Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from whichOptik somehow fell out.
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:Optik somehow fell out.
Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from which
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
вторник, 24 декабря 2019 г., 5:53:57 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:which Optik somehow fell out.
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
No. Charges radiating were not predicted by EM math
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 3:49:35 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:Optik somehow fell out.
вторник, 24 декабря 2019 г., 5:53:57 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote: >>>> Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from which
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
No. Charges radiating were not predicted by EM math
Aren't the Lienard-Wiechert potentials solutions to Maxwell's equations for an accelerating rigid charge?
Differentiating these to get the fields then allows us to derive Lamor's formula for radiation loss.
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 3:49:35 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:which Optik somehow fell out.
вторник, 24 декабря 2019 г., 5:53:57 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
No. Charges radiating were not predicted by EM math
Aren't the Lienard-Wiechert potentials solutions to Maxwell's equations for an accelerating rigid charge? Differentiating these to get the fields then allows us to derive Lamor's formula for radiation loss.
John McAndrew
On 19/12/25 5:58 AM, john mcandrew wrote:
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 3:49:35 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
вторник, 24 декабря 2019 г., 5:53:57 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch
написал:
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko
wrote:
Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the
spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100
articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the
global corruption in the Scientific Community, from which Optik
somehow fell out.
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole
http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
No. Charges radiating were not predicted by EM math
Aren't the Lienard-Wiechert potentials solutions to Maxwell's
equations for an accelerating rigid charge?
For any charge, also if not accelerated (or not even moving).
Differentiating these to get the fields then allows us to derive
Lamor's formula for radiation loss.
The exact results for any situation would be Jefimenko's
equations. (Just mentioning it to please certain members
of this newsgroup..)
Merry Christmas,
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:Optik somehow fell out.
Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from which
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
I discovered the radiation of the spin, and not of the energy, by a rotating dipole
I discovered the radiation of the spin, and not of the energy, by a rotating dipole
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 2:53:57 AM UTC, Mitch Raemsch wrote:Optik somehow fell out.
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from which
accelerated.50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
Interesting point, although of course the charges aren't radiating inside the atom despite being 'accelerated' by the electric field of the nucleus from a classical EM viewpoint. So I wouldn't expect them to radiate either when the whole atom is
On 12/25/2019 3:43 AM, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 19/12/25 5:58 AM, john mcandrew wrote:And Merry Christmass to you Jos. Love your present...although
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 3:49:35 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote: >>>> вторник, 24 декабря 2019 г., 5:53:57 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch
Raemsch написал:
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko
wrote:
Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the >>>>>> spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100
articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the
global corruption in the Scientific Community, from which Optik
somehow fell out.
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole
http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
No. Charges radiating were not predicted by EM math
Aren't the Lienard-Wiechert potentials solutions to Maxwell's
equations for an accelerating rigid charge?
For any charge, also if not accelerated (or not even moving).
Differentiating these to get the fields then allows us to derive
Lamor's formula for radiation loss.
The exact results for any situation would be Jefimenko's
equations. (Just mentioning it to please certain members
of this newsgroup..)
Merry Christmas,
Jefimenko's results are basically the same thing.
Do I detect someone has been visited by the Ghost of Jefimenko past?
On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 2:46:27 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:charge?
I discovered the radiation of the spin, and not of the energy, by a rotating dipole
A rotating electric dipole obviously radiates energy-momentum since the electric charges are accelerating. Note the q^2 in Lamor's formula showing the radiation is independent of the charge's sign: P = q^2 a^2/(6 pi epsilon_0 c^3)
I'm defining radiation here as energy-momentum propagating away from the accelerating charge to infinity, never to return to the charge as bounded energy-momentum. Maybe you're defining radiation differently as in part bounded to the accelerating
John McAndrew
On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 6:46:27 AM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
I discovered the radiation of the spin, and not of the energy, by a rotating dipole
Where did you observe light coming out?
Radiation is energy.
How is spin like momentum?
What is a dipole?
Mitchell Raemsch
пятница, 27 декабря 2019 г., 4:32:10 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:charge?
