The answer is edited : 2018.01.15, 10:59 Local Time

Dear Subahash

I try to explain the phenomena so simple. so you can find your answers.

First of all imagine a single and stationary charged particle in a vacuum-like space , without any pre-existent electric or magnetic fields around it. As long as the particle is stationary (with any linear or angular movement) there are stationary electric and maybe magnetic field around it.

Now imagine you are an stationary observer near the described particle with simple antenna on your hand. Obviously, as there are no measurable voltage or current at antenna output as long as you and your antenna are stationary.

But when the particle start to move (in linear or angular form), the magnitude and phase of, for example, electrical field in an arbitrary point of space changes. Due mathematical model of electromagnetism, which was first introduced by J.C. Maxwell, this variable electrical field, generates a variable magnetic field, and the generated magnetic field also generates variable electrical field. This arbitrary point of space acts just like a electromagnetic source of radiation of its adjacent point. This is due to Hygiene's principle of propagation. This way an electromagnetic field starts to propagate through the space, carrying a calculable amount of energy through the space

Let's check what will happen to you and you antenna. the antenna on your hand will intersect with electric and magnetic lines of fields. This causes the electrons of metallic parts of antenna to move in a way with you can measure read-able voltage or current at the output of antenna.

V.A. Golovko also did some research on wave emission from the wave resonance perspective:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0810/0810.3773.pdf

Great article. But is a little complicated and mathemaizes for general question and study.

Dear Andre. I read the article too and I thnak you because it opened some insight into the problem and in the way which I used to think about the issue.

Thank you again

Dear Ahmad,

Glad to see that resonance states are of interest to you. Indeed Golovko's paper is a little strong on maths.

The interest of his paper is that he is picking up research on resonance states that are at the origin of the establishment of the wave function by Schrödinger and de Broglie in the 1920's, after 80 years of neglect.

De Broglie also attempted in the 1930's to reverse-engineer the photon as a local resonator from the volume that can be established by the wave function, to eventually also do the same for the electron stabilized in the ground state of the hydrogen atom, but could not succeed due to the too great complexity of the wave function representation.

I have been trying to raise attention about their work on my side too, but from a less mathematically dense angle, and from the opposite direction, that is, from the electromagnetic properties of the electron, and found that in the ground state, two beat frequencies are involved, because I found that the carrying energy of the electron electromagnetically oscillates at its own frequency separately from that of the energy of the rest mass of the electron, which seems to me is what establishes the Zitterbewegung observed for the electron in free motion.

This is coupled with an axial beat frequency with respect to the proton that keeps the electron stabilized on a partially stochastic trajectory within the volume definable by the wave function when in the ground state.

I find that it is this complexity that kept de Broglie and Schrödinger from succeeding in reverse-engineering the electron as a resonator in the ground state of the hydrogen atom from the too general characteristics of the volume definable by the wave function.

If interested, I summarized my research in this recently published paper:

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/gravitation-quantum-mechanics-and-the-least-action-electromagneticequilibrium-states-2329-6542-1000152.pdf

You will also find in the Reference section a link to another interesting paper on electromagnetic resonance states by Antony Soosaleon:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.07225.pdf

Best Regards

Thank you dear Andre

Ahmad,

what does the magnetic field generated by a hypothetical stationary electron look like?

Can you tell us more about the energy that may be detected at the terminal of your antenna if one approaches the latter to, say a single atom of hydrogen, that is a proton around which an electron gravitates, which has an accelerated speed? I am asking, because I thought that non-stationary electrons do not always radiate energy...

Dear Denis

such a great question...

before i start to explain my opinion, i want to ask Dr.André Michaud to join us and it will be appreciated if he accept.

Lets answer the first question : "what does the magnetic field generated by a hypothetical stationary electron look like?"

to answer the question, we need too check its validity first. there are some assumptions in your question:

1) existance of "a hypothetical stationary electron".

2) its ability to generate the magnetic field.

any assumption, as long as do not ovverride the inherent principles of nature are valid.

