## Archive for November, 2017

### Averaged result

November 29, 2017

It looks as if there is a pi epsilon sub 0 missing in the denominator of the second term. This is again just a typo.

In a message dated 28/11/2017 14:16:02 GMT Standard Time, writes:

PS: the correct result for E (eq.27) with average values for delta r should be: or Am 28.11.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Horst Eckardt:

E_1 ~ 1/r^5 * (5/3 r (p*r) <delta r*delta r> + 1/9 p <(delta r*delta r)^2> + 1/3 <delta r*delta r> r.

### Averaged result

November 29, 2017

It looks as if thee is a pi epsilon sub 0 missing in the denominator of the second term. This is again just a typo.

In a message dated 28/11/2017 14:16:02 GMT Standard Time, writes:

PS: the correct result for E (eq.27) with average values for delta r should be: or Am 28.11.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Horst Eckardt:

E_1 ~ 1/r^5 * (5/3 r (p*r) <delta r*delta r> + 1/9 p <(delta r*delta r)^2> + 1/3 <delta r*delta r> r.

### Averaged Result

November 29, 2017

This looks like the final averaged result, worked out by hand by Horst. It looks full of interest.

In a message dated 28/11/2017 14:16:02 GMT Standard Time, writes:

PS: the correct result for E (eq.27) with average values for delta r should be: or Am 28.11.2017 um 14:39 schrieb Horst Eckardt:

E_1 ~ 1/r^5 * (5/3 r (p*r) <delta r*delta r> + 1/9 p <(delta r*delta r)^2> + 1/3 <delta r*delta r> r.

### Checking 393(6)

November 29, 2017

I think that the dot (r + delta r) in the last equation should be + (r + delta r). This is just a typo.

In a message dated 28/11/2017 16:28:28 GMT Standard Time, writes:

I had to check the averaging operations by hand. All seems o.k. up to eq. (25). From the 8 contributions of (16), I obtain

E_1 ~ 1/r^5 * (5/3 r (p*r) <delta r*delta r> + 1/9 p <(delta r*delta r)^2> + 1/3 <delta r*delta r> r.

The last term (from contribution 6) seems to be missing in your eq. (26), and for the first term I obtained the factor 5/3 instead of 7/3.
In eq. (15) the factor should be 11/6 because a 4 is already below the fraction bar. The total result (27) will change.
Computer algebra obtains for E_1 the simplified expression (without averaging): where dr^2 means bold delta r * bold delta r, and dr, r and p are vectors, the dot is the scalar product. By this expression one could also compute higher terms in delta r. It seems that you used 4th order in eq.(25) but neglected 3rd order at other places.

The total expression for E is Horst

Am 28.11.2017 um 10:35 schrieb EMyrone:

Thanks again, agreed about the typo. A check by computer algebra of this hand calculation would be essential, in my opinion, because things get complicated. If errors are fund by computer, the papers will be corrected and reposted. One of the important things to note is that the gradient operator is defined by Eq. (16) of Note 393(4). The basic axiom is that r is replaced by r + delta r in all physics. More generally, angles are also changed in the same way in all physics. However, for the Coulonb law and dipole fields it is sufficient to consider the replacement of r by r + delta r. This is the procedure used in the highly accurate Lamb shift theory.

To: EMyrone
Sent: 27/11/2017 20:48:59 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: 393(6): Shivering Electric Dipole Field in the Presence of the Vacuum

Is there a typo in eq.(10) ? should it read <delta X^2> instead of <X^2> , etc. ?
I hast still to check the rest of the note.

Horst

Am 22.11.2017 um 12:09 schrieb EMyrone:

This is Eq. (27) to first order in x of the binomial expansion of previous notes. The zitterbewegung theory results in a very rich structure and a completely new subject: the zitterbewegung or shivering theory of macroscopic electrodynamics in the presence of the vacuum. This theory is ideal for computer algebra because the calculations quickly become laborious. My hand calculations for UFT393 should be checked as usual by computer algebra, and graphed, when Horst returns from vacation. The effect of the vacuum is very intricate, and the vacuum is ubiquitous and ever present. Note carefully that this is the same theory as used to calculate the Lamb shift with great accuracy. So there is great confidence in the theory.