On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 2:46:27 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
I discovered the radiation of the spin, and not of the energy, by a rotating dipole
A rotating electric dipole obviously radiates energy-momentum since the electric charges are accelerating. Note the q^2 in Lamor's formula showing the radiation is independent of the charge's sign: P = q^2 a^2/(6 pi epsilon_0 c^3)
I'm defining radiation here as energy-momentum propagating away from the accelerating charge to infinity, never to return to the charge as bounded energy-momentum. Maybe you're defining radiation differently as in part bounded to the accelerating
John McAndrew
I discovered a spin radiation
On 12/27/2019 1:17 PM, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:charge?
пятница, 27 декабря 2019 г., 4:32:10 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:
On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 2:46:27 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote: >>> I discovered the radiation of the spin, and not of the energy, by a rotating dipole
A rotating electric dipole obviously radiates energy-momentum since the electric charges are accelerating. Note the q^2 in Lamor's formula showing the radiation is independent of the charge's sign: P = q^2 a^2/(6 pi epsilon_0 c^3)
I'm defining radiation here as energy-momentum propagating away from the accelerating charge to infinity, never to return to the charge as bounded energy-momentum. Maybe you're defining radiation differently as in part bounded to the accelerating
John McAndrew
I discovered a spin radiation
We are sorry Radi but your discovery does not meet our current needs and will not be accepted for publication...
I discovered a spin radiation
We are sorry Radi but your discovery does not meet our current needs and
will not be accepted for publication...
I discovered a spin radiation
How do you discover something you cannot observe?
How do you see EM leaving anything radi?
Mitch, It's you who can’t observe the publication:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
I discovered a spin radiation
How do you discover something you cannot observe?
How do you see EM leaving anything radi?
On 19/12/27 2:26 AM, john mcandrew wrote:which Optik somehow fell out.
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 2:53:57 AM UTC, Mitch Raemsch wrote:
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote: >>> Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from
accelerated.50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
Interesting point, although of course the charges aren't radiating inside the atom despite being 'accelerated' by the electric field of the nucleus from a classical EM viewpoint. So I wouldn't expect them to radiate either when the whole atom is
Their radiation would cancel to a large extent if the atom is
neutral (and if not, we should call it an ion). But still the
atom as a whole might be an accelerated dipole, which will in
fact radiate. Although a bit less than a net non-zero charge.
To remain totally non-radiating (during acceleration) the
charge must be distributed with some high degree of symmetry
(avoiding any multipole-moment) and this symmetry has to be
preserved during the acceleration, so you would have to apply
forces very evenly on the whole system. This does not sound
very practicle..
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:05:24 AM UTC, Jos Bergervoet wrote:which Optik somehow fell out.
On 19/12/27 2:26 AM, john mcandrew wrote:
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 2:53:57 AM UTC, Mitch Raemsch wrote:
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote: >>> Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from
accelerated.50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
Interesting point, although of course the charges aren't radiating inside the atom despite being 'accelerated' by the electric field of the nucleus from a classical EM viewpoint. So I wouldn't expect them to radiate either when the whole atom is
later through the hard work of theoretical physicists we now have QFT. Others of course, will have their boundary for deciding when to give up on using classical EM to model a problem.Their radiation would cancel to a large extent if the atom is
neutral (and if not, we should call it an ion). But still the
atom as a whole might be an accelerated dipole, which will in
fact radiate. Although a bit less than a net non-zero charge.
To remain totally non-radiating (during acceleration) the
charge must be distributed with some high degree of symmetry
(avoiding any multipole-moment) and this symmetry has to be
preserved during the acceleration, so you would have to apply
forces very evenly on the whole system. This does not sound
very practicle..
This is what I had in mind, but I wouldn't want to stray too far into QM territory by resurrecting the non-radiation condition in an atom leading to then speculating on the structure of an electron 'orbiting' a nucleus. Especially when over 100 years
John McAndrew
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 5:34:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
I discovered a spin radiation
How do you discover something you cannot observe?
How do you see EM leaving anything radi?
Mitch, It's you who can’t observe the publication:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
No. Show how science can see the point of emission...
