Figure 4. Charged mass system vector.
-- CHARGED-MASS-SYSTEM VECTOR --
The third type of vector we meet is the vector mass system where the mass is charged. First, we point out a serious error in present electromagnetic (EM) theory. That is, in present theory it is implicitly assumed that
In other words, "charge" and "charged mass" are
erroneously assumed to be identically the same thing.
Figure 5. The "charge" on an electron
mass consists of
Thus, actually the "charge" is the virtual (unobservable, or SPATIO-TEMPORAL) flux to and from the observable SPATIAL particle of mass. So, rigorously,
and this is a definition and therefore an identity. This definition
alone affects all present electromagnetics theory.
Figure 6. A test charge (charged mass) brought near a
(charged mass) experiences an acceleration.
Now note that what actually happens is that the unrestrained test charge becomes a CHARGED MASS SYSTEM VECTOR (a "smeared charged mass-motion changing"). The "test charge" BECOMES a charged mass force vector; it does not have a separate geometer's vector "appear on it." What actually happens is shown in Figure 7.
Figure 7. A charged-mass-system vector.
That is, in the simplest (nonrelativistic) case, for an electron what happens is
and this is a DEFINITION. That is, considered
instantly, the electron exists as a charged-mass electrical force
CONSISTING OF/COMPRISED OF a charge flux qe canonically
coupled to a mass, with that subsystem then canonically coupled to a
spatial acceleration vector, ALL AS A SINGLE ENTITY, WITHOUT ANY
"SEAMS" BETWEEN ITS "PARTS." The cm
IS THE ELECTRON SYSTEM ITSELF; it is NOT a "spatial
vector." Rigorously, it does not exist in the absence of the
smeared electron mass, a priori.
Figure 8. Repeating the "test charge" experiment.
It is found that, rigorously,
where cm is a charged mass system vector. Erroneously, this has been stated one way or another as
where is assumed to be a spatial system vector. Further, this confusion has been carried over into the definition of the -field as:
In this definition, -- which is a charged mass system vector -- has been confused as a charged spatial system vector, where is regarded simply a spatial system vector! Actually, the definition of the -field should be
is a charged mass system vector. Failure to properly define the -field
has caused the conception of the -field
to be falsely perpetuated as existing in vacuum.
Help support this work