### Checking 393(6)

November 29, 2017

Many thanks indeed for all this work. I will write out the final result for the total expression for E. It would be very useful to write code to average the final result by computer. I will average it by hand first. The calculations are straightforward but tedious. The results are full of interest

To: EMyrone@aol.com
Sent: 28/11/2017 16:28:28 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Checking 393(6)

I had to check the averaging operations by hand. All seems o.k. up to eq. (25). From the 8 contributions of (16), I obtain

E_1 ~ 1/r^5 * (5/3 r (p*r) <delta r*delta r> + 1/9 p <(delta r*delta r)^2> + 1/3 <delta r*delta r> r.

The last term (from contribution 6) seems to be missing in your eq. (26), and for the first term I obtained the factor 5/3 instead of 7/3.
In eq. (15) the factor should be 11/6 because a 4 is already below the fraction bar. The total result (27) will change.
Computer algebra obtains for E_1 the simplified expression (without averaging): where dr^2 means bold delta r * bold delta r, and dr, r and p are vectors, the dot is the scalar product. By this expression one could also compute higher terms in delta r. It seems that you used 4th order in eq.(25) but neglected 3rd order at other places.

The total expression for E is Horst

Am 28.11.2017 um 10:35 schrieb EMyrone:

Thanks again, agreed about the typo. A check by computer algebra of this hand calculation would be essential, in my opinion, because things get complicated. If errors are fund by computer, the papers will be corrected and reposted. One of the important things to note is that the gradient operator is defined by Eq. (16) of Note 393(4). The basic axiom is that r is replaced by r + delta r in all physics. More generally, angles are also changed in the same way in all physics. However, for the Coulonb law and dipole fields it is sufficient to consider the replacement of r by r + delta r. This is the procedure used in the highly accurate Lamb shift theory.

To: EMyrone
Sent: 27/11/2017 20:48:59 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: 393(6): Shivering Electric Dipole Field in the Presence of the Vacuum

Is there a typo in eq.(10) ? should it read <delta X^2> instead of <X^2> , etc. ?
I hast still to check the rest of the note.

Horst

Am 22.11.2017 um 12:09 schrieb EMyrone:

This is Eq. (27) to first order in x of the binomial expansion of previous notes. The zitterbewegung theory results in a very rich structure and a completely new subject: the zitterbewegung or shivering theory of macroscopic electrodynamics in the presence of the vacuum. This theory is ideal for computer algebra because the calculations quickly become laborious. My hand calculations for UFT393 should be checked as usual by computer algebra, and graphed, when Horst returns from vacation. The effect of the vacuum is very intricate, and the vacuum is ubiquitous and ever present. Note carefully that this is the same theory as used to calculate the Lamb shift with great accuracy. So there is great confidence in the theory.

### Checking Note 393(5)

November 29, 2017

This is the check by hand, giving the same answer r <delta r dot delta r>. It is certainly worth writing a program to code in the isotropy rules exemplified in this note, and recheck this hand calculation with Maxima. The program could then be used for the magnetic dipole field and so on. Gradually the program could be extended for all of electrodynamics and indeed all of physics, with angular as well as linear fluctuations. Vacuum maps or spin connections of all kinds can be computed for any problem in physics.

In a message dated 28/11/2017 10:28:13 GMT Standard Time, writes:

When setting linear, orthogonal and cross correlation to zero, and restricting to second order terms, my calculation of eq.(7) gives the result for the X component: This is not a multiple of <delta r * delta r> because the factor 3 appears only in front of one term. Could you please check this?

Horst

Am 28.11.2017 um 10:23 schrieb EMyrone:

Thanks again for checking with computer algebra. The terms set to zero are defined by Eq. (6), which is the assumption that orthogonal correlations are not correlated in an isotropic ensemble. The cross correlation functions (see Omnia Opera) are zero, the autocorrelation functions are not zero. Agreed that there should be no factor 3, because

<delta X squared + delta Y squared + delta Z squared)> = <delta r squared>

So the factor 3 should be removed from the right hand side of Eq. (36) and the factor 9 in Eq. (37) replaced by 3. I will repost the paper to make this entirely clear.

