us play with why,
F=q V x B ?

There is no need for me to make the electron into anything. It is
what it is. The electron's structure is entirely induced from the
constants of the physics it is involved with. It would also help if you took the time to read my model before judging it.
Where can I read about your model? Do you have a blog or something? I
read your posts. They already have self contradictions. Is your blog
better formulated than your posts? Perhaps your blog doesn't
contradict itself. I would like to read it.
Then you could
actually point to a specific instance within the model that needs to be addressed.

Alright. However, my original question was why in terms of the aether:
F=qV x B
where "q" is the electric charge, "V" is the velocity, "B" is the
magnetic field, and "x" is the cross product. That was the only thing
I asked for when I began this thread. I was not interested in any
other feature of the model than this equation, as well as all it
physically implied. You have not addressed that question, or even told
me where you think this equation fails.
My specific instance within the model is this. Why does,
F=q V x B ?
Do you derive this equation in terms of the aether? If not, I have
no interest in reading your theory.
Very few scientists are interested in how you, and you alone,
define magnetic field.

On Jun 24, 6:16*pm, Darwin123 wrote:
* * The most important property of the magnetic field for our
discussion is the direction. If the magnetic field is the gradient of
the magnetic flux density, then I have no problem since a gradient has
a direction.

I agree that the magnetic flux density gradient is the magnetic field
for a given magnetic structure.

However, you also said that the magnetic flux
density forms tubes.

No, I didn't say that. I said that magnetic flux is tubular.
Magnetic flux density is not tubular, it is merely a quantity for the
density of the tubes.

* * *The magnetic field that I asked about is the well known magnetic
field from science and engineering. This magnetic field does have a
definite direction. It sounds like you named something else as "the
magnetic field." However, that is secondary. Can you explain in terms
of the magnetic field most of us play with why,
F=q V x B * *?

I already did that.

There is no need for me to make the electron into anything. *It is
what it is. *The electron's structure is entirely induced from the
constants of the physics it is involved with. *It would also help if you took the time to read my model before judging it.

*Where can I read about your model? Do you have a blog or something? I
read your posts. They already have self contradictions. Is your blog
better formulated than your posts? Perhaps your blog doesn't
contradict itself. I would like to read it.

I use my blog only for occasional comments when a scientific
observation validates a point I had raised. I gave the link for my
white paper in the last post.

*Then you could
actually point to a specific instance within the model that needs to be addressed.

Alright. However, my original question was why in terms of the aether:
F=qV x B
where "q" is the electric charge, "V" is the velocity, "B" is the
magnetic field, and "x" is the cross product. That was the only thing
I asked for when I began this thread. I was not interested in any
other feature of the model than this equation, as well as all it
physically implied. You have not addressed that question, or even told
me where you think this equation fails.

I have told you a discrete interpretation of the equation, which was
your original question. I have not told you where this equation fails
because it doesn't fail. The equation is valid. I did tell you how I
use the same general equation within the Aether Physics Model, which
has distributed charge dimensions and two types of charges.

* * My specific instance within the model is this. Why does,
F=q V x B * * * * ?

I answered that question directly in an earlier post.

* * Do you derive this equation in terms of the aether? If not, I have
no interest in reading your theory.

If you truly had read all my posts in this thread carefully, as you
claimed, you would have seen that I did explain this equation in terms
of Aether. But I only gave a general answer to your question. If you
want an in-depth answer, you would need to study the theory in-depth
since the answer would be given from within the framework of the
theory.

* * *Very few scientists are interested in how you, and you alone,
define magnetic field.

It is true that very few scientists are interested in the correct
understanding of magnetic fields, but I am not alone in correctly
understanding them. I learned about the correct understanding of
magnetic fields from an online university physics course. The
professor explained the reasoning using dimensional analysis. I don't
have the link to the site, as it was several years ago that I read it,
but you can do the dimensional analysis for yourself.

Magnetic flux density, which most scientists incorrectly call the
magnetic field, is a unit equal to magnetic flux per area. Magnetic
flux is the flux tube I was talking about. Some people incorrectly
call them "flux lines." They are flux tubes, as can be determined by
holding a magnet near a CRT screen. Also, the unit of magnetic flux
is dimensionally equal to kg m^2 / sec coul. The m^2 means the unit
is applied over an area. A line is a single dimension of length, an
area is distributed dimensions (m^2) of length. A tube has area, a
line is just a line.

A field fills a volume. Therefore, the unit of magnetic field must
have m^3 as its length dimensions. Thus the magnetic field unit is
dimensionally kg m^3 / sec coul (in single dimension charge units).

Dave

On Jun 21, 12:38 pm, David Thomson wrote:
On Jun 15, 12:03 pm, Darwin123 wrote:

In terms of the aether theory, please explain the following.
1) The formula,
F=qV x B,
where F is the force vector on an electrical charge, q is the amount
of electrical charge, V is the velocity of the electrical charge, x is
the cross product and B is the magnetic field.
Note F, V and B are 3D vectors, q is a scalar, and x is a binary
vector operation.

In terms of the Aether Physics Model, the equation is written:

forc = chrg * velc * mfxd
Okay, here is where you didn't answer my question. The formula
above is not the same as the formula I provided because there is no
angle term. The formula I provided is:
F=q V x B
where F is the force vector, V is the velocity vector, B is the
magnetic field vector, and x is the cross product. You refer to the
magnetic field magnitude as the magnetic field flux density, which is
fine. In other words, |B|=mfxd. However, suppose there is an angle A
between B and V. Then,
|F|=q|V| |B| sinA
Furthermore, the direction of F is provided by a hand rule. Thus
the cross product is a shorthand notation for using the sinA factor
and the hand rule. Your aether model does not provide either a hand
rule of a sinA factor.
The magnitude of the force is proportional to "sinA". So if A is
0 degrees or 180 degrees, |F| is zero regardless of the size of "velc"
or "mfxd." Your formula implies that |F|0 when A is 0 degrees or 180
degrees.
Furthermore, your formula does not provide a direction to F, the
force vector. In real physics, we learn the left hand rules that
determine the direction of the force.
Now, I have been looking for your link to the white paper. When I
find it, I will be looking for that hand rule and the sinA term. If I
don't find it, I will be very disappointed. |:-)

On Jun 25, 1:11*pm, Darwin123 wrote:
On Jun 21, 12:38 pm, David Thomson wrote: On Jun 15, 12:03 pm, Darwin123 wrote:

In terms of the aether theory, please explain the following.
1) The formula,
F=qV x B,
*where F is the force vector on an electrical charge, q is the amount
of electrical charge, V is the velocity of the electrical charge, x is
the cross product and B is the magnetic field.
* * Note F, V and B are 3D vectors, q is a scalar, and x is a binary
vector operation.

In terms of the Aether Physics Model, the equation is written:

forc = chrg * velc * mfxd

* * *Okay, here is where you didn't answer my question. The formula
above is not the same as the formula I provided because there is no
angle term. The formula I provided is:
F=q V x B

Your equation didn't show a separate angle variable, so I didn't add
one either. The math works the same for either system for this
particular equation, except that the dimensions of charge are
different. You wanted a physical explanation of the equation in terms
of Aether. I gave it to you. Now you are changing the question
retroactively.

The explanation I gave focused on the physical explanation of the
equation and explained the distributed charge concept and the two
types of charges. Apparently you missed all of that, or did not
understand it. Did you really want a physical explanation for the
equation?

Dave