Home

ARCUS:  The World Formula and its Solutions

Consequently constructed using the results of Albert Einstein and Max Planck leading to the Unified Field Theory

 
Articles
The Preaching
 
 
 
 
  
To the model errors of quantum mechanics,

To their correction,

By qualified engineer H.-J. Ackermann (chemistry)

Pseudonym: Arcus

Preface:

Let's say it clearly. What a state had the chemistry in that time before Mendelejew found the periodic system of the elements (PSE)?
Yes, it was alchemy, and it was a complete chaos of crazy ideas what ever was possible using this kind of art!

Precisely just this state today cosmology, cosmogony and also particle physics are reflecting. We really live in a "Pre-PSE-Time",  projected at our present time period - in the pre-world-formula-time. What is missing else? You are missing that system! But what predicted Einstein to be that system? He expected a unified theory, so to speak a formula about the world system. As long as this "PSE" of universe is not given to the science, all the ideas will be swirled mess filled of pure irrealism. And this although:

No single calculation and no single measurement of the present sciences are wrong!

Only the models and their connection models are not right. This is caused by the solution of my theory which explains the particles in a completely different way then it was done before. This means that the present interpretations especially of the quantum mechanics and of the relativity theory are wrong. The total system which makes close the world at its inside is made from a completely different view.


Overview about some articles

The first mistake made by Victor de Broglie (1892-1987)

De Broglie predicted matter waves. They would be formed by a particle wave. The mass of the particle plays the primary role:

nh = m' v w = pww

(1,1)

or nh = m' v Rw

h = h / 2

Rw =w / 2

Planck's constant h extended with integer numbers n is equal to the product of the relativistic mass

m' = mo / (1-v²/c²), of the velocity v and of the wave lengthw. Relationship is completed by vacuum light velocity c. If the magnitudes are shortened with 2 radially then we get the wave amplitude Rw in that product. The momentum of the wave quantum is pw.

Mathematics of this solution is correct. The interpretation is wrong. Before 1924 de Broglie didn't have enough information about the general relativity theory, GRT, of Einstein (1879-1955) which was published in 1915/16. Einstein predicted there would be gravitation waves. They would arise with the movement of masses. In his work he showed the parallel to electromagnetic waves which are made by movement of electric charges.

So called matter waves really are nothing else than gravitomagnetic waves - gravitation waves.

Here the equations for comparison:

nh = m' v Rw

the gravitomagnetic momentum, the g.m. angular momentum, the g.m. effect

n = e' v Rw

(1,2)

the electromagnetic momentum, the e.m. angular momentum, the e.m. effect.

Here the e.m. momentum is made of the relativistically moved electric charge e', until now only called as magnetic momentum ´(gravitational magnetic fields were unknown): ´ = n .

This analogy is extremely obvious. It means:

A rotating charge eo makes an electrically caused magnetic field while its electric field is rotating. In the meaning of me derived by GRT, a rotating mass mo creates a gravitationally caused magnetic field while the gravitational field is rotating. We find here the start of the electromagnetic wave and of the gravitomagnetic wave. Their wave quanta are the photon and the fallon. Both are extending over and along the stationary vacuum of the universe.

Remark:

Present opinion is that the vacuum would be made by compensations of Heisenberg's wave quanta. But these are compensations of waves. The stationary vacuum does not consist of wave quanta. It is made by the two stable subparticles of the stable elementary particles and of the two elementary charges in complete rest. Along this stationary vacuum body, Einstein conceived it with his solution of the equalizing of gravitation and antigravitation in 1917, and then he rejected it to be a "stupid thing", all the types of wave quanta are extending. The true stupidity of Einstein was to reject this solution again. It was used by me to create the background for the movement of the exchange quanta.

Additionally, de Broglie didn't know the macroscopic importance of the gravitomagnetic waves ("of his matter waves"). A short time before scientists noticed that also fullerons (carbon balls) have the qualities of g.m. waves (of those "matter waves"). This means that each angular momentum I of an arbitrary mass m is forming the sum of all the elementary angular momenta at the same event:

I = nh = m v r = (m1 + m2 + ... mn) v r .

(1,3)

The compact mass body also can create a magnet field like the compact charge of an arbitrarily large electric current, but a gravitomagnetic field. That magnetic field gravitationally caused is referred to the strength of the attraction force of the electric charges and it may not be underestimated if big masses are rotating. Well, this is not meant that compact mass, made from one complete cluster, would be rotating around its gravity center but that many singularities of masses are rotating on a ring. Therefore we expect the g.m. field made by the differential rotation of masses.

