Emmanouil, thanks for forwarding this to me! By quickly looking up your input material via a simple Google search, I could find the following imho very interesting excerpt to an experiment imho much related to the one referred to by you in [1]:

excerpt (PSB) taken from:

https://maker.pro/forums/threads/experimental-evidence-for-v-c-in-case-of-coulomb-interaction.168813/

# - - - cut - - -

"Quantum electrodynamics and experiment demonstrate the non-retarded

nature of electrodynamical force fields"

J.H.Field

http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.1661

Abstract

"In quantum electrodynamics, the quantitatively most successful theory

in the history of science, intercharge forces obeying the inverse

square law are due to the exchange of space-like virtual photons. The

fundamental quantum process underlying applications as diverse as the

gyromagnetic ratio of the electron and electrical machinery is then

Moller scattering ee-ee . Analysis of the quantum amplitude for this

process shows that the *corresponding intercharge force acts

instantaneously*. This prediction has been verified in a recent

experiment."

The experiment he refers to is here:

"Experimental test on the applicability of the standard retardation

condition to bound magnetic fields"

A. L. Kholmetskii et. al.

Journal of Applied Physics -- 15 January 2007

http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/ser...00101000002023532000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=Yes

There is a related preprint here:

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0601084

# - - - cut - - -

Sorry for "throwing" unchecked (uncommented) over the fence, but I believe this is imho highly relevant and hence important for the question you asked.

Dear Christian,

Your detective skills are better than mine :)

Emmanouil

An experiment like this should actually be repeated again in a better quality. Just to be sure.

It would be best to use two identical detectors, each of which detects the EM pulse locally and converts it into a light signal. The two light signals can then be transmitted by means of optical fibers of equal length to a remote location which is not influenced by the EM pulse. With modern ToF electronics, one can then determine very precisely the time difference depending on the distance between the detectors and the EM pulse source. Of course, the influence of the field strength needs also to be analyzed ...

Several experimenters have published results on speed of the coulomb field:

``Propagation speed of coulomb force: What do experiments say?"

Eugene V. Stefanovich

Preprint Propagation speed of Coulomb force. What do experiments say?

John Hodge The drawbacks of the experiments in Eugene V. Stefanovich 's article are that they are complicated. I do not mean to question the value of the experiments. I only want to say that a particularly simple experiment would be most welcome.

In Gasser's experiment, for example, neither the transmitter nor the receiver are moving. This is important, because if there are relative velocities between transmitter and receiver, it becomes complicated. Gasser simply wanted to know if the near field of a Hertzian dipole between two resting objects propagates with velocity c. Maxwell's equations say so, but unfortunately I don't know any experiment where this is verified.

Hi Steffen! ( Steffen Kühn )

Thank you for your expert input. I believe you are current;ly one of the best researchers on this topic with extensive theoretical and experimental and rigorous work produced.

Yes I agree, the simplicity of Gasser's experiment http://www.pandualism.com/c/coulomb_experiment.pdf allows to be a control experiment eliminating many free parameters. Also I like the ingenious experiment setup of Gasser's. The fact that the generated spark discharge source electrostatic field generator using a spark gap could be also described phenomenologically using Maxwell's theory as a very strong displacement electron current of a two parallel plates capacitor (capacitor leakage breakdown current) which in his setup this longitudinal displacement current of the source transmitter is aligned on the same x-axis with the target sensor receiver apparatus used for the time delay measurement which is a spherical capacitor and identical with the one used for generating the spark on the source.

This is ingenious because you are actually measuring NOT transverse EM waves but isolated measurement of longitudinal aligned and I dare to say, entangled displacement currents between two sphere capacitors at a distance from each other, one source generating the spark and and one receiver capacitor receiving the static field displacement current distortion transient but of course not producing any spark on the receiver capacitor because the amplitude attenuation with distance which between two electric dipole dipoles goes with the inverse cube 1/r3 with distance for the far-field although I am not sure about the near field? I could be that in the near-field for interaction between two electric dipoles the inverse square law still holds 1/r2 as in the case of electric monopoles which doesn't really matter much anyway in the outcome of this experiment since as demonstrated the receiver was sensitive enough to sense the static Coulomb field transient signal and display it on the oscilloscope.

It was this relative low radio frequency displacement electron current Coulomb static field transient that was measured remotely in this experiment and it time delay and of course NOT the frequency spectrum of the generated blue electric spark which I remind is not at the radio spectrum but at the THz visible light spectrum and beyond thus, the frequency spectrum associated with a visible blue spark is typically in the range of 400-450 THz (terahertz). This frequency range corresponds to the blue light perceived by the human eye, with a wavelength of approximately 450-495 nanometers. Which of course this kind of EM waves signal is not possible to be sensed by the Gasser's experiment. Which is actually good.

