Very brief electromagnetic history. / By Israel Socratus /

[socratus]

Very brief electromagnetic history. / By Israel Socratus /

===…

Part one.

Oersted demonstrated connection between electricity and magnetism.

Ampere gave mathematical explanation to this effect.

Faraday discovered the reverse effect: relationship between magnetic

and electric fields. ( how to use magnetism to induce electricity)

Maxwell (using mechanical model: balls, springs, hooks . . . etc.)

found mathematical equations to describe Faraday’s idea.

Oliver Heaviside reformulated twelve (12) Maxwell’s equations

to the modern four (4) equations.

Hertz discovered Maxwell’s electro- magnetic waves and . . .

he wrote that . . . EM waves cannot be put into practice.

But . . . . .

Morse created the telegraph and Morse Code.

Bell is often credited as the inventor of the telephone.

Marconi developed the first effective system of radio.

. . . etc . . . .

 

#

Part two.

Maxwell’s EM theory was theory about waves.

It said nothing about particles.

It was Lorentz who introduced particle-electron in Maxwell theory.

And it was Einstein who developed and leaded Maxwell / Lorentz

EM theory into the “forest / jungles” of SRT.

 

#

Part three.

Planck united together long and short wavelengths and said that

this unity is possible if they ( long waves and short waves) have

something common. The common is – quantum, quantum of action.

De Broglie decided vice versa:

quantum discrete particle can be as a wave – as a "pilot-wave".

Later SRT + QT created conditions for modern technological progress.

===…

 

My conclusion.

Different waves ( long and short) have something common in behavior.

The common is quantum- quantum of action- quantum particle in action.

Planck’s “quantum of action” is quantum particle in action.

It means that there isn’t EM waves without quantum particles in action.

Different quantum particles in action create different kinds of waves.

The source of all EM waves (and all phenomenons in Nature)

are different quantum particles in action with energy E=h*f

The particle’s energy of Gamma-Radiation waves is E=h*f ,

The particle’s energy of Röntgen-Radiation waves is E=h*f,

The particle’s (photon) energy of Light waves is E=h*f,

The particle’s energy of Infra-red-waves is E=h*f ,

The particle’s energy of Super/Ultra-High-TV waves is E=h*f,

The particle’s energy of Radio waves is E=h*f . . . . etc . . . etc.

What is difference between them?

Frequencies make difference between quantum particles in action

and their EM waves.

===…

Once more.

Photon, electron, x rays, cosmic rays, microwaves, radio waves,

TV-waves all they have in common one thing: frequency.

Change the frequency and you can step from one to another particle.

Frequency is the key to quantum particles.

Frequency makes difference between particles (EM waves).

Book.

" . . . photons with extremely high fluctuations (frequency) . . .

in the experience was observed . . . . the remarkable phenomenon

of transformation them in … … …electrons.

Undoubtedly, a reverse process is also possible."

/Book. " Isaac Newton ", page 94.By academician S. I. Vavilov./

===…

Planck’s quantum particles are quantum particles in actions.

The results of these actions are different frequencies.

Question: How did frequencies appear in actions, in nature?

Answer: The frequencies are result of quantum particle’s high

speed self-rotation (a particle behaves like having self- angular

momentum) around its own axis. There are many different kinds

of waves but all they were created by this one scheme: h*=h/2pi.

This effect (spin) was found by Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck in 1925.

And in spite of that this effect is well-known for a long time, until

today it doesn’t adopt philosophical as real physical self-action of

quantum particles, as real self-rotation process of quantum particles.

============…

Best wishes.

Israel Sadovnik Socratus.

========= …

[Klaynos]

Maxwells EM theory was theory about waves.

It said nothing about particles.

That's not really true.

 

If you read Maxwell's original books the talks about what we would now call electrons. He just didn't know what they were.

 

I've only scanned the rest of your post but bassed on the original text I've read in not sure I see a point in reading the rest.

 

What are you hoping to achieve with this and for other threads?

[Mordred]

The conclusions above on just wavefunctions ignore numerous quantum numbers.

 

For example spin correlations to velocity.

- effects of charge to action.

 

etc etc.

 

yes you can successfully model interactions according to action this is one possible choice.

 

Just judging from the scattering of references I don't get a good sense you fully understand the metrics involved behind each of the models you've referenced.

 

Each model you mentioned have specified changes in relations. Quantum theory models the probability distribution.

 

Yet relativity models more according to geometry change via vectors.

 

(Which isn't specifically action... which has a more rigorous treatment).

 

You can certainly adapt the four momentum to the Hamilton.

 

However I seriously doubt the OP would understand the steps involved.

 

Essentially the gist I get from the scattering of references you've provided is that your not truly familiar what each reference is designed to model in relation change.

( though like Klaynos, I'm having difficulty determing what your getting at)

Edited April 8, 2016 by Mordred

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Is there a question you're asking here, or a topic to discuss? Posting an historical summary really isn't compatible with the format of SFN. It's more of what you might blog about.