 

Second mistake made by Werner Heisenberg (1901-1976) and the following physics

Heisenberg established the mathematical relationship which is called uncertainty relation since this time, resulting explanation problems definitively:

h  pw· 2 X .

(2)

The product of momentum change  p and of "position" change  X would be larger/equal to Planck's constant h/2. How did Heisenberg think of the "position" X of the particle? Aren't there measured the changes of the wave amplitudes Rw, like above described, instead of the particle position so that 2 X =  Rw:

h  (m' v)·  Rw ?

(3)

Therefore Heisenberg, followed by Max Born (1882-1970), has made the amplitude Rw or X equal to the position of the particle! Born told that the amplitude square Rw² of the "particle wave" would be a measurement for the "position probability of the particles". This would be made clear at the extended function to square:

h²   pw² 4 X² .

(4)

How could Heisenberg and Born do this, and what problems have they given to us?

At first the particle properties of electrons seemed to be indicated at low intensity. At higher intensity the same indications were noticed like they are well-known of e.m. waves. Because of the indications of the hits one thought these hits all have to be the hits of the particles directly (dual-slit experiment).

Nobody thought that a particle as such a thing cannot be a hit itself directly.

To an interaction we have to add the momentum exchange or the angular momentum exchange! If work is made between quanta of two magnetic fields then there is an interaction and also an area where the momenta are reacting with the other momenta.

How did one think the mistake particles themselves would be indicated? At lower intensity, indications seem to reflect the particles themselves. But this assumption is also wrong. What does my theory tell us?

Stable particles like protons, electrons and definite neutrinos, have a rest mass or a rest energy after the equation E = mo·c². Because the energy E can be also calculated with Planck's condition E = h·f into a frequency f, each stable particle should make a constant intrinsic oscillation of its space in rest. The result means a spherical wave which is falling back next to zero from the high point of its elongation - the amplitude Ro. It looks like a pulsating heart.

Elongation in an arbitrary cosm (illustration 8.1;2 of my theory)

 

 

This oscillation is given by Schwarzschild's solution of GRT. That solution I have solved deeper. A term was resulting which gave the harmonic oscillation of stable cosms. Here one can find the agreement between my oscillator-solution (Arcus, 1986) and of Planck's theory. Each cosm is an oscillator. It represents the program of each life. At the same time it makes a hierarchy of cosms up to the oscillating universe. Under these circumstances waves cannot really be seen as particles or signed as such things! On the one hand there are

  • particles and their primary momentum exchange of their oscillation functions; on the other hand there are
  • the moved particles and the secondary momentum exchange of their wave functions.

Primary wave quanta represent the same picture of oscillation into all directions. Therefore they are felt as monopolar states (see illustration above: pulsations of a sphere are spatially equal).

Because of the oscillations of the spheres of particles it is possible to compensate particles with antiparticles in their contrary vibration. While a proton is expanding an antiproton should be contracting. The stationary vacuum remains. If a real particle is oscillating then it transmits the own picture of its movement over the primary particles and antiparticles making vacuum. Practically all over the space primary wave quanta are running from particle to particle and vacuum quantum to vacuum quantum (short distance effect). This kind of wave quanta is not identical with the well-known secondary quanta of waves. Primary quanta transmit the effects of gravitation mo and antigravitation mo as primary fallons and the effects of the electric charges +eo and their anticharges -eo as primary photons. Their frequencies correspond to the resting frequencies of the particles themselves in relative rest.

Here an active exchange of primary effects is running into all directions. Einstein set a limit to this event: if there will be enough mass, but also enough momentum mass of secondary wave quanta, then the coordinate system will be curved up to the end. The GRT is not in contradiction to my opinion of the quanta and their interactions. The reason is that the exchange forces are forcing every body into curved orbits. If there are centers of force at all so all the orbits lay curved above them. Therefore it is wrong to describe Einstein's GRT alone to be a geometric theory of gravitation. Consequently, it is wrong to mark the GRT as pure space-curvature theory. It is also wrong to assert that GRT would negate the exchange force of gravitation. Till now, nobody still had solved the GRT completely so that its oscillator solution would have been recognizable, before me.

