This is a discussion of Lloyd's summary of Mathis' theory of electric charges.

 

'14-05-04, 16:57   Lloyd St. Louis area	Comments on Statements #1-36   #10 is Doubtful, so prove it please; my impression is that a random spray of particles in all directions would repel electrons as much as protons, unless the spray were not random. - #10 seems Not vital for his model.   #13a is Untrue and Contradicts Battery Circuit paper which starts at #16. - #13a seems Not vital either.   #13b-15 Contradict Battery Circuit paper. - #13-15 seems Important to clarify, because the mechanism is different from that in the Battery Circuit paper.   #21 is True, but it contradicts 13a. - #21 seems Not vital.   #26 is Unclear, the wire isn't ionized, is it? - #26 seems Important to help clarity.   #28: I think it does separate ions from electrons, doesn't it? - #28 seems Not vital.   #30: Please specify which ions are large and small in batteries. Is it protons and electrons? - #30 seems Not vital.   #34: The description that follows 35 doesn't seem clear enough for me. - #34 seems Important to help clarity.   Others' comments are needed too.
'14-05-04, 17:00   Lloyd St. Louis area	Lloyd: Detailed Comments on #9-10   MM on How Protons Repel _9 The proton is emitting a bombarding field that tends to drive off all particles that come near. *_10 But it will drive off larger particles more successfully than smaller particles, since the smaller particles will encounter a smaller cross-section of the field.   Doubt about Above Repulsion Model #10 is Doubtful, so it needs proof. - As I said above, my impression is that a random spray of particles (like photons) in all directions would repel electrons as much as protons, unless the spray were not random. - The heavy protons would be repelled a little by each photon hit, which would be more frequent because of its larger surface area. - Lighter electrons would be repelled farther by each photon hit, which would be less often.   How to Prove Electrons Are Repelled Less - MM calculated that each proton (at STP?) would emit 19 times the proton mass each second in photon masses. - He also calculated the mass of a proton and the mass of a photon, so the number of photons emitted per second can be calculated from those findings.(Photons however would have several quantized masses, depending on the frequency.) - A proton bound to an atom or ion would not have axis end over end spin, so it would only emit in 2 dimensions equatorially. - A free proton would probably often spin in 3 dimensions, because the equator would be free to turn on the axis end over end, so the photon emission would be spread over all 3 dimensions. - So a free proton should repel in all directions but more weakly, i.e. producing a less dense emission per area. - A bound proton should repel strongly in 2 dimensions around its equator, but not repel at all above or below its equator. - I think the proton's repulsion of electrons and protons can be estimated by dividing each one's cross-section area by its mass. If the ratios are proportional, I think the repulsion of both would be the same. - Is That Correct? - If so, what results are found from such calculations? (I hope I don't have to find all the data and make the calculations myself.)   Implications if Repulsion Is the Same - I think MM was trying to explain why electrons seem to be attracted to protons by saying that in reality they're merely repelled less than protons are. - But, even if they are not repelled less, it may make little or no difference for his charge model etc. - Am I right or not? - If not, feel free to explain.   Implications if Emission Is Non-Random - If emissions are not random, but evenly spaced, then electrons would be able to get closer to the proton between the evenly spaced emitted photons.
'14-05-04, 19:28   Lloyd St. Louis area	Detailed Comments on #13-15 & #20-22 & #34-35 Does the Charge Field Travel in Conducting Wire? *_#13a says Free electrons travel at high speed in a conducting wire, or any conductor, - This contradicts #20-22, which says _20 If you read the page at Wiki on electrical circuits, you get the impression that electrons travel through the circuit, creating the energy transfer. _21 Sefton shows us that is false, and I have nothing to say against him. His argument in that regard is convincing. *_22 The electrons are simply moving too slow. - I conclude that #13a is wrong. - #22 seems Important for the Battery Circuit paper model. *_13a Free electrons travel at high speed in a conducting wire, or any conductor, *_13b because the B-field is moving in only one direction in that substance. *_14 The B-field acts as a river, moving the electrons along by direct contact. *_15 This B-field river can be created in any number of ways, either by having lots of radiating particles at one end of the wire and few or none at the other, or by directionalizing the B-field through the shape of the molecules in the substance. - #13b-15 seem Important to rule out, because they seem to contradict the Batter Circuit paper. MM's current view should be requested. Photon Flow in Wire or Not? #15 contradicts #34-35 as follows. *_15 This B-field river can be created in any number of ways, either by having lots of radiating particles at one end of the wire and few or none at the other, or by directionalizing the B-field through the shape of the molecules in the substance. _34 Now, if we extend wires to the bulb, we haven't provided the path to the bulb that the photons must take, since the photons need no path of that kind. *_35 What we have done is prime the field, like what happens in wireless transmission. - #15 & #35 seem Important to clarify.