[witsend (OP)]

The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field.Vern

I agree.  I totally and wholeheartedly agree - BUT with one proviso - that the magnetic part of that electromagnetic interaction is not in our dimension.  Except for this difference I ENTIRELY agree.   []

[jerrygg38]

I suspect that simple principle is

The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field.

Yes. Since I have eliminated the necessity for the independent property of mass, all we have left is pure electrical theory.

[jerrygg38]

The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field.Vern

I agree.  I totally and wholeheartedly agree - BUT with one proviso - that the magnetic part of that electromagnetic interaction is not in our dimension.  Except for this difference I ENTIRELY agree.   []

Verns statement does not specify what dimensions the fields occupy. It could be three , four, five , ten etc.

[witsend (OP)]

Yes. Since I have eliminated the necessity for the independent property of mass, all we have left is pure electrical theory.EDIT - sorry JerryGG38

What do you mean?  I cannot understand how you can eliminate mass.  It's tangibly evident - everywhere?

[Vern]

Yes. Since I have eliminated the necessity for the independent property of mass, all we have left is pure electrical theory.Vern

What do you mean?  I cannot understand how you can eliminate mass.  It's tangibly evident - everywhere?

Mass is electromagnetic change. [] Any time that change exists in a local area, it is mass. It is the only way the arithmetic works. This is standard stuff; not just my concept. It is just that we don't usually think of it that way.

BTW; the quote was from jerrygg38 not me but I agree with it.

[Vern]

Verns statement does not specify what dimensions the fields occupy. It could be three , four, five , ten etc.

It only works in the familiar 3 + 1 dimensions.

[witsend (OP)]

Vern - Jerrygg38 - Let's somehow get to the same page.  JerryGG38 says that he has no need of mass in an electric field.  You say that it is a required property in any electromagnetic interaction.  Am I missing something.  These two concepts seem diametrically opposite.  I have no problem with mass.  I have a problem in any universe at all without it.

What's actually being said here?  

[Vern]

I agree.  I totally and wholeheartedly agree - BUT with one proviso - that the magnetic part of that electromagnetic interaction is not in our dimension.  Except for this difference I ENTIRELY agree.

I guess there could be other dimensions; I can make computer simulations of them, but I can't imagine that they could exist in real life.

[Vern]

These two concepts seem diametrically opposite.  I have no problem with mass.  I have a problem in any universe at all without it.

Mass exists; we are just considering its composition. The contention is that it consists of nothing other than electric and magnetic change trapped in local patterns.

[jerrygg38]

Yes. Since I have eliminated the necessity for the independent property of mass, all we have left is pure electrical theory.EDIT - sorry JerryGG38

What do you mean?  I cannot understand how you can eliminate mass.  It's tangibly evident - everywhere?

If you look at my Sister transformation theory you will see that in my theory I propose that
   MCC = QC = energy
  Therefore a moving charge at light speed has the property of energy
Therefore
  M = Q/C = coulombs seconds per meter

  This eliminates the need for kilograms. Therefore mass is elimated and replaced by an electrical term.
  Over the years I have had three different transformation solutions. I started with this one, then went to another sister solution, then I tried the mass equals charge solution. Finally I returned to my original equation of 1988.
   You think mass exists? Why? You pick some heavy object up and it is hard to do. You push against a wall and think it is a hard object. Why?
  If you take a three dimensional high speed gyroscope (3 axis) and try to lift it, you will find you cannot. It may weigh ten pounds but you cannot pick it up.
  Mass is merely the electromagnetic field spinning on 3 axis. It is not an independent property of nature.

[jerrygg38]

I agree.  I totally and wholeheartedly agree - BUT with one proviso - that the magnetic part of that electromagnetic interaction is not in our dimension.  Except for this difference I ENTIRELY agree.

I guess there could be other dimensions; I can make computer simulations of them, but I can't imagine that they could exist in real life.

Think about a magnetic hysteresis loop. You know that exists in real life. Then think about a light speed hysteresis loop. Finally think about a space time hysteresis loop. In this way the universe is a hysteresis loop of plus time, minus time and zero time.
  It is not complex. It is just that the universe we live in is a composite of three time dimensions which are extremely close to each other.

[witsend (OP)]

This eliminates the need for kilograms. Therefore mass is elimated and replaced by an electrical term.JerryGG38

OK - we're on the same page.  I'm with you.  I entirely agree.  The only difference between you me and Vern is this.  Vern says all is sufficient in the electromagnetic description.  You say is all sufficient in the Electric description.  And I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.