Quantum mechanics was made by wrong interpretations. Heisenberg saw the momentum exchange as an exchange of "virtual particles". The next wrong conclusion was to see the vacuum being a space of "virtual particles". But the stationary vacuum exists primary. Inside of it elementary angular momenta of real particles are wandering to and from each other. Therefore there is no vacuum of "virtual particles" which would only live shortly and then die again after the uncertainty relation of Heisenberg. This complete interpretation made for model is wrong. But independent on this there is a stationary vacuum of primary particles.

As soon as a particle doesn't rest referred to its partner then the relative velocity v appears. It leads to the phenomena of secondary wave quanta after de Broglie and after the electrodynamics. This way secondary photons and secondary fallons will be formed. They play an important role at higher velocities. Their indication have confused Heisenberg, Born and present physics. They thought that there would have been proved the immediate proximity of the particles. But there the interactions of quanta were indicated, so the secondary angular momenta of the moving particles. The particles themselves never have changed their direction! Particles never have wave properties or qualities. But they are receiver or transmitter of primary wave quanta because they are oscillators themselves. In relative movement particles become causes of a second type of wave quanta, of secondary wave quanta which are reflected by their bipolar magnetic fields.

Really the particle was not indicated as such a one because its primary wave quanta express only the properties of rest mass and of rest charge. But the momentum of movement of that particle was indicated. Just like this the position of the particle was not indicated but the wave amplitude Rw of the particle which was in movement.

In the end everything is expressed by uncertainty relation, the primary wave quanta and the secondary wave quanta, but in a completely new interpretation.

Rotation of a current of masses or charges and their elongation (illustration 8.1;1 of the theory)

 

 

Here the field changes its polarizing or its field strength swells with small movements.

 

Remark:

The normal electrically caused magnetic field, which propagation is a change of the transversal wave, really is the result of the twist of the primary field. That primary field consists of a spherical longitudinal wave - of a spherical Tesla wave. This way I think, that every transversal wave at each dipole antenna must have a change of its primary longitudinal wave by which the secondary longitudinal wave comes from. Both wave types are coupled then.

The cohesion between momentum and wave amplitude

 

 

Here the amplitude R can be substituted for the primary amplitude Ro of cosm and for the secondary amplitude Rw of wave quantum. The momentum stands firstly for the momentum of the cosm po = mo·c for R = Ro and secondly for the momentum of the wave quantum (of the magnetic field) pw = mw·c = m'·v for R = Rw, where mw is the momentum mass and also for the non-indicated wave quantum momentum pB = mB·v with R = rrot.

The area h is always constant. It only can be extended by integer numbers of itself! You can see now why: This area cannot be divided or enlarged. It is a unique and fundamental magnitude given by God! But where does ½ h of Fermions come from? This is a secondary effect caused by rotations of charges inside of the particle on half the amplitude while its oscillation with an integer h. It means: the area of an electromagnetically fundamental constant  made from the product of the charge features e and their velocities is very much smaller than h.

For primary oscillations and secondary waves the same law is valid. But the things are not the same!

The relationship which is shown above doesn't construct any contradiction between particles and waves. Heisenberg thought there would be a contradiction and tried to overcome it with his variant of interpretation. Our interpretation shows the unity of wave functions and oscillation functions better. Additionally we see the angular momentum as the determining element of oscillating matter. The same relation is valid for the so-called uncertainty of energy and time. Primarily this is the oscillation energy of oscillators, secondarily it is the wave energy of wave quanta. The time isn't a general time, but the period time of oscillators (I called it oscillation time) or the period time of wave quanta. The area h represents a thing like a constant programming of matter. If it would not exist then the matter would be completely free, and it could decay absolutely accidentally. Additionally in connection with the world formulae this solution proves that the matter including particles and energy represents a programmed system.

If the given context is not enough to explain why X equal to Rw isn't the position of the particle, I give the following explanations.

Heisenberg wasn't master of the special relativity theory, SRT, at his time. Otherwise he had exactly separated the observer relations. This mistake couldn't be corrected by consideration of terms of SRT in quantum mechanics afterwards, only used for indications. There the resting observer is at the place of the indicator and at the place of the totally braked particle and its wave quanta. The mass is relativistically stopped seen as m'. Then the momentum pw also became relativistic. The more the mass m' increases with increasing velocity v the smaller is the amplitude Rw.