So, what was this transient's frequency (rise time of signal) in Gasser's experiment when translated to a continuous signal? I have to study more its signal graphs but here in this reference link, it says that almost independent of the spark apparatus characteristics, the initial spark displacement electron current signal that breaks down the air is about 350 KHz https://www.tech-faq.com/spark-gap-transmitter.html which gives a λ/2 wavelength about 428 m and the receiver capacitor is surely in this experiment is in the near-field. Actually very very near-field :) Which is good.

Therefore, Gasser's experiment is excellent! It is a simple highly control experiment that isolates adequately the longitudinal electratatic pressure radiation component transient generated. Enough to allow to make reliable measurements and extract information about the propagation time of longitudinal radiation pressure transient distortions in a electrostatic Coulomb field.

If my recent theory about the coupling of superluminal gravitons with normal EM flux is correct:

Preprint Non Tachyonic Superluminal Graviton

then it is possible as reported by Gasser's experiment to have a group velocity FTL non Lorentz-invariant static Coulomb field transient signal component that has previously ignored in our measurements because it was hard to isolate in previous experiment or slip our attention since we concentrated NOT on measuring propagation speed of Maxwell's displacement current but only the more massive effect of transverse EM wave distortions (see attached herein illustration).

Actually, when I private email to Gasser (no reply received), I wrote that the maximum static Coulomb transient reaction speed about 5c in air he has measured, could be actually much higher approaching infinity depending on how much perfect the xyz alignment in space is, of the transmitter spark gap sphere capacitor and receiver sphere capacitor. The higher the accuracy in alignment between these two, especially on the xy-axes the faster the propagaion speed ToF of the transient signal.

Unfortunately, all my efforts to get in contact with Gasser have failed so far. In case I find him and he agrees? Are you interested in co authoring all three of us an experimental paper and phenomenology using the Gasser's available experimental results for a Journal publication?(please reply via RG private message or my email [email protected])

IMHO, this is a very important experiment that cannot longer be ignored. But first I need the current confirmation and supporting of Gasser himself about his data credibility and updated conclusions otherwise we have to replicate this experiment and write the paper without Gasser co authoring. Also any other interested experimenter who believes can replicate the Gasser experiment reliable is welcome.

Kind Regards,

Emmanouil

A spark gap generates EM / radio-like emissions. These have been measured at c. The other experiment measure a speed MUCH.MUCH greater than c. That he measures a speed less than 2c is suspect - he may be measuring radio - type signal such as emitted by current along a wire (Biot-Savart Law) or antenna.

Dear John Hodge

He measured from x2c up to x5c corresponding to different distances between the receiver and transmitter. Each time he had to separate and align the two manually. Since speed increase is not analogue with distance in his measurements, it could that it is an alignment accuracy related. This actually support the FTL theory since the better the alignment he possible achieved to the longitudinal speed component the closer the measured values would be to the the theoretical predicted by many about the Coulomb field longitudinal action to be practically instantaneous (non measurable).

Also take into account please that the experiment was not performed in a vacuum but inside normal matter environment thus air and we cannot be sure what this impact this could have on the results of the Gasser experiment?

Anyway it seems a very interesting and smart experiment tha tis worth the attention and science curiosity.

Kind Regards,

Emmanouil

Emmanouil Markoulakis

Thanks for the correction. But still 5c is way too low.

> Unfortunately, all my efforts to get in contact with Gasser have failed so far.

Unfortunately, Wolfgang Gasser is already deceased some years ago. As I have already written, one should repeat the experiment in a better quality and publish the results in a journal.

> It was this relative low radio frequency displacement electron current ...

It is an electrostatic dipole field which suddenly breaks down. This corresponds to a step function, i.e. the spectrum is rather broadband (proportional to 1/frequency).

BTW, I have created an animation of the electromagnetic field. As one can see, the longitudinal part also moves with velocity c. To create the animation, I used the general analytical solution of Maxwell's equations for point charges. If the longitudinal near field were actually moving faster than c, Maxwell's equations would be wrong or incomplete.

The experiment is really important. Unfortunately, I don't have enough time.

