## The Source Charge Problem

The received interpretation of the Maxwell-Heaviside theory treats the source charge and source dipole as perpetual motion machines, freely and continuously pouring out EM energy in 3-space in all directions with no energy input. Experimentally one verifies that there is no 3-space observable energy input to the charge or dipole. In accepting that model, a scientist objecting to COP>1.0 EM systems has unwittingly hoisted himself upon his own perpetual motion machine petard, by already accepting every source charge and dipole as precisely that to which he is objecting. To explain the source charge, either one holds to the U(1) Maxwell-Heaviside theory and surrenders the conservation of energy law, or one accepts a change to U(1) electrodynamics to add the concomitant input of energy flow from the active vacuum (from the time domain, which in Minkowski geometry is all that is left outside 3-space) to that charge or dipole. That corresponds to a violation of the second law of thermodynamics, as — as we discussed in Chapter 10 — Evans and his colleagues at the Australian National University have already experimentally proven that the second law can be violated up to micron scale and for times of up to two seconds.287 At the much smaller fundamental charged particle level and far shorter "switching" time of one spin completion, the probability is 100% and a certainty that the second law is violated. Hence the broken symmetry of the charged particle considered in the modem sense as a dipolarity (considering its associated clustering virtual charges of opposite sign).

Either way, the classical Maxwell-Heaviside theory must be changed. Every charge and every dipole — which themselves are Maxwell-Heaviside EM systems a priori — refutes the erroneous argument that no Maxwell-Heaviside system can output more energy than the operator himself inputs from an external power supply. To adamantly continue to challenge something already experimentally demonstrated by every charge and dipole in the universe is the epitomy of scientific blindness.

As have others, Sen {641} called this source charge paradox the "most difficult" problem in electrodynamics. However, the basis for its solution - absorption and transduction of virtual KM energy from the vacuum via the broken symmetry of a charge or dipole in its vacuum energy exchange — has now been known in particle physics for nearly a half-century {642a-642d}. It is not included in the Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz theory. Neither the proven vacuum interaction with Maxwellian system nor the broken symmetry in that interaction has been added to the model.

The present author has proposed an EM wave solution {643} to the source charge problem, by reinterpreting Whittaker's {644} decomposition of the scalar potential (as between the ends of a dipole) and treating the "isolated charge" and its clustered virtual charges {645} of opposite signs as a set of composite dipoles. Each of the dipoles then becomes a broken symmetry in the energetic exchange with the vacuum. Hence the charge pours out observable EM energy with no observable energy input because the input energy is in virtual photon form.

In the solution, the EM energy is input to the charge or dipole from the time-domain, so conservation of EM energy flow is upheld in 4-space, while time-like symmetry and space-like symmetry are broken individually. Powerful support for the proposed solution was given in a quantum field theory argument by Mandl and Shaw {646} nearly three decades ago. We challenge any scientist skeptical of C0P>1.0 Maxwellian systems to produce a solution of the source charge problem in Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz theory alone. In conventional theory, every charge in the universe experimentally exhibits COP = oo. Any theory conflicting with a replicable experiment is falsified a priori.

## Credit Score Booster

There are many misconceptions about credit scores out there. There are customers who believe that they don’t have a credit score and many customers who think that their credit scores just don’t really matter. These sorts of misconceptions can hurt your chances at some jobs, at good interest rates, and even your chances of getting some apartments.

## Post a comment