My solution clearly explains the cohesion to the SRT. It is told the mass will be increase relativistically along increasing velocity. To which observer is this reflection valid? At the impact the indicating observer notices a relativistically increased mass m'. Now the cause of it is the same as it appears at secondary wave quantum exchange: the frequency of primary exchange waves is shifted to the blue. Because after my theory the resting gravitational particle has a definite frequency f which practically reflects the rest mass mo of the particle, the frequency f ' is shifted to the blue over the exchange momenta and then it represents the bigger mass m'. But the relationship behind the escaping mass was not explained by generally formulated SRT of Einstein. There the frequency is shifted to the red. The moving mass mB will be lighter with SRT position:

mB = mo ·(1-v²/c²) .

(2,1)

If now the moving mass mB isn't indicated, but it is rotating on its orbit radius rrot then it doesn't reflect the equation (1,1) but the following:

nh = mB v rrot .

(2,2)

With increasing relativistic velocity the mass mo is decreasing down to mB while the rotation radius rrot may be arbitrary.

The particle is there where its rotation radius is! But the particle is not there where its secondary wave quanta are landing at indication:

nh = m' v Rw = mo v Rw / (1-v²/c²)

(2,3)

nh = mB v rrot = mo v rrot ·(1-v²/c²) .

(2,4)

It is expressed in differences of uncertainty relation:

h (m' v)  Rw{[mo / (1-v²/c²)] v}   Rw   =  p Rw

(2,3a)

h  (mB v) rrot{[mo ·(1-v²/c²)]  v}  rrot  =  pB   rrot.

(2,4a)

Expressed in tendencies:

while pw increases,  Rw decreases; especially it decreases against zero if v against c.

(2,5)

 pB takes its own way. At small increasing speed v the movement mass mB decreases just in small rates while the rotation radius  rrot decreases first. At velocities v against light speed c the tendency is turning around: The rotation radius is strongly increasing while  pB decreases against zero. 

Such a way of the difference of the rotation radius rrot is not identical with the difference of the wave amplitude Rw!

Using non-relativistical speeds - explicitely in the classical physics - both radial magnitudes seem to be the same. As soon as relativistical velocities will be reached - so in the modern relativistical physics of the reality - it is shown that both radial magnitudes are contradictions! Today smallest magnitudes decide about the truth of a theory!

(2,6)

Consequently, we cannot speak of the equality of the positions of the electrons rrot and their wave amplitudes Rw. This will be clearly seen with both following illustrations. The first illustration from my theory marks the relativistic mass m' with mA. We see the cohesion between the moving rest mass mB and the momentum mass mw. Both masses don't lay in the same point. Therefore there is no "position location" of particle. And, an elementary particle cannot be the same as its wave!

The indicated momentum p of a wave quantum which just had an interaction is p = m' v = pw = mw c. This relativistic retardation momentum is not equal to the wave momentum pB = mB v while the unchanged and non-indicated movement of the particle causing its own wave quantum!

The second part of the uncertainty relation is referred to time and energy:

h  Ew· tx .

(2,6a)

One thought that an interaction would exist during a time uncertainty and after this it would disappear again. This interpretation led to the mistake. Really it has to be explained like following:

A real particle is oscillating spatially. It gets bigger up to its amplitude R(X) in the time tx. During this process its energy Ew corresponds to the oscillation energy which one can calculate into its oscillation mass m called rest mass of that particle. Then the particle radius decreases on a minimum again. For a short time the particle doesn't exist any more. Then it will be reborn. A pulsation like a heart!

This event is not equal to vacuum. It describes the behavior of real particles! Exactly for them is valid:

h = E · to = Ro · po .

(2,8)

 

Relativistic masses referred to vacuum (illustration 8.2.5;1 of my theory)

a) particle

b) particle orbit

Have attention, please: The particle as such a one does not contact the indicator directly by interaction! The center of a secondary wave amplitude has its interaction with the indicator! That's the central dot of the orbit (always curved) if the rotation radius is next to the wave amplitude at small velocities. But there are all the virtual central dots of all the wave amplitudes of the main quanta and their sub-quanta! These interaction indications have to be seen all around the particle coming from it and going out into the space.