It is not only EM radiation with no or insignificant mass, but mega astronomical objects like quasars have very close to c or even FTL speed. So, SR have already been broken long ago; but of course not in a laboratory scale experiment; which seems to be of more importance and the main (close to home) focus for this discussion:

"QUASARS – RETROSPECT, PROSPECT AND A POINT of DEPARTURE": Article QUASARS – RETROSPECT, PROSPECT AND A POINT of DEPARTURE

Steffen Kühn

The simulation is great! Which s/w have you used?

This experiment is also EPIC!

https://tinyurl.com/u7a49sez

The authors went at the last paragraph in the Conclusions section to a great extend to not mention words like superluminal or FTL :)

Steffen Kühn

For the longitudinal component of the distortion Maxwell is not suitable since it does not treat EM waves as mixed cyclic waves having both longitudinal crest x-axis component but only a z-axis crest thus exclusive transverse wave.

On the other hand water waves are mixed cyclic waves:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korteweg%E2%80%93De_Vries_equation

also seen in this animation for a point distortion in water:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Shallow_water_wave.gif

I am afraid the Gasser experiment results if true can be explained using established theories only as a quantum entanglement non-local phenomenon similar also to the Aharonov–Bohm effect.

Emmanouil Markoulakis

Also in Maxwell's electrodynamics there are - despite the common opinion - longitudinal waves. They just do not have a long range. You can see this in the animation I attached in the last post. The amplitude of longitudinal waves decreases much more with increasing distance than that of transverse waves.

I agree with you, however, that there is no guarantee that Maxwell's equations are correct in their present form. One might assume so because they have been used very successfully in electrical engineering for a century. But electrical engineering does not use all aspects of Maxwell's equations in the same degree. Therefore, there are parts where they are well validated in practice and parts where this is less true.

What supports Maxwell's equations is that they can be solved for point charges in general. I do not mean the Lienard-Wiechert potentials, but an algebraic formula in the style of Coulomb's law. This is quite new, so almost nobody knows about it. This general Coulomb law also shows that electromagnetic waves of any form always propagate at the speed of light and nevertheless satisfy Newton's third law. Furthermore, one recognizes that also classical electrodynamics is purely Newtonian mechanics.

I have created the animation by means of this general Coulomb law. This is not very difficult, because one does not need differential equations any longer. One needs only the trajectories of the point charges and has then immediately the field in the whole space. Attached are a few more animations.

Dear Steffen Kühn

See my new reply to you in this link here please:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OV2Y1lSsr0rPTsNPZ6fYBrU9GbxZmpMn/view?usp=sharing

Because RG question threads are not the best for inserting images.

Emmanouil

Dear Emmanouil Markoulakis

I see what you mean. I also believe that transverse waves have such a long range only because EM waves (even in high vacuum) travel through a thin polarizable medium. Transverse waves would then obviously be amplified and longitudinal waves would be weakened. And the actual transmission of the force between the particles of this medium could be much faster than one thinks. But this is only speculation.

Certainty can only be obtained by a proper experiment. Unfortunately, as already written, I do not have the time for it because I would like to start soon with the development of a new EM simulation software. I think I will write a plugin for Blender. But I am still in the concept phase. If someone would like to participate, please let me know ...

Dear Steffen Kühn ,

Best of luck with your sw project! Sounds very interesting.

You know, there is a question actually that is not very often asked in the literature maybe also avoided. and may be related to our discussion here if the these superluminal interactions are very short in range compared to the wavelength:

What is the propagation speed of of the strong force between the quarks inside a proton or neutron nuclei? or else what is the propagation speed of the gluons inside a proton or neutron?

:)

I challenge hereby, anyone to show me a reference in the literature or him/her self, any theoretical or experiment prove that gluons inside the confinement of a proton or neutron propagate at c.

The propagation speed of gluons inside a proton is a topic of ongoing research and there is no consensus on a fixed value. Gluons are massless gauge bosons that carry the strong nuclear force, and their interactions with the proton are described by Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). The QCD Lagrangian describes the gluon field as a set of point-like particles, which are free to propagate through the proton, but the exact speed at which they do so is not a well-defined quantity. Different methods to calculate the gluon propagator in QCD lead to slightly different results, and there is currently no experimental evidence that can pin down the gluon speed.

Dear Emmanouil Markoulakis ,

the alpha version of the software is now available:

https://github.com/StKuehn/OpenWME

The basis of the framework is the Weber-Maxwell force, i.e. the universal solution of Maxwell's equations for point charges. This means that the force between two point charges always propagates at the speed of light. In other words, it is standard electrodynamics, but in a very modern and elegant representation.

The light clock simulation might be interesting for you. Please have a look at it. I think there is a need for discussion ...

Best regards

Steffen