Beyond Maxwell-Lorentz electrodynamics

von Georg Galeczki

Beyond Maxwell-Lorentz electrodynamics
Georg Galeczki

In: Episteme. An international journal of science, history and philosophy. Nr. 6, Parte 2. 2002, 21. Dez., ca. 13 S.

Die Forschungsgruppe G.O. Mueller referiert in der Ergänzung des Kapitels 4 ihrer Dokumentation diese Arbeit von Georg Galeczki:

Freeman Dyson published twelve years ago [1] „Feynman’s proof of the Maxwell equations“. He recalls that in 1948 Feynman showed him this „proof assuming only Newton’s law of motion and the commutation relation between position and velocity for a single particle.“ Although formally obtaining the two „vacuum equations“ (i.e. those without source terms), the claimed „proof“ of the full Maxwell equations is wrong mathematically, physically and conceptually. On top of all this, it expresses the – nowadays common – arrogance of mathematical physicists giving priority to formalism against empirical facts.“

Beurteilt mehrere Eigenschaften der Maxwell-Gleichungen als nicht ausreichend zur Begründung der Speziellen Relativitätstheorie oder im Widerspruch zur Speziellen Relativitätstheorie:

3 – The ubiquitous presence of radiation, i.e. of electromagnetic fields detached from their fields requires the existence of a unique, fundamental frame of reference, relative to which the energy transmission velocity is „c“. This is a consequence of the fact that the velocity of light doesn’t obey either the hypotheses of Ritz („ballistic propagation“, or dependence on the state of motion of the source), or the untenable second postulate of „special“ relativity which is discussed in [15]. The existence of a fundamental frame of reference which could be experimentally approached by successive approximations, is in line with Maxwell theory, but disagrees with „special relativistic electrodynamics“ which states the validity of ME in any inertial frame of reference.“

Kommt insgesamt zu folgenden Ergebnissen (VIII. Conclusions):

„- Maxwell’s equations (ME) retain their validity for closed current loops.
– ME have to be completed with a force-law and a corresponding equation of motion.
– In all applications the force of Lorentz is a phenomenological external force, with different sources for E and B, the latter being produced by closed circuits.
– MLE [= Maxwell-Lorentz electrodynamics] fails to explain low-velocity experiments with non-rigid loops.
– Ampère and Weber’s force law accounts for all electrodynamic phenomena in which radiation can be neglected.
– MLE in its accepted form is unable to account for all induction phenomena.
– The correct law of induction is given by the total derivative of the vector potential. This is compatible with ME, but destroys the Lorentz covariance of the theory.
– The vector potential is of primary importance and is uniquely defined for specific systems.
– There is no „gauge invariance“.
– Low-velocity Weber electrodynamics is truly relativistic in the sense of Mach.
– The presence of radiation requires an absolute, fundamental frame of reference

Eine von mehreren gewichtigen Arbeiten der Kritiker zum wahren Status der Maxwell-Gleichungen in der Elektrodynamik mit dem Ergebnis, daß sie als die behauptete angebliche Grundlage der Speziellen Relativitätstheorie nicht dienen können.

Hier weiterlesen…

Siehe auch vom Autor in diesem Blog:

Requiem für die Spezielle Relativität
Kritik der Relativitätstheorie auch offiziell unerwünscht
Der Zirkus der Mathematik hält einige Taschenspielertricks bereit
Requiem für die Spezielle Relativität
Der eigentliche Skandal: Unterdrückung der Korrektur
Einsteins Nachlaß: Physik im Tempel
Der Saurier Spezielle Relativitätstheorie hat sich in eine prekäre Lage manövriert

Hinterlassen Sie eine Antwort

Erlaubter XHTML-Code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>