We observe an electrical circuit in the shape of a single track conductor with the rotation radius rrot. The electrons are rotating there where the vector of that rotation radius rrot shows from the center (the middle dot) to the rotating electron. It draws the circular movement. But where ist the amplitude Rw which is caused by the rotating electron? If you orientate a magnet to the electrical circuit, so it does not be attracted to the electrons on their orbit but into the center of the electrical circuit. There the vector of the wave amplitude Rw shows to! Consequently, both vectors of rrot and Rw are contrary to each other as already proved above relativistically! There is no equalitiy of the amplitude Rw and the places at rrot of the particles, in such a way no equality of wave and elementary corpuscle, too! The theory of the corpuscle-wave-dualism is an error!

The resting particle mass is indicated by its interaction center in Ro as gravitation. Above the apparent point-like being of the particle doesn't lay the "vacuum polarizing" of quantum mechanics but there are the innumerable subparticles balanced charged up to the upper subparticles. The upper subparticles are rotating on their radii Rrot. So the quantum theory has measured a cloud of electrically positive and negative poles above the electron-"point" those space has an extension of about 10-13 m. But this is not the true vacuum polarizing! Here is an interpretation mistake of quantum mechanics again. This space above the point-like particle is filled with the subparticles of electrons, with the subordinated particles which come from the electron's protocosms. Protocosms are unstable particles which are emitting radiation and stable particles in the end at their decay. All these things remain locked under the horizon of the electron of 3.9·10-13 m calculated after my theory.

This means: physics has already recognized the structures of some particles without knowing this, because de Broglie and Heisenberg have led the following generation into the lunatic.

But there were more mistakes. Quarks are only interaction photons and fallons, which give an information about a type of subparticles. But they don't give information about the number of all the subparticles inside of the definite particle! It's just like this with Z- and W-bosons.

The true and real vacuum polarizing is insignificantly extended in the space that its measurement is relatively hard. At least the vacuum of masses and charges is partially separated. It forms the stationary field of gravitation and the electric field. As soon as the masses and the charges will be moved the given field will be twisted. It will be converted to a rotation field which one calls magnetic field. Now there are two types of it - the g.m. and the e.m. field.

When a front of magnetic field quanta with their angular momenta comes to one single and relatively resting magnetic field, they are interacting with the single field over a complete area, because the resting field can be extended from minus to plus infinite state, cf. illustration 2.22,1 of my theory:

Explanation of German concepts here above: Kern = core or nucleus, Hülle = shell

That magnetic field non-relativistically has its largest interaction force H in the distance of zero from the core or the nucleus. The more relativistic a particle is rotating the more two peaks are shown besides the peak point of the curve. While rotation of electrons these distances are very small. Therefore the model of electron shell by Erwin Schrödinger (1887-1961) is mistaken. Following Heisenberg's ideas he put the central interaction to the outside onto the electron orbit in his opinion model explaining the right mathematical solutions. So the reality was mirrored. This cannot remain so although the calculations cause on the wave function. In principle it calculated the right wave amplitudes but no rotation radii. My theory shows it simply: the electrons couple over the elementary magnetic fields of their orbits making chemical compounds. The orbits of electrons exist objectively in reality without that they would be measurable. Interactions of orbit magnets of electrons are distributing themselves over a theoretically infinitely large space - over an orbital of interactions.

Relatively reversed the event is working if a single magnet field quantum collides with a multiple number of momenta on an indicator. That indicator includes a multitude of interaction fields of the particles there which are standing in relationship to the hitting angular momentum. The resulting effect is relatively the same as the above called process. Just this drawing nobody has really understood.

Interactions between two electrons, abstracted of their orbit, are determined by their charges, their masses (both are oscillation functions of both primary fields of the world) and by their e.m. momentum and their g.m. momentum. Such interactions are running when an electron pair has got a orbit.

 

2. Refutation of the present interpretation of the quantum mechanics

2.1. The meaning of Planck's constant

Planck's constant h is an effect, an action or just the elementary effect quantum. Effects are working with each other. This process is called interaction. Let us look at the meaning of the equations.

At first the equation (1) can be understood as if the wave lengthw would be a perimeter u of a circle which is made of the amplitude being a radius Rw:

w = 2Rw = u .

 

Then the momentum pw could be understood as height of a cylinder mantle. That cylinder mantle itself would be the symbol for one interaction h at all multiplied with the level n. In its area there is the probability of the interaction. But we don't find there any position probability of some particle. Such an interpretation of positions was given by Max Born although it is invisible from mathematics. The interaction had to be the same as the particle. There where a particle position would be its interaction had also to be located. Then Born would be right. But is this correct?

