5 Likes
It is intriguing that since 1964 it has been known in the literature that there are radiationless charge current configurations, the general form of solutions for which have the same form as the uncertainty relation of quantum theory.
I ran across this body of work while searching for ways of constructing an “antenna” that would not emit EM for our work on longitudinal vector potential wave radio. There is at least one “crackpot” theory of physics based on a model of the electron as a charge current configuration which, in a stable condition (whether an orbital or free electron) does not radiate. But I’ll not discuss that here as it is probably the most extreme point on the scatter plot I described elsewhere and therefore makes people go completely bonkers when I bring it up.
2 Likes
The aforementioned physical theory for the electron (and all massive particles) as non-radiating charge current configurations, also predicted dark matter is highly paramagnetic – and did so in the late 80s on purely theoretic grounds (rather than attempting to explain dark matter observations of apparent magnetism as described in the aforelinked video). This prediction purports to be an inevitable (no free parameter) consequence of the theory. Samples of laboratory-created dark matter filaments are available for analysis from them. This material has been analyzed by a lab in Europe and reported (now published in a peer-reviewed journal) to possess the predicted characteristics.
But when I attempted to get a ballpark quote from the University of Illinois in Urbana (the only physical chemistry lab in the midwest with the electron paramagnetic resonance equipment capable of reproducing the paper’s measurements that I know of) to do a blind analysis of the material, they refused, insisting that I tell them what it was. So I sent them the (now published) scientific paper that was then in review. When they saw the theory it was based on, they went bonkers. When I told them that this didn’t strike me as the way science proceeds and requested that they tell me why they were unwilling to debunk this “crackpot” theory even if paid, they came back with a response stating that it would take them years to do the analysis.
PS: Part of the reason everyone goes bonkers is this form of dark matter is supposed to be ash from a non-nuclear reaction involving hydrogen that releases energy. Hence the danger of a “Pascal’s Scam” holding out the promise of energy production akin to “cold fusion”.
3 Likes
A quote from the aforementioned – unnamed – “crackpot”:
“God or fate (depending on your world view) dealt me a hard problem, but stupid competition. Not bad in balance.”
1 Like
I just ran across an intersection with Schantz’s “The Hidden Truth”.
A Royal Society review article “Oliver Heaviside: an accidental time traveller” (emphasis JAB) came up in my google search after the following piqued my interest in Heaviside:
The nonradiation condition was reformulated in a 1986 paper in such a way that it shed new light on Cherenkov Radiation. Here’s the excerpt:
It was this paper, “On the radiation from point charges” by then MIT professor H. A. Haus that was the basis of the aforementioned theory of dark matter as low energy state “ash” from an energy production process disallowed by QM
1 Like