3 - Magnetism
It is well known that Maxwell’s equations have many similarities to the hydrodynamic equations for a fluid. This is not surprising given that the original Maxwell’s equations were derived on the basis of a fluidic medium (aether) [1]. It is worthwhile looking at these similarities more closely. If we consider the general equations for fluid flow where we are only interested in describing the velocity, we get the following equations [2]: where v is the velocity of the fluid is the vorticity, or circulation of the fluid is in fact a vector that points in the direction perpendicular to the circulation and whose magnitude is proportional to the amount of circulation, Fig 3.1(a). If we now look at the Maxwell’s equations that describe the magnetic field we have, for the case where there are no changing electric fields, the following: where B is the magnetic field j is the electric current We can immediately see the similarities between these and the last two equations above if we equate the velocity v with B and vorticity with the current j. This suggests that, at least under certain conditions, the magnetic field represents the velocity of the aether as projected onto 3D space. That is, as there is a 4D component to the circulation of the aether (see next item) the aether particles would not move parallel to the 3D velocity vector above but would move in and out of the 4th dimension, with the 3D projected velocity being represented by v. We can get a better idea of what is involved by considering a normal 3D vortex such as one observes in water draining from a bathtub. If we then imagine a 2D plane (x, y) at right angles to the vortex axis (z), the water molecules will follow a spiral path which appears circular when projected onto the 2D plane. However 2D flatlanders living on the plane would not see the water molecules going in a circle, rather the molecules will appear briefly as they cross the 2D plane before disappearing again from their awareness. We would expect something similar to occur when going from 3D to 4D space. Fig 3.1 Comparison between magnetic field and fluid flow. We can apply this idea to the case of a current carrying wire, Fig 3.1(b). We know from experiments that the magnetic field around a current carrying wire falls off as 1/r, where r is the distance from the wire, and is proportional to the current. This would imply that the projected 3D velocity of the aether also falls off as 1/r with a magnitude that is proportional to the current. Based on the previous discussion about the similarity of the current and the vorticity this would suggest that the moving charges that form the current somehow create a preferential rotation of the aether around the wire. Given that electric currents are generated by moving charges it remains to be explained how a moving charge can create a circulating aether perpendicular to the direction of motion.
As detailed in the previous section, a charge is considered to be a vortex of aether entering the 4th dimension, Fig 2.1 . Lets consider the case when the charge moves in 4D. One might expect that the aether vortex, whose axis is perpendicular to 3D space - Fig 2.1 , would lean over behind the direction in which the charge is being pulled, Fig 3.2. This of course is a much simplified picture of a 4D vortex. We would then have a net component of the vortex spin around the direction of motion where the 4D axis meets 3D space. Fig 3.2 Electron vortex motion in 4D. In other words the aether flow from a charge would not be spherically symmetric but would show a preferential rotational movement around the direction of motion. The magnitude of that preferential spin would depend on the speed of that motion relative to the aether background. The faster the charge moves the more the vortex would lean over in 4D and the greater would be the component of spin projected onto 3D. Motions in 4D are difficult to picture but it does make intuitive sense. This preferential rotation of the aether around a moving charge would produce what we observe as the magnetic field, when all the individual charge contributions are summed. This picture also neatly accounts for the fact that when a charge reverses direction of motion the magnetic field rotates in the opposite sense. That is, the vortex leans over in the opposite direction and therefore the projected spin goes from clockwise to anticlockwise or vice versa.
Note that the above implies that the magnetic field from a charge depends on the speed of the charge relative to the aether background and not relative to the observer as standard theory suggests. The idea that the magnetic field should depend on how fast a charge is moving relative to the observer leads to a number of conceptual difficulties and paradoxes. Where is the actual field in space if it depends on the observer? By assuming that the magnetic field is dependent on the speed of the charges relative to the aether a lot of the complexity simply disappears. There is a logical requirement (Lorentz invariance) that the forces between objects, such as the force between two current carrying wires, should not depend on what the observer is doing. In the aether model this condition will be satisfied in a natural way because the forces surrounding moving charges will not depend on the speed of the charges relative to the observer but relative to the aether. Lets see if this is consistent with observation. We can consider the situation of two parallel current carrying wires that attract each other by virtue of their magnetic fields, Fig 3.3. Fig 3.3 The force F between two current carrying wires. One might ask what happens if in the above example we move both the wires in the opposite direction to the movement of the conduction electrons by an amount equal to the drift velocity of the electrons. In other words, the wires are moved in such a way as to make the conduction electrons stationary, on average, with respect to the aether. Shouldn’t this make the magnetic field disappear, contrary to experience? On closer examination we find that moving the wires in this way causes the positive charges of the atoms to move relative to the aether by an amount equal and opposite to the drift velocity of the electrons (Vd in Fig 3.3). This movement of the positive charges relative to the aether will create exactly the same magnetic field as the conduction electrons do for the stationary wire case. In general, moving the wires at any speed will create a magnetic field that is the difference between the positive and negative charge contributions. This means that the net magnetic field will always be proportional to the average drift velocity of the conduction electrons relative to the wire no matter what the speed of the wires relative to the aether. It is not too difficult to see that any neutral object, carrying any current whatever, will behave in exactly the same way in both the aether model and the standard theory. Things get more interesting however when we have objects with a net charge moving through the aether. It is worth noting that the aether theory does not eliminate relativistic type effects. When two objects move relative to one another relativistic effects will come into play because of the finite speed of the forces, which is what relativity takes into account.
[1] Sir Edmund Whittaker, “History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity”, Nelson LTD, N.Y. 1953 (copies available here) [2] Feynman R.P., Leighton, R.B., Sands M., “The Feynman Lectures on Physics”, Addison-Wesley, Vol II, Sec 40-42 (copies available here) [3] Charles R. Morton, "Velocity Alters Electric Field", www.amasci.com/freenrg/morton1.html
Go to Top