We square the equation (1) and get the following term:

n² 4 ² h²= pw² 4p ²Rw²

Then we divide it by 2 and find the following equation:

n² 2 h² = pw² 2 Rw² = pw² Aw.

There we get the circle area Aw made of its amplitude and the height of the cylinder made of the momentum square pw². Now this product represents the volume of that cylinder. Inside of it the square interaction is localized. Just in this function we do not find any direct note of that particle. Instead of this we only find the interaction with Planck's quantum.

The more n we set in (up to infinity) the better we see that the interactions are made in a successively extended area of the mantle or of the volume of the cylinder.

 

2.2. Which effect has the stable particle itself?

I understand the effect of a particle like the electron to be a locked or closed oscillation of its space during its time referred to one single Planck-quantum h:

h = moo = po

(5)

h = mo c Ro = po Ro .

(6)

Then that quantum h reflects the resting mass mo of that particle. The oscillation length o represents the perimeter uo of the falling and elongating spherical space. That elongation amounts Ro. The oscillation itself radiates the rest momentum po of the primary exchange wave into all directions. This momentum practically represents the signal for the dimension of rest mass mo which is transferred to the other resting masses. The momentum exchange leads to the effect of rest mass attraction, to the gravitation force in the end. In this respect the quantum h is here the interaction of gravitation.

The hit of a particle which is moving with the velocity v and the mass mo therefore cannot be the mass effect itself. The mass effect has already been used! It is switched by the exchange of primary rest momenta. Then the oscillation velocity c of elongation Ro is valid. But if a particle is moved with the velocity v then it cannot be valid the velocity c. Consequently at indication of particle-caused waves we never observe the direct interaction of the particles. We never indicate their locations or positions. Instead of the particle positions we notice the interactions of the wave quanta made by particle velocity of v. These effects do not lay a priori at the inside of the particles but each on the wave amplitude Rw. A particle never is indicated itself but always its wave is indicated with its relative velocity v referred to light velocity c!

This way the wave energy Ew which is able to be indicated distinguishes of the (gravitational) rest energy Eo:

Ew = m' v c = pw c = mw

mw = m' v/c

(7)

Eo = mo c² .

(8)

There the momentum mass mw of the wave can be found which reflects the really indicated effect h of an arbitrary wave.

 

2.3. Corrected statement after Max Born

The statement of Born had to be called like following:

The square of the wave amplitude Rw is a measurement for the interaction probability of waves caused by those particles which cannot be indicated directly at their position.

 

3. Summary

We find 6 types of interactions, 2 primary types connected with the light velocity of the oscillation and 4 secondary interactions connected with the relative velocity:

I a)

rest mass

primary spatial fallon

I b)

rest charge

primary spatial photon

(no particle position; primary wave quanta, all over spatial because of its spherical oscillation)

II a)

moved mass

momentum mass, g.m. field, fallon;

II b)

moved charge

momentum mass, e.m. field, photon.

III a)

moved gravitomagnetic field

rotating momentum mass, change field, fallon;

III b)

moved electromagnetic field

rotating momentum mass, photon.

If the problem isn't yet understood how indications of particles and their wave quanta are different, this verbal summary follows:

Two types of momentum masses arise from movement (velocity v) of rest masses or/and rest charges (velocity v=0). The first type is caused gravitationally (fallons), the second type is caused by the electric charge (photons). Momentum masses are the analoga to rest masses or rest charges.. But the first of them are interacting in relative movements! Momentum masses never lay at the position of the particle where the rest mass or/and the rest charge are working. If this would be so, then the gravitation field or the electric field would be the same as the field of the gravitation wave or of the magnetic field. But we know well that the electric field and its magnetic field are not the same.

Notice: Today we speak of the electromagnetic wave as a phenomenon of the electric and magnetic field. Our opinion is: When does an electric field swell (made from oscillating charge-cosms as spherical waves of primary quanta)? Yes, if charges are moved. But what does then follow if they are moved inevitably? The resting polarization of the vacuum is twisted by a moving electric charge in vacuum. From this, the magnetic field and its change is following. I don't see any explanation contradiction to the present opinion after which the e.m. wave would consist of electric and magnetic field components.

Primary quanta are consequently primary wave phenomena however being able to be "shielded". This is the precondition for explanation of Podletnikov's experiments and other effects caused by any features of "shieldings". That "how?" I can best explain (see at the end of exchange forces).

 
 
· All rights reserved: Arcus (Heinz-Joachim Ackermann, since1998) ·