@meberbsTo change my mind, it is enough to have an experiment in which there is a measure of the magnetic field of the displacement current that does not originate from exchange errors like: magnetic field generated by charges exchanged for magnetic field by displacement current. In conclusion I have no difficulty in changing my opinion ... .. but this should not happen not through equations or theories but through an experiment.
In 1901, Henri Poincaré pointed out the Newton 's third law is violated if the displacement current does not exist. This conjecture implies that, according to Maxwell' s equations, a net propulsion force can be generated from electromagnetic interaction ...... "(H. Poincaré, Électricité et Optique (Paris: G Carré et C Naud), 1901, pp 465-6).
Following the indication of Poincarè some years ago I theoretically conceived a propulsion system based on what was said Poincare http://www.calmagorod.org/pnn-la-sua-genesi/ ... When I went to his experimentation with great difficulty I found that it was perfectly NOT working ... or functioning as if the displacement current did NOT exist.
No one has likewise gone to make an experimental measurement in the vacuum of the magnetic component of the wave H in order to experimentally verify that E / H is approximately 377 Ohms. I would be very happy to find a link where there is this measure in vacuum.
But the worst thing for Maxwell's fans is that the set of heresies I just told you did not in any way deprived me of being able to build antennas working for purely electromagnetic objectives (antennas) as for Newtonian and non-Newtonian targets that pushed me to reach. In fact, those who build an antenna even remotely dream of building it through measures of the current of displacement or at least I have never found anyone who took it into account.
@meberbs>It sounds like there are at least 2 mistakes you are making though, one being that you still seem to >think that "displacement current" refers to a physical current of some physical thing,> when it is just the rate of change of electric field at a point. i.e. you say to me that such change of electric field DON’T GENERATE A MAGNETIC FIELD?
>My last post explained that there is no question about whether "displacement current" is a thing.I REPEAT SUCH MAGNETIC FIELD EXIST OR NOT EXIST?
When you propose such experiment:>See https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0602073.pdf for a modern take on the experiment.Or Others> Other evidence for the magnetic fields comes from the existence of modes such as TM modes in >waveguides and resonators. They don’t are magnetic fields from displacement current but the same of Bartlett experiment in the near zone field i.e. magnetic fields of moving charges mixed with the hypothetical magnetic field of displacement currentHere one paper of Bartlett
When you propose such experiments of magnetic field of displacement currenthttps://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0602073.pdf it is a modern comics becouse it is fruitless as result
In fact at the end of several experiments the Bartlett conclusion was : http://www.asps.it/bartlett5.jpgI.e it is fruitless the search such magnetic where are magnetic fields of different origin
On my opinion this is the better experiment to detect the magnetic field from displacement current....
the physical incompetence of mathematical J.C .Maxwell!
PNN in progress
Still you has not answered me on this elementary fact: if modern Narda probes that measure both the electric field and the magnetic field of an electric and presumed magnetic wavehttp://www.narda-sts.us/pdf_files/DataSheets/NBM-Probes_DataSheet.pdf they do not detect the magnetic field H relative to the E / H = 377 ohms
And I repeat Maxwell never made that measurement E/H = 377 ohm since there is no experiment done by Maxwell to verify his mathematical theory in the e.m. (?) field
And again if Lorentz evaluates the displacement current as not existinghttp://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.205.6223&rep=rep1&type=pdf
why should I trust Maxwell and not Lorentz since Lorentz is a nobel prize and Maxwell is not a nobel prize?
@meberbsThe narda probe that I have indicated and which measures the magnetic field H has the appropriate sensitivity threshold for that measurement ... and you make it fit with the narda probe because you do not believe to me and I don’t want to convince you at all costs….
Quos Deus perdere vult, dementat prius.
…."measurement of radiation pressure" is not a measure of the magnetic field of the displacement current.You exchange the effects with the causes. An wave is electric only when it invests the matter finds electric charges that in turn set in motion generate a magnetic field ... but there is no magnetic field upstream in the wave that does not invest the matter and does not generate any radiation pressure.
I have the potential suspicion that you will never understand how the emdrive works without understanding that the wave without interaction with matter it is only an electric field. But I do not want to experience the emdrive for me emdrive is and remains a pnn with the square wheels.
@meberbsThe article you mentioned pro DC (Displacement Current) https://physics.aps.org/story/v26/st13They say:"Light wave", "the weaker effect of the magnetic component" has been nearly impossible to detect directly. " It does not specify how "tiny". But I suspect that not having found the magnetic field from DC (Displacement Current) went to change the experimental setup and have multiplied their efforts to look for it by exchanging whistles for flasks (fischi per fiaschi in italian) .
How is it that nothing becomes a proof?Simply by inadvertently replacing the magnetic field from DC with the one generated by real charges!
And then there is another alarming fact that comes from the fans of DC: you do not even dream of going to see if electric field and magnetic field from DC are in quadrature. What does it mean? THAT YOU AGREE TO ANY MAGNETIC FIELD IN ANY PHASE! (I am attaching two figures)
And then the experimental setup https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0602073.pdf that you brings or research of the DC in a waveguide "The original confirmation came from the Hertz in 1888. See for a modern take on the experiment. Other evidence for the magnetic fields comes from the existence of such modes as TM modes in waveguides and resonators. " is another great place or to exchange fireflies for lanterns.
I can only repeat the same thing that says Miller : stop teaching an erroneous concept!From http://www.asps.it/miller.pdf
I have lost only a few thousand euro in trying to follow the advice of Poncarè or violation of the III of Newton through the magnetic field from DC http://www.calmagorod.org/pnn-la-sua-genesi/In conclusion dear meberbs I must say that in practice I keep my feet in two brackets are both against and pro displacement current So I can only congratulate those who follow the advice of Poincaré will make a propellanless propulsion from DC and I will be right ps: Today PNN is NOT based on Displacement Current
@meberbs> Is PNN based on the non-existence of the magnetic field? By displacement current then? > Otherwise I do not know why you brought it up. (Note: Please read the words >I used to do not say the displacement current causes the fields, since it is simply >described in the fields.)What you are telling me is a philosophical assumption that unfortunately does not allow me to understand it or formulate other questions and then give to you answers.
I talked about DC (Displacement Current) because I think Maxwell's electromagnetism brings with it mathematical concepts that do not serve the operational objectives of physics. In practice I think that the minimum of truth that the emdrive has is precisely obscured by the theoretical mass of mathematical chatter that are useless and away from the most elementary facts.
PNN unfortunately does not know what to do with DC. For PNN if Maxwell had never existed it would have been better and identically “in this phase of PNN” I assure you that I have never used relativistic concepts for it.
Note the Maxwellian heresy that for Marconi (NOT graduated in physics) the waves were electric and not electromagnetic
said more simply I want to ridicule the official science.
@meberbsI'm not doing an olympiad I work for free. Our pnn team will only be paid when the pnn will have demonstrated experimentally that it works, NOTE AFTER NOT BEFORE. Our potential financier wants the prototype only with batteries ... in practice he wants a mini spaceship controlled remotely. I had to change all the experimental setup and 4 engineers have been helping me for about 2 years. Everything resembles this www.asps.it/sidetra.jpg even if it is changing in the construction phase.
I only say one thing before saying goodbye. When you know the know-how of the pnn you will obsessively ask for one thing: because you have not noticed it before.