Yes I agree that non radiation is not the only thing and can have multiple solutions - but it's a hint to narrow down the possibilities.
1. There is a photon traped inside that is kept there in a standing wave and this is maintained with a time dependant sources in maxwell equatiions. The only such sources, if we assume time dependance of exp(iwt), is sum a(m,p)Ylm exp(piwt), p = +1 or -1 the radii of the sphere times |w| must match a zero in spherical bessel j_l. 2. You need to be able to match meassured ionization energies 3. You need to nullify the electric field 4. the currents amd charge distribution needs to match the spin of the electron - this will give you the nessesary current magnitude. 5. If you consider solid state objects a very normal deviation is cracks and 2 dimensional interfaces - why not attribute a interface to matter. On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 5:03 AM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > There is no reason for the sphere to be infinitesimally thin if far field > radiation null is the only driving force. You can even have variation in > the thickness at various locations throughout its volume. It merely needs > to be distributed so that no changing accumulation of charges over it > surface occurs with time. > > I further propose that various regions of the spatially distributed charge > can undergo differential acceleration provided that there is no change to > the accumulation of charge allowed at any location. > > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe <stefan.ita...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Sun, Oct 11, 2015 4:40 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cross section reduction at lower energies > > Eric Walker said: > " > The orbitsphere is proposed to be an infinitesimally thin sphere of > circulating current. The overlaying of spherical harmonics on top of this > sphere seems to imply one of: > > - The sphere is not infinitesimally thin and instead can vary in > thickness, and the accumulation of charge results in a thicker segment of > sphere. > - The sphere is in fact infinitesimally thin, and the charge is > represented by a vibration of the surface of the sphere in a standing mode > (in which case the sphere is only approximately a sphere). > - The sphere is in fact infinitesimally thin, and the charge > accumulation occurs in a hidden dimension. > > Do you agree? > " > If you magnify it large enough I'm sure you will see some structure, maybe > a thickness. But to a practical approximation I think a zero thickness is > fine. > I believe that what matter is is a singular artifact due to nonlinear > behavior in space. A nonlinearity that needs to be added to Maxwell. How > this nonlinearity > behaves is unknown but what it does is to produce a crack or surface which > can be sustained and stable under the right circumstances. Now if you want > to > add this singularity you need to add a distribution field as source terms > on a surface to Maxwell and the most simple such distribution is a delta > messure on the surface. > What we know about this source term is that it does not radiate and from > there MIlls produces GUTCP. Note that what it may be is just a mathematical > correction > that feels like a bunch of charges with mass etc is what we would like to > visualize this as. But math is ruthless, nothing in the charge field or > current fields could be > attributed to physical quantities, it's just a mathematical correction > with some properties, the result of this at a higher level creates our > physical world where we get > our intuition for, but that intuition may not return back to the basic > building blocks - that's a circular argument. But sure the math also > suggest that we actually have > a thickness - just that it ain't certain. The only way to really know this > is to actually find a model of the non linearities of the world and see > what you get. Until then > you may be right or you may be wrong. > > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < >> stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> No it is not arbritary. It is a simple matter to prove that these charge >>> distribution would lead to non radiation for certain internal standing >>> waves. >>> >> >> The orbitsphere is proposed to be an infinitesimally thin sphere of >> circulating current. The overlaying of spherical harmonics on top of this >> sphere seems to imply one of: >> >> - The sphere is not infinitesimally thin and instead can vary in >> thickness, and the accumulation of charge results in a thicker segment of >> sphere. >> - The sphere is in fact infinitesimally thin, and the charge is >> represented by a vibration of the surface of the sphere in a standing mode >> (in which case the sphere is only approximately a sphere). >> - The sphere is in fact infinitesimally thin, and the charge >> accumulation occurs in a hidden dimension. >> >> Do you agree? >> >> Actually sometimes I tend to get a feeling that the whole thing is >>> obfuscated. >>> >> >> Me too. >> >> Eric >> >> >
