Persistent-current destroys a theory about 'propagation' of electrical-current

[ayeaye]

Has anyone studied the Aharonov-bohm-Effect ? Beaden described this in the operating principle of MEG

https://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/bearden-fact-sheet-meg-how-it-works.pdf

I don't see that this paper anyhow proves that this so called MEG should have any overunity. It starts from talking about Aharonov-Bohm effect, making it to sound like it were something extremely advanced. But then it goes on talking about something completely different, that doesn't seem to be related at all. And finally it looks like that all that supposed to do all these wonderful things, is some nanocrystalline core. What is it and why it supposed to do that, this paper doesn't explain.

Maybe i miss some other hundred papers about that, but this paper supposed to prove that MEG has overunity, and i don't see that it does. It doesn't even describe how that system works, that is what its key component, the nanocrystalline material, does.

I also don't see what this MEG has to do with Aharonov-Bohm effect. Sorry, there may be things that i don't know, but this paper doesn't explain it to me.

I mean, not only doesn't this paper prove that MEG has overunity, but it also doesn't provide any sensible reason why it might have overunity. Thus it is not anything worth to research, unless someone provides some better explanation perhaps.

[ayeaye]

F6FLT, reality is like a net bag your grandmother took to the market, even if you read No Stein books.

The drawing below shows electrons actually touching each other, but this can only be true for short distances i think, the same as the Aharonov-Bohm effect or two slit experiment. At longer distances they should use photons as quanta, why, because on the grid one cannot find another without sending something propagating through the grid. These are the only ways for particles to interact, they can only fumble in a way or another, the particles are blind, they cannot see. And we can also see only because of photons.

[F6FLT]

No, Schrödinger equation describes vector potential.

False.
Schrödinger equation
Vector potential

[ayeaye]

False.
Schrödinger equation
Vector potential

You are not correct when saying false.

In the Schrödinger equation for charged particles, the electromagnetic field is described by the vector potential and electric potential.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_equation

[F6FLT]

The classical fields can indeed be extracted from the wave function but there is no identity between the Schrödinger equation and the vector potential as shown by the links I provided in my previous post, see the very different definitions and formalism between the two.
Things are not at all as simplistic as you say they are, see here:
https://motls.blogspot.com/2011/11/how-classical-fields-particles-emerge.html