To: EMyrone
Sent: 27/11/2017 20:05:51 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: 393(5): Effect of the Vacuum on the Dipole Potential

Concerning eq.(7), which terms did you set to zero? Did you neglect terms of third order in delta X ?. There are terms like

<Z*delta X*delta Z>
and
<X*Z*delta Z>.

Do these terms vanish too although they are not of type <delta Z> or <delta X * delta Z> ?
The last line of the protocol is the X component of (7). I do not see a factor of 3.

Horst

Am 20.11.2017 um 13:16 schrieb EMyrone:

Using the zitterbewegung theory to first order in x of note 393(4), the effect of the vacuum on the well known dipole potential of electrostatics is to change it to Eq. (8) from Eq. (9). The dipole potential actually obseved is always the dipole potential in the presence of the vacuum, Eq. (8). This is shown conclusively by the radiative corrections, which are always present, and which are accurately observable as is well known. So the entire subject of electrodynamics can now be developed correctly with consideration of the vacuum. The same is true for gravitation. fluid dynamics and indeed, all of physics and engineering, unified by ECE2 generally covariant field theory. It would be very interesting to graph and compare Eqs. (8) and (9). In the first instance the mean square displacement can be used simply as an input parameter. In future work it can be calculated or computed in various ways, as in earlier notes for UFT393. There is no reasonable doubt that the vacuum (or aether or spacetime) contains a source of inexhaustible, safe and clean energy. This source can be used in patented and replicated circuits such as those of UFT311, UFT364, UFT382, and UFT383. This has been known since the Lamb shift was discovered in the mid forties. The zitterbewegung theory used to explain the Lamb shift conserves total energy momentum, and total charge / current density. Now it is known that it must also conserve antisymmetry. All schools of thought can accept this theory. It is the simple and straightforward extension of Lamb shift theory to macroscopic electrodynamics.

a393rdpapernotes7.pdf

### Discussion of 393(3)

November 29, 2017

I got this formula from Marion and Thornton, third edition, page 567. That page gives the general formula as Eq. (D.1) and some examples with non integral n in (D.4) to (D.8). I cross checked by looking up binomial expansion with Google. The formula used by Marion and Thornton was first derived by Isaac Newton in 1665 at home in Woolsthorpe Manor when Cambridge was closed because of plague. It is an infinite term series and I used it with n = – 3/2 and n = – 5/2.

To: EMyrone@aol.com
Sent: 28/11/2017 10:14:48 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Discussion of 393(3)

I guess that this formula only holds for integer exponents, but anyway, you used a power series expansion in the other notes.

Horst

Am 28.11.2017 um 09:51 schrieb EMyrone:

Welcome back! I used Eq. (D.1) of the third edition of Marion and Thornton:

(1 + x) power n = 1 + nx + n(n-1) x squared / 2! + ……..

with n = – 3/2 and n = – 5/2. I agree that angular shivering will occur in atoms and molecules as well as radial shivering, leading to many new possibilities.

To: EMyrone
Sent: 27/11/2017 16:23:48 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: 393(3): Zitterbewegung and Dipole Fields

The shivering is restricted to the radial coordinate in (4). An angular shivering would also be possible, it is respected in the”real” dipole (12) or (25), respectively.
The Taylor expansion of (1+x)^(-3) in eq. (7) gives according to Maxima: and as powerseries: which is the same result. You seem to have used different results in (7) but these are not further used.
Horst

Am 17.11.2017 um 15:16 schrieb EMyrone:

This is a first calculation of the effect of the vacuum in inducing zitterbewegung in a dipole field. The two macroscopic charges of a dipole moment shiver due to the presence of the vacuum. In the next note I will refine this first calculation by going back to the basic definition of a dipole moment in which each charge shivers, and calculating the dipole potential and field. Zitterbewegung of macroscopic charges is a completely new idea and works its way into the whole of classical electrodynamics. The overall aim here is to calculate the spin connection and to apply the conservation of antisymmetry. These ideas go far beyond the standard model. In general the dipole, quadrupole and octopole moments of a molecule all shiver in the presence of the vacuum. These effects can all be expressed in terms of spin connections (or vacuum maps). The Lamb shift shows clearly that they exist in the H atom so they exist in all material matter, namely circuits.