How interesting is that.  

[Vern]

Think about a magnetic hysteresis loop. You know that exists in real life. Then think about a light speed hysteresis loop. Finally think about a space time hysteresis loop. In this way the universe is a hysteresis loop of plus time, minus time and zero time.

I can imagine it; I just can't think of why it is needed.

[jerrygg38]

This eliminates the need for kilograms. Therefore mass is elimated and replaced by an electrical term.JerryGG38

OK - we're on the same page.  I'm with you.  I entirely agree.  The only difference between you me and Vern is this.  Vern says all is sufficient in the electromagnetic description.  You say is all sufficient in the Electric description.  And I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.

How interesting is that.  

The problem is a man named Maxwell. His excellent equations have formed the basis of much of electrical theory. You cannot separate the electric and magnetic fields. They are interconnected. One makes the other. To me the stationary dot-wave is the electric field while the moving dot-wave is the magnetic field. In general things move and stop, thus the electric field always turns into a magnetic field and visa versa.

  If you try to build a universe where the two fields are not sister properties, then the foundation of electrical theory is in jepoardy.

   On thing I saw you state previously is that two magnetic fields will not produce an electric field.
   If you bring two bar magnets toward each other, Each bar magnet will induce electric currents in the next bar magnet. Therefore the moving magnetic fields will produce electric fields and visa veras. you cannot disconnect the electric and magnetic fields from each other.

[Vern]

And I say that the magnetic is separate from the electric description but I need both.

Some physicists suspect that the two fields might exist separate from each other and that a magnetic monopole might exist. So far this has not been observed. A changing magnetic creates an electric etc.


Edit: jerrygg38; our posts crossed [] We're on the same page.

[jerrygg38]

Think about a magnetic hysteresis loop. You know that exists in real life. Then think about a light speed hysteresis loop. Finally think about a space time hysteresis loop. In this way the universe is a hysteresis loop of plus time, minus time and zero time.

I can imagine it; I just can't think of why it is needed.

From a mathematical viewpoint think about differential equations. It works based upon delta time. Thus the whole basis of our math is the present time verses the past time and verses future time. Therefore the whole basis of our universe is plus and minus differential time. Therefore in reality there is a memory of the past time.
  A rock moves slowly in pure empty space. There is a memory of the rock a split second ago. There are forces between the rock in the here and now and a split second ago. So we always have a universe of today and a universe of a split second ago. Now we get Einsteinian.
  The image of the rock's motion is ahead of the rock at the speed of light. Thus there is a fast forward component to the motion of the rock.
Now we have a t- universe, a t=0 universe and a t=+ universe.
   If we did not have three time universes, then differential equations would be eliminated. Our universe would be eliminated as well.

[Vern]

Now we have a t- universe, a t=0 universe and a t=+ universe.
   If we did not have three time universes, then differential equations would be eliminated. Our universe would be eliminated as well.

I just always thought of the + and - of time to be properties of the time dimension.

[witsend (OP)]

since we're discussing everything except my composites - let me say this.

There was a young lady of Bright,
Whose speed was much faster than light
She left one day in a relative way
And returned the previous night.


NOT sure of the relevance nor the composer for that matter. 

[witsend (OP)]

If you bring two bar magnets toward each other, Each bar magnet will induce electric currents in the next bar magnet. Therefore the moving magnetic fields will produce electric fields and visa veras. you cannot disconnect the electric and magnetic fields from each other. JerryGG38

I have spoken to the following academics on this question.  Professor Lyndsay, Professor Zingu, Professor Violie and Professor Claymans.  I have also written and/or spoken to 2 other professors and have written to a whole host of professors including phsyicists at Yale and Harvard.  Not one of them has claimed that there is an ELECTRIC FIELD in a magnet on magnet interaction.  All have said that it is assumed but unproven.  That was a decade ago.  I then looked for proof.  There's a guy who did some test to prove this and the proof was inconclusive.  But it IS published.  I cannot for the life of me find that paper. I agree that there may be an electric field (edit) in this magnet on magnet.  But there is NO PROOF of an electric field, to the best of my knowledge.

[witsend (OP)]

And JerryGG38 - I'm not sure, but I think that the only thing that can shield one magnetic field is another magnetic field.  Can one shield an electric field with another electric field?  I actually don't know.  I've just thought of it.