For the open-minded reader, let me
explain what broken symmetry means, and what the broken symmetry
of a dipole means with respect to powering any dipolar EM
The strong prediction
of broken symmetry by Lee and Yang and
its experimental proof by Wu et
al. in 1957, initiated a great revolution across physics and won
a nearly instant Nobel Prize in December 1957 for Lee and Yang.
One of the broken symmetries proven
by Wu et al. and published in 1957 is the broken symmetry of
opposite charges, as on the ends of a dipole.
That asymmetry is used by charges and dipoles for extracting and
pouring out Electromagnetic energy from the vacuum, yet not one
current Electrical Engineering or classical electromagnetics
textbook mentions the energy implications of dipolar asymmetry.
Nor do they mention that every charge and dipole freely pours
out real observable EM energy continuously, with no observable energy
Thus the textbooks implicitly
assume that all EM fields, potentials, and energy are freely
created out of nothing at all by their associated source
Either the conservation of energy
law is falsified, or the source charge must be receiving the
necessary energy input in virtual state form from the active
Broken symmetry essentially means
that something virtual (shadowy, but real in a special sense and
widely used in physics; it has real physical consequences, since
it creates all the forces of nature) has become observable (real
in the ordinary everyday sense that it can be detected,
measured, observed, and used.). The broken symmetry of the end
charges of a dipole rigorously means that, once the charges are
forcibly separated to form that dipole, the dipole (its end
charges) continuously absorbs virtual (fleeting) photons from
the seething vacuum, coherently integrates these "photon pieces"
into real observable photons, and re-emits the resulting real EM
energy in the form of real observable photons in all directions
at the speed of light.
That is not this author's work; that
is particle physics as justified by the award of two Nobel
Prizes. It isn't even in the electrical engineering model, so
no objection based on standard classical EM and electrical
engineering concepts has any validity at all.
That's why a dipolar permanent
magnet, with opposite magnetic charges on its ends locked in
there by the material itself, continuously exhibits magnetic
field in the space surrounding it (out to the ends of the
universe, if the magnet has been around long enough). There is
a continuous and steady stream of EM energy, extracted directly
from the vacuum and integrated into observable magnetic field
energy, pouring forth from the dipolarity of that magnet. At
any external point in that stream, the steady flow will give a
steady or "static" reading for the magnetic field and thus for
the intensity of the flow at that point.
Actually there is no such
thing as a "static" field or potential in the universe; simply
check out Whittaker's 1903 decomposition of the "electrostatic"
scalar potential into bidirectional longitudinal EM waves, and
his 1904 decomposition of any field and wave pattern into two
such potentials comprised of bidirectional longitudinal EM
waves. The 1904
what today is known as superpotential
been largely ignored by the academics, although it has been
formidably weaponized by several nations, notably the Russians
not long after WW II. Application of Whittaker's 1903 and 1904
papers is responsible for the weapons that then Secretary of
Defense Cohen referred
to in 1997.
T. D. Lee, "Question of Parity Conservation in Weak
Rev., 104(1), Oct. 1, 1956, p. 254-259. Errata are
given in in Phys.
Rev. 106(6), June 15, 1957, p. 1371; (b) T. D. Lee,
Reinhard Oehme, and C. N. Yang, "Remarks on Possible
Noninvariance under Time Reversal and Charge Conjugation," Phys.
Rev., 106(2), 1957, p. 340-345.
2) C. S. Wu, E. Ambler, R. W. Hayward, D. D. Hoppes and R. P.
Hudson, "Experimental Test of Parity Conservation in Beta
Rev., Vol. 105, 1957, p. 1413.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Newest