Seeking open-minded theoretical physicists

[Theoretical Research]

Quote Mr research''ive shown mathematically that mass inertia is caused by the same thing that causes electrical induction, which is near field transverse electromagnetism.

I've shown mathematically that photon momentum is a secondary effect caused by transverse electromagnetism.'

This will probably be of great interest to mr theoria-apophasis from the magnetic vortexual thread in this section sir.

Thanks! I'll try to contact him.

[Theoretical Research]

Well, Paul, just about everything on your list was theorized and published by big-name physicists during the late 1800s. 

Uhhhh, are you aware of this?


CANGAS 159

I think you were referring to mass inertia in my list. Is that the one you're talking about it or are there others? A few months ago I became aware of electromagnetic mass:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_mass

For the most part they're referring to the theory that mass can be accounted for by the particles electromagnetic field energy. I wrote some c code that shows the classical electrons electric and magnetic field energy come to E = m*c^2, but what I am referring to as mass inertia is the inertia force that mass objects experience when accelerated/decelerated. So I took a macro scale wire where the current is changing, used the well known induction equation, scaled it down to an electron, and after doing a lot of painful math, presto, the resulting force came to mass inertia, F = m*a. I've never seen anyone derive mass inertia from the cause of induction, electromagnetism. There was a guy, Friedrich Hasenöhrl, who had a somewhat similar theory, albeit nothing to do with induction. His theory was regarding the far field radiation, which is different than my theory and math.

As far as the the work done by physicists in the early 1900's regarding to equating the particles electromagnetism to E = m*c^2, their equations failed miserably until Quantum Mechanics was well established. They finally figured how to do it with classical equations. Does that mean it's true for all particles such as neutrons? Maybe. That's a tough one. I ran into problems when taking it that far. In the end my equations showed that it's charge that determines mass, but I feel it could be taken another step further. Note that the standard model believes that even the neutron is made of charged particles. The latest theory is that the neutrons outer sphere is negatively charge. Anyhow, this is not what I was talking about in terms of mass inertia. There's mass *inertia*, which is a force. And there's inertia *mass*, which is regarding the attempt at equating electromagnetic energy to m*c^2.

[TinselKoala]

Oh, yes. Let's TR and TA fight it out. This will  indeed be fun to watch.

[Theoretical Research]

Oh, yes. Let's TR and TA fight it out. This will  indeed be fun to watch.

What does TR and TA mean? Why do you want fighting?

[TinselKoala]

What does TR and TA mean? Why do you want fighting?

You are TR and TA is Theoria Apophasis (and I am TK but I am not Tariel Kapanadze who is also TK). I see you have already found his thread, and you probably understand by now what I meant by "fighting" and how amusing it is to watch.