Seeing Exactly where it comes out can't be observed.
Mitchell Raemsch
суббота, 28 декабря 2019 г., 4:39:54 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 5:34:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
I discovered a spin radiation
How do you discover something you cannot observe?
How do you see EM leaving anything radi?
Mitch, It's you who can’t observe the publication:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
No. Show how science can see the point of emission...
Seeing Exactly where it comes out can't be observed.
Mitchell Raemsch
Mitchell, A rotating dipole emits circularly polarized light. It is well known
суббота, 28 декабря 2019 г., 4:28:40 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:which Optik somehow fell out.
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:05:24 AM UTC, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 19/12/27 2:26 AM, john mcandrew wrote:
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 2:53:57 AM UTC, Mitch Raemsch wrote:
On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from
accelerated.50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
Interesting point, although of course the charges aren't radiating inside the atom despite being 'accelerated' by the electric field of the nucleus from a classical EM viewpoint. So I wouldn't expect them to radiate either when the whole atom is
later through the hard work of theoretical physicists we now have QFT. Others of course, will have their boundary for deciding when to give up on using classical EM to model a problem.Their radiation would cancel to a large extent if the atom is
neutral (and if not, we should call it an ion). But still the
atom as a whole might be an accelerated dipole, which will in
fact radiate. Although a bit less than a net non-zero charge.
To remain totally non-radiating (during acceleration) the
charge must be distributed with some high degree of symmetry
(avoiding any multipole-moment) and this symmetry has to be
preserved during the acceleration, so you would have to apply
forces very evenly on the whole system. This does not sound
very practicle..
This is what I had in mind, but I wouldn't want to stray too far into QM territory by resurrecting the non-radiation condition in an atom leading to then speculating on the structure of an electron 'orbiting' a nucleus. Especially when over 100 years
John McAndrew
I discovered a spin radiationWe are sorry Radi but your discovery does not meet our current needs and
will not be accepted for publication...
Benj, You do not need because you cannot read.
The corruption wall cracked for some reason. Optik has already published four articles about the spin.
See if you can't read:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
суббота, 28 декабря 2019 г., 4:28:40 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:which Optik somehow fell out.
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:05:24 AM UTC, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 19/12/27 2:26 AM, john mcandrew wrote:
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 2:53:57 AM UTC, Mitch Raemsch wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote: >>>>>> Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from
accelerated.50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but
not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
Interesting point, although of course the charges aren't radiating inside the atom despite being 'accelerated' by the electric field of the nucleus from a classical EM viewpoint. So I wouldn't expect them to radiate either when the whole atom is
later through the hard work of theoretical physicists we now have QFT. Others of course, will have their boundary for deciding when to give up on using classical EM to model a problem.
Their radiation would cancel to a large extent if the atom is
neutral (and if not, we should call it an ion). But still the
atom as a whole might be an accelerated dipole, which will in
fact radiate. Although a bit less than a net non-zero charge.
To remain totally non-radiating (during acceleration) the
charge must be distributed with some high degree of symmetry
(avoiding any multipole-moment) and this symmetry has to be
preserved during the acceleration, so you would have to apply
forces very evenly on the whole system. This does not sound
very practical..
This is what I had in mind, but I wouldn't want to stray too far into QM territory by resurrecting the non-radiation condition in an atom leading to then speculating on the structure of an electron 'orbiting' a nucleus. Especially when over 100 years
John McAndrew
John, My dipole is not an atom. No atom rotates:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
On 19/12/28 2:44 AM, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:which Optik somehow fell out.
суббота, 28 декабря 2019 г., 4:28:40 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:
On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 9:05:24 AM UTC, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 19/12/27 2:26 AM, john mcandrew wrote:
On Tuesday, December 24, 2019 at 2:53:57 AM UTC, Mitch Raemsch wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 4:54:57 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from
accelerated.50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb >>>>>> See also: Radiation damping of a rotating dipole http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=189&module=files
Charges radiating were predicted by EM math but never observed.
