Breaking the Speed Limit

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>A ... dipole antennae should generate a longitudinal field ... we are talking about longitudinal field variations ... in what is effectively a near-field case.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Any and all wave phenomena ("longitudinal field", "near-field") associated with charges and masses are electromagnetic in character and refer to entities propagating at lightspeed. Only the force component propagates ftl, and this has no wave character whatever, so there is no "longitudinal" part and no way to give meaning to "nearfield".

For example, masses and charges at rest produce the same gravitational and electrodynamic force as when in motion. So if you are thinking of a phenomenon that would not exist for a source at rest, the ftl propagation speed does not apply. And conversely, if the phenomenon does exist when the source is at rest, then it will have an ftl character for all possible motions of the source, whether periodic or not.

Many people have been trying their best to figure out ways to test the propagation speed of these forces. The W-D experiment is the best idea available to date. -|Tom|-

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Any and all wave phenomena ("longitudinal field", "near-field") associated with charges and masses are electromagnetic in character and refer to entities propagating at lightspeed. Only the force component propagates ftl, and this has no wave character whatever, so there is no "longitudinal" part and no way to give meaning to "nearfield".
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

You are quite right on the terminology. I just use those terms in an "improper" way, but I feel it "geometrically" applicable.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Many people have been trying their best to figure out ways to test the propagation speed of these forces. The W-D experiment is the best idea available to date. -|Tom|-
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

You might've noticed that I proposed exactly the W/D-type scheme, but at a decent engineering level instead of their initial "stick'n'rope" config...

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
For example, masses and charges at rest produce the same gravitational and electrodynamic force as when in motion. So if you are thinking of a phenomenon that would not exist for a source at rest, the ftl propagation speed does not apply. And conversely, if the phenomenon does exist when the source is at rest, then it will have an ftl character for all possible motions of the source, whether periodic or not.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I was talking of exactly the first-order field variations caused by charges in motion and proposed the means to cancel the transverse EM radiation. The scheme would produce a static field if one could make an array of one thousand of about one coulomb-charged static dipoles, but that's rather impractical.
See, I'm not proposing any "longitudinal waves" here, or any other woodoo for that matter; I'm talking of "static" field variations in longitudinal direction, i.e. along the dipoles' axes. Using an array ensures those field variations are about the same both at 50 cm and 50 m from the array plane. The effect must be very, very strong!

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>The effect must be very, very strong!<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Is there, or is there not, an "effect" if every charge is frozen rididly in place?

If "yes", then were talking a Coulomb field with ftl propagation, even if the charges are then placed in motion.

If "no" then we're talking about an EM effect generated by changes in a Coulomb field (i.e., some part of the electromagnetic spectrum), with propagation at lightspeed.

If your answer is in the former category, then you tell me -- What hasn't someone thought of this before and done it? -|Tom|-

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Is there, or is there not, an "effect" if every charge is frozen rididly in place?
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Absolutely YES. It's like a "static" field of a charged plane of varying charge density.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
If your answer is in the former category, then you tell me -- What hasn't someone thought of this before and done it? -|Tom|-
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

That was exactly my initial question.<img src=icon_smile_approve.gif border=0 align=middle>
But, seriously, since we are discussing a variation of the W/D scheme, could you tell me why nobody proposed that before them?

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>since we are discussing a variation of the W/D scheme, could you tell me why nobody proposed that before them?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Probably because Walker-Dual were told the experiment was not worth doing because "everybody knows" the propagation speed is c. Then when it turned out higher than c, they were told "everybody knows" it is infinite in the nearfield and falls to c only in the farfield.

They are presently told that any "real" effect would be of order (v/c)^3 in electrodynamics and (v/c)^5 in gravitation, placing it comfortably below the threshold of detection again. <img src=icon_smile_dissapprove.gif border=0 align=middle>

But if someone can demonstrate sending a signal ftl, this game would be over. -|Tom|-