In first assumption, as listed above, the word "stationary" can be described as without any movement, linear or angular, in respect with the observer. so the observer can locate the position of the hypothetical electron accurately, as accurate as location of an apple on a table. also the word "stationary" reduces the relative speed of the hypothetical electron equal to zero. so the observer can measure the particle's momentum accurately. due to Heisenberg's indeterminacy(Uncertainty) principle, Simultaneous determination of location and momentum of an elementary particle (i.e. an electron) is impossible. so if you accurately measure the position of an electron in any arbitrary time, you can not determine its momentum (speed) at all. it is impossible.

In your second assumption you assumed this particle can generate a magnetic field. as long as i know the ability of orchestrating magnetic field by an electron is because if its angular spin which is assumed equal to zero in first assumption. if my reasoning is true, the assumptions are contradicted and the question is not valid logically.

But what about the 2nd question: "Can you tell us more about the energy that may be detected at the terminal of your antenna if one approaches the latter to, say a single atom of hydrogen, that is a proton around which an electron gravitates, which has an accelerated speed?"

I think i know the answer but i need to study because of some contradiction in practical application. for example in ferromagnetic materials you can not use such a reasoning. also the hydrogen is not a "balanced" atom. at any moment of time you have dipole with a electron and a proton on its end...

i will be glad if you wait. i will answer the 2nd question soon.

Thank you

Ahmad

My 1st question was based on your assumptions, actually, as you wrote:

«imagine a single and stationary particle (...) there are stationary electric and magnetic field around it»...

The answer to my 2nd question is a paradox which led to the development of quantum mechanics, isn't?

Dear Ahmad,

First I must say that I am flattered that you would assume that I deserve the title of Dr., but no, I do not have a PhD, so I do not deserve this title. I am simply André.

I must say that I was very impressed by the clearness of your explanation of electromagnetism to Subhash. I have not seen many people understanding Maxwell this clearly. Particularly the mention of the separate presence of both electric and magnetic fields about a stationary electron, and the dependence on the existence of both fields for propagation to be possible. Generally, people speak of the "electromagnetic field" as if it was a single entity.

This is why I thought you might be interested in current research on energy emission from the wave resonance perspective.

And also your clear explanation of the current state of understanding with regard to relativity of stationary states real or assumed with respect to observer and the difficulty that this poses with respect to Heisenberg's indeterminacy, which makes it difficult to harmonize Maxwell with Quantum Mechanics, which is something that Feynman also observed, but could not resolve.

Obviously, we do not have all the answers yet. But as you can see from the current research on resonance states, new perspectives seem to be emerging here and there on these issues.

Best Regards.

André

Dear Denis

Thank you for your eagle-eye checking the answer. Honestly the objection is true and the answer was edited. If it is required, please inform me to answer your first question again.

But about your 2nd. question:" Can you tell us more about the energy that may be detected at the terminal of your antenna if one approaches the latter to, say a single atom of hydrogen, that is a proton around which an electron gravitates, which has an accelerated speed? "

Let's check the electrical status of hydrogen atom. as we know the described single atom of hydrogen is considered a Neutral structure. but lets take a closer look. The electron circling the core at radious about 5.2917721067(12)×10−11 m. lets take a snapshot of this atom when the electron passes the 12 o'clock position. now the electron is exactly overhead of the core, if we consider the atom in 2D. now draw a line form 10 to 2 o'clock. a simple dipole structure appears which is rotating at 2.2x10+6m/s . this simple dipole absorbs the electromagnetic al wavelength which matches to its size (Radius), which starts form 122 nm for n=1 to n=2 transition.

Now imagine two adjacent but bounded hydrogen atom. as we described, there will act as two dipoles. Essentially these dipoles will induce electrical field around and due to its dynamic structure, the stationary observer will see variable electrical field which can generate the perpendicular magnetic field and creation the electromagnetic radiation. As these two hydrogen atoms are located at close distance, the electric and magnetic forces are considerable and these forces will change the properties of dipole rotation so the forces become balanced as possible as is practical. as a nearby stationary observer you detect electromagnetic radiation form two dipoles which are synchronized.