When the atom accelerates their charges inside are accelerating but >>>>> not radiating. If never observed and predicted that prediction
has been disproven.
Mitchell Raemsch
Interesting point, although of course the charges aren't radiating inside the atom despite being 'accelerated' by the electric field of the nucleus from a classical EM viewpoint. So I wouldn't expect them to radiate either when the whole atom is
years later through the hard work of theoretical physicists we now have QFT. Others of course, will have their boundary for deciding when to give up on using classical EM to model a problem.
Their radiation would cancel to a large extent if the atom is
neutral (and if not, we should call it an ion). But still the
atom as a whole might be an accelerated dipole, which will in
fact radiate. Although a bit less than a net non-zero charge.
To remain totally non-radiating (during acceleration) the
charge must be distributed with some high degree of symmetry
(avoiding any multipole-moment) and this symmetry has to be
preserved during the acceleration, so you would have to apply
forces very evenly on the whole system. This does not sound
very practical..
This is what I had in mind, but I wouldn't want to stray too far into QM territory by resurrecting the non-radiation condition in an atom leading to then speculating on the structure of an electron 'orbiting' a nucleus. Especially when over 100
John McAndrew
John, My dipole is not an atom. No atom rotates:
Perhaps you are over-simplifying things here, Radi Igorevich my friend..
If you add a p-state and an s-state you get e lopsided electron cloud,
--
Jos
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular
Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular
Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular
Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular
Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular
Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 2:11:50 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
Radi, in what subjects did you get your degrees in?
I ask this because it might be you don't have even an undergraduate degree in physics. Hence you might not be aware of theoretical classical mechanics at a sufficient level that prevents you from making amateurish conclusions about physics.
John McAndrew
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
You can define anything as you like...
No. You then have nothing.
How is it still like angular momentum Roy masters?
Mitchell Raemsch
понедельник, 30 декабря 2019 г., 4:27:03 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 2:11:50 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
Radi, in what subjects did you get your degrees in?
I ask this because it might be you don't have even an undergraduate degree in physics. Hence you might not be aware of theoretical classical mechanics at a sufficient level that prevents you from making amateurish conclusions about physics.
John McAndrew
John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
On Monday, December 30, 2019 at 4:10:00 AM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:theory whereas foremost theoretical physicists haven't see this before.
понедельник, 30 декабря 2019 г., 4:27:03 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 2:11:50 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular
Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
Radi, in what subjects did you get your degrees in?
I ask this because it might be you don't have even an undergraduate degree in physics. Hence you might not be aware of theoretical classical mechanics at a sufficient level that prevents you from making amateurish conclusions about physics.
John McAndrew
John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
I can't find anything on there about your academic qualifications. I'm not deliberately trying to insult you, I'm just curious about your academic background that's enabled you to confidently claim there is something wrong about conventional EM field
John McAndrew
On Monday, December 30, 2019 at 4:10:00 AM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:theory whereas foremost theoretical physicists haven't see this before.
понедельник, 30 декабря 2019 г., 4:27:03 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 2:11:50 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular
Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
Radi, in what subjects did you get your degrees in?
I ask this because it might be you don't have even an undergraduate degree in physics. Hence you might not be aware of theoretical classical mechanics at a sufficient level that prevents you from making amateurish conclusions about physics.
John McAndrew
John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
I can't find anything on there about your academic qualifications. I'm not deliberately trying to insult you, I'm just curious about your academic background that's enabled you to confidently claim there is something wrong about conventional EM field
John McAndrew
вторник, 31 декабря 2019 г., 2:22:53 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:theory whereas foremost theoretical physicists haven't see this before.
On Monday, December 30, 2019 at 4:10:00 AM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
понедельник, 30 декабря 2019 г., 4:27:03 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 2:11:50 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote: >>>>> воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb >>>>>>>>Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular >>>>>>> Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
Radi, in what subjects did you get your degrees in?
I ask this because it might be you don't have even an undergraduate degree in physics. Hence you might not be aware of theoretical classical mechanics at a sufficient level that prevents you from making amateurish conclusions about physics.
