Date mån 07 januari 2019

Mills claim that there is a contraction when it comes to a circular movement at speed of light?? that makes the usual circular distance contract from \(2\pi r\) to \(r\). I really can't find any support for this in third party sources and there is no reference in Mills GUTCP. I really can't follow his argument in the book and is a bit perlplexed about this beacause this notion is very often applied and there are specific rules how to apply it. I suspect that these transforms are allowed, but the reason behind them is different then told in GUTCP. So, if you encircle a sphere with a light wave and it takes a wavelength to encircle it you will have \(\lambda = 2\pi r\). But let's assume that the waves transforms to spherical symmetric standing waves or waves constructed by a few spherical harmonics, you end up with the full loop done in one radius. e.g. \(\lambda = r\). So for example if we consider the stored magnetic energy used in the derivation of the g-factora nd equation 1.172. There equation 1.171 is modified and restructed with \(r\to 2\pi r\), we could say that this is the fluxon that goes form the internal representation with the fluxon in steady state to a move along the the surface of the electron. which represent the outer stored magnetic component affecting the system. There is still some mysteries with this derivation, the masses typically also transforms and there is no reference to why that is not happening here, I would expect \(m\to m/(2\pi)\), but that is not happening. My best guess is that \(H \to H/(2\pi)\) That would mean that those corrections would cancel the corrections in the masses. The other two calculations involve the electric fields and currents that should not change and that's why you don't see any corrections here. What do you think?


Comments

comments powered by Disqus

~ Follow me ~