But what about a huge amount of hydrogen atoms. is there any detectable electromagnetic radiation. The thermal noise excites random number of electrons in hydrogen cloud and some absorption lines appears in spectroscopic devices. the question is "while the hydrogen cloud has been cooled enough, when the thermal noise can not afford to excite a electron to be transferred from n=1 to n=2, is there any background radiation form randomly oriented dipoles which are always trying to compensate the described forces? honestly is did not find any record about the existence or absence of such radiation. on the other hand the attenuation of electromagnetic waves if proportional to R6 while you are in near-field region. i did not calculate the near field region radius but it is calculabe.

There are some evidence supporting its existence, such as existence of "Static Electricity" which is due to fine alignment of patterns of electrons on the surface of a dielectric by and external source of energy.

the answer to the last part of your question is predictable. but you need to note about "acceleration". what effects the properties of an electromagnetic wave is the relative speed of source in respect with the observer and will cause a doppler effect. also at very high speeds, some changes in pattern of radiation of relativity particles are reported, such as electrons in in Cyclotron.

i will be glad to know more about you opinion

Thank you for your Time

Best Regars

Dear André

• Being a philosopher is our, the humankind, art. anyone who can think in a reasonable way, is a philosopher. On my standing point of view, you are philosopher, even if you had not gained your PHilosophic Degree. but as you like, Dear André.

Thank you for you r consideration and thank you for your time.

Honestly, yes. I am interested in described issue : on energy emission from the wave resonance perspective. But i prefer to know more about scientific phenomena in its descriptive form. Then its mathematical background will be easier to understand and interpret. I will be glad if you show me the starting point.

Thank you again

Ahmad

As far as I am concerned, waving broad sleeves like an attorney does, to the face of a judge, doesn't count as scientific argumentation, Ahmad. I go by demonstrations, not big talk.

Dear Ahmad,

You write "But i prefer to know more about scientific phenomena in its descriptive form. Then its mathematical background will be easier to understand and interpret. I will be glad if you show me the starting point."

This is the sort of description I prefer also.

Although I am clearly aware that establishing these resonance states is required in final analysis, I admit that their definition is beyond my abilities to establish. I am currently trying to locate all related papers trying to figure out how to proceed, and refer them to anybody who might be interested, as I did here.

As for the starting point, I think that you already are familiar with it. From my analysis, fundamental energy can exist only as a consequence of its electric aspect and its magnetic aspect cyclically mutually inducing each other, which seems to me is what you have also understood.

From my conclusions, what has prevented the resolution of the disconnect between electromagnetism and Quantum Mechanics is the fact that nowhere in the workable theories addressing the various aspects of fundamental physics, the self-sustaining mutual induction of these 2 aspects of the energy making up elementary particles has been described in a manner that can explain why these electromagnetic quanta can remain permanently localized in a manner that can explain why they behave point-like during scattering encounters.

This is what I try to put in perspective in this recently published paper, if you are interested:

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/gravitation-quantum-mechanics-and-the-least-action-electromagneticequilibrium-states-2329-6542-1000152.pdf

Best Regards

André

Dear Denis

It takes me a while to decide how to answer you.

But looking at History, showed me it is better to leave the inept one in his ignorance, with all respects to his ideas.

RG is a place for sharing information not a court. :)

Best Regards

Dr. A. Esmaeilkhah

Dear Andre

I start to read your paper. we will talk about the topic very soon

Best Regards

Ahmad

Looking at the History of your statements in this thread will help determine who is inept, Ahmad. We can also widen the prospective and compare our respective publication records, if you will.

You are not sharing information, just waving broad sleeves. As I wrote earlier, that does not work in this site. The latter is not a court indeed. It is one to share the information; that information you are not giving us.

@Denis

you are right :)

:)

I'll accept your apology for calling me an inept person, then, and we'll be square.

My opinion is that this question is not clear therefore one can get more one answer. I am wandering that there is no reaction from the asking colleague!

Is this particle charged? , is its velocity constant or this velocity changes with time? Only if the particle is charged and its velocity changes with time it can emit electromagnetic radiation.

Best wishes