John McAndrew
John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
I can't find anything on there about your academic qualifications. I'm not deliberately trying to insult you, I'm just curious about your academic background that's enabled you to confidently claim there is something wrong about conventional EM field
John McAndrew
Please, Look at my book http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=105&module=files
Visible representation of exterior differential forms and pseudo forms. Electromagnetism in terms of sources and generation of fields.
On Monday, December 30, 2019 at 4:10:00 AM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:theory whereas foremost theoretical physicists haven't see this before.
понедельник, 30 декабря 2019 г., 4:27:03 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 2:11:50 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb >>>>>>>Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular >>>>>> Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
Radi, in what subjects did you get your degrees in?
I ask this because it might be you don't have even an undergraduate degree in physics. Hence you might not be aware of theoretical classical mechanics at a sufficient level that prevents you from making amateurish conclusions about physics.
John McAndrew
John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
I can't find anything on there about your academic qualifications. I'm not deliberately trying to insult you, I'm just curious about your academic background that's enabled you to confidently claim there is something wrong about conventional EM field
On 19/12/31 12:22 AM, john mcandrew wrote:theory whereas foremost theoretical physicists haven't see this before.
On Monday, December 30, 2019 at 4:10:00 AM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
понедельник, 30 декабря 2019 г., 4:27:03 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 2:11:50 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote: >>>> воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb >>>>>>>Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular >>>>>> Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
Radi, in what subjects did you get your degrees in?
I ask this because it might be you don't have even an undergraduate degree in physics. Hence you might not be aware of theoretical classical mechanics at a sufficient level that prevents you from making amateurish conclusions about physics.
John McAndrew
John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
I can't find anything on there about your academic qualifications. I'm not deliberately trying to insult you, I'm just curious about your academic background that's enabled you to confidently claim there is something wrong about conventional EM field
Actually, there have always been some ambiguities around the
precise definition of the conserved quantities (and not just
angular momentum, here a random example:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belinfante%E2%80%93Rosenfeld_stress%E2%80%93energy_tensor>
)
But AFAIK whatever you choose can be OK of you use it consistently.
Still, in the search for the most 'elegant' formalism, alternative
ways of doing it can be useful, I think..
вторник, 31 декабря 2019 г., 2:22:53 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:theory whereas foremost theoretical physicists haven't see this before.
On Monday, December 30, 2019 at 4:10:00 AM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
понедельник, 30 декабря 2019 г., 4:27:03 UTC+3 пользователь john mcandrew написал:
On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 2:11:50 PM UTC, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
воскресенье, 29 декабря 2019 г., 2:50:20 UTC+3 пользователь Mitch Raemsch написал:
On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 2:20:29 PM UTC-8, Radi I. Khrapko wrote:
50 days' free access https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1aFPT6wQfKoEb
Thanks for the link. Elsevier is very generous, these days!
-- > Jos
Jos, Everyone can read all my publications on my site, in particular
Spin radiation from a rotating dipole. Optik 181 (2019) 1080-1084 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=172&module=files
Absorption of spin from an electromagnetic wave Optik 154 (2018) 806–810 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=161&module=files
Reflection of light from a moving mirror Optik 136 (2017) 503–506 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=153&module=files
science needs to explain how spin is like angular momentum.
Spin is angular momentum by definition of spin, but not a moment of momentum
Radi, in what subjects did you get your degrees in?
I ask this because it might be you don't have even an undergraduate degree in physics. Hence you might not be aware of theoretical classical mechanics at a sufficient level that prevents you from making amateurish conclusions about physics.
John McAndrew
John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
I can't find anything on there about your academic qualifications. I'm not deliberately trying to insult you, I'm just curious about your academic background that's enabled you to confidently claim there is something wrong about conventional EM field
John McAndrew
Dear John, sorry, You cannot use content of papers, so you focus only on the authority of the author.
field theory whereas foremost theoretical physicists haven't see this before.Radi, in what subjects did you get your degrees in?
I ask this because it might be you don't have even an undergraduate degree in physics. Hence you might not be aware of theoretical classical mechanics at a sufficient level that prevents you from making amateurish conclusions about physics.