### Daily Report 27/11/17

November 29, 2017

The equivalent of 223,553 printed pages was downloaded (815.076 megabytes) from 3,211 downloaded memory files (hits) and 633 printed pages each averaging 3.8 memory pages and 9 minutes, printed pages to hits ratio of 69.62, top referrals total 2,333,615, main spiders Baidu, Google, MSN and Yahoo. Collected ECE2 3000(est), Top ten 1308, Collected Evans / Morris 891(est), Collected scientometrics 580, F3(Sp) 375, Principles of ECE 286, Barddoniaeth / Collected Poetry 264, Collected Eckardt / Lindstrom 249, Autobiography volumes one and two 170, UFT88 161, Evans Equations 119, Collected Proofs 117, Engineering Model 84, CV 71, PECE 66, UFT311 61, CEFE 54, PLENR 48, UFT321 43, 83Ref 36, SCI 34, PECE2 32, Llais 29, ADD 24, UFT313 37, UFT314 38, UFT315 50, UFT316 25, UFT317 34, UFT318 39, UFT319 58, UFT320 48, UFT322 38, UFT323 39, UFT324 65, UFT325 52, UFT326 35, UFT327 44, UFT328 47, UFT329 43, UFT330 34, UFT331 50, UFT332 52, UFT333 24, UFT334 19, UFT335 41, UFT336 41, UFT337 21, UFT338 31, UFT339 33, UFT340 31, UFT341 36, UFT342 31, UFT343 34, UFT344 20, UFT345 50, UFT346 43, UFT347 40, UFT348 50, UFT349 34, UFT351 50, UFT352 42, UFT353 48, UFT354 52, UFT355 33, UFT356 34, UFT357 30, UFT358 48, UFT359 29, UFT360 22, UFT361 20, UFT362 27, UFT363 30, UTF364 39, UFT365 34, UFT366 32, UFT367 51, UFT368 29, UFT369 40, UFT370 27, UFT371 21, UFT372 24, UFT373 25, UFT374 24, UFT375 19, UFT376 19, UFT377 33, UFT378 24, UFT379 18, UFT380 27, UFT381 35, UFT382 55, UFT383 57, UFT384 30, UFT385 44, UFT386 35, UFT387 39, UFT388 36, UFT389 61, UFT390 48, UFT391 61, UFT392 51, UFT393 11 to date in November 2017. University of Quebec Trois Rivieres UFT373 – UFT393; Students Charles University Prague UFT213; University of Hawaii at Manoa AIAS Fellows; Worcester Polytechnic Institute UFT33; Izmir Institute of Technology Turkey UFT175; Physics Imperial College London UFT99; University of Southampton UFT2; University College Swansea extensive reading of historical items. Intense interest all sectors, updated usage file attached for November 2017.

### Usage Statistics for aias.us aias.us – November 2017 – URL

November 29, 2017

### Corruption Investigation at University College Swansea

November 28, 2017

This is easily found by Google. The Vice Chancellor has also been under investigation on the way he was appointed. His h index is very low. I would not go near the place and would not send students there to be used as fee fodder. If they really want to learn new physics, read www.aias.us and www.upitec.org for free, and start thinking for themselves. There should be an investigation into the way the EDCL was shut and the way that two professors and a lecturer were allowed to take up tenured jobs at Swansea, systematic harassment, severe abuse of human rights, verbal common assault and mafeasance. This corrupt transfer of tenure was another fix by Purnell. My exposure of events in Autobiography volume two has been read hundreds of thousands of times in up to 192 countries. It seems that funding is now allocated according to research, if so departments like physics at Aberystwyth and Swansea should be closed, their performance is so abysmal. All Vice Chancellors should originate in Wales, and should be rigorously and personally fluent in Welsh, and all senior staff. The language is in a critical condition and must be heavily protected. I agree with the historian Dr. Starkey of FitzWilliam College Cambridge that the university system is in severe decline. If we do not eliminate corruption ourselves in Wales, no one else will. There was also severe corruption at UNCC.