John McAndrew
John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
I can't find anything on there about your academic qualifications. I'm not deliberately trying to insult you, I'm just curious about your academic background that's enabled you to confidently claim there is something wrong about conventional EM
John McAndrew
Please, Look at my book http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=105&module=files
Visible representation of exterior differential forms and pseudo forms. Electromagnetism in terms of sources and generation of fields.
Looks interesting but do you have it in a language I can understand?
theory whereas foremost theoretical physicists haven't see this before.John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
I can't find anything on there about your academic qualifications. I'm not deliberately trying to insult you, I'm just curious about your academic background that's enabled you to confidently claim there is something wrong about conventional EM field
Actually, there have always been some ambiguities around the<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belinfante%E2%80%93Rosenfeld_stress%E2%80%93energy_tensor>
precise definition of the conserved quantities (and not just
angular momentum, here a random example:
)
But AFAIK whatever you choose can be OK of you use it consistently.
Still, in the search for the most 'elegant' formalism, alternative
ways of doing it can be useful, I think..
--
Jos
Radi, I admit that the content of the papers lies outside my interest and expertise. However, further up you wrote:Optik somehow fell out."
"Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from which
My first reaction is to face-palm myself very hard, almost knocking myself out. You're supposed to be a professor within the physics department at a Russian university, specializing in aeronautical engineering, yet talking like a persecuted crackpot.IMO, no professor with a PhD in physics would behave like this, hence my interest in your academic background, which I suspect lies in engineering. Please don't take this as an insult because I consider you far more capable and intelligent than me
John McAndrew
Optik somehow fell out."Radi, I admit that the content of the papers lies outside my interest and expertise. However, further up you wrote:
"Optik is the only journal to publish revolutionary articles on the spin of electrodynamics. ALL other journals rejected over 100 articles on this topic over 1,000 times. This demonstrates the global corruption in the Scientific Community, from which
IMO, no professor with a PhD in physics would behave like this, hence my interest in your academic background, which I suspect lies in engineering. Please don't take this as an insult because I consider you far more capable and intelligent than meMy first reaction is to face-palm myself very hard, almost knocking myself out. You're supposed to be a professor within the physics department at a Russian university, specializing in aeronautical engineering, yet talking like a persecuted crackpot.
John McAndrew
Dear John, And what is your interest and expertise? As for “a persecuted crackpot”, it is I who persecute the Scientific Community. But the corruption wall is very strong!
theory whereas foremost theoretical physicists haven't see this before.John McAndrew, Many thanks for your question. You may know about me from my site: http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru
I can't find anything on there about your academic qualifications. I'm not deliberately trying to insult you, I'm just curious about your academic background that's enabled you to confidently claim there is something wrong about conventional EM field
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belinfante%E2%80%93Rosenfeld_stress%E2%80%93energy_tensor>
Actually, there have always been some ambiguities around the
precise definition of the conserved quantities (and not just
angular momentum, here a random example:
)
But AFAIK whatever you choose can be OK of you use it consistently.
Still, in the search for the most 'elegant' formalism, alternative
ways of doing it can be useful, I think..
--
Jos
Jos, What is AFAIK?
The Belinfante–Rosenfeld stress–energy tensor is neither symmetric nor conserved. It is a senseless tensor. See:
Mechanical stresses produced by a light beam J. Modern Optics, 55, 1487-1500 (2008) http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=9&module=files
Absorption of spin by a conducting medium AASCIT Journal of Physics. Vol. 4, No. 2, 2018, pp. 59-63 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=169&module=files , http://www.aascit.org/journal/archive2?journalId=977&paperId=6355
The Belinfante–Rosenfeld stress–energy tensor is neither symmetric nor conserved. It is a senseless tensor. See:
Mechanical stresses produced by a light beam J. Modern Optics, 55, 1487-1500 (2008) http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=9&module=files
Which Eq. in that text is the correct spin tensor? And which
is the sum of spin and the other angular momentum? Are they both
symmetric?
Jos
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 294 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 243:43:47 |
| Calls: | 6,626 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 12,175 |
| Messages: | 5,320,318 |