Abstracts Details

The field approach to thermodynamics, proposed by the authors in [1], is used to analyze field cycles similar to the Carnot cycle. The evaluation of energy losses in such cycles turns out to be qualitatively similar to Carnot but there are some essential differences between them. The field estimation includes dependence on a greater number of parameters and contains not only initial and final temperature. This additional dependence let us formulate recommendations to optimize the work of heat engines and the necessary conditions for the efficiency coefficient to exceed 1.

The concept of thermodynamic fields is introduced, and a mathematical apparatus for its description is proposed. Such an approach enables us to shed new light on a lot of problems; for instance, on the second principle of thermodynamics, Planck's formula, and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. It is an old idea that Brownian motion is essential for description an solution of the Quantum Mechanics problems. Nonstohastic description Brownian motion is also proposed using tensor mathematics.

A system of mechanical dimensionalities is proposed for electrodynamics. It turns out that permittivity has the dimension of mass density. Therefore, the electric permittivity constant is interpreted as ether mass density. The vacuum magnetic permeability has dimension of compressibility, and it is therefore interpreted as free ether compressibility. The electric field has dimension of velocity. That enables us to compare its qualities with those of gravity, which has dimension of acceleration.

The concept of thermodynamic fields is introduced, and a mathematical apparatus for its description is proposed. Such an approach

enables one to shine a new sight on a lot of problems; for instance, on the second principle thermodynamics, Planck?s formula,

Heizenberg?s uncertainty principle.

From my point of view, the pressing questions include:

- Do you agree with Maxwell equations? What do they describe? Perhaps the direct force formulas by Gauss, Weber, Spencer et al, Grassman, Ampere, Wittaker are better in this or that aspect.
- Do Maxwell equetions describe interaction? If not does the Lorentz force formula do it OK? May we use one instead of the other? Your propositions?
- Why is the relativistic approach sometimes successful? Can we reach the same effects in another way? Does this other way predict anything in addition?
- Your opinion on the connections between electricity and gravity.
- The Gravifield has dimension of acceleration. In order to compare two different things, we must describe them with the help of the same language. What is the mechanical dimension of electricity?

Certain generalization of Maxwell equations was proposed in paper [1]. It implies total time derivatives instead of the partial ones. Partial solution of this system was found for the case of the fields induced by electric charges. Scalar product of electric fields created by different charges determines their interaction energy and vector product of their magnetic fields determines their interaction impulse. Having calculated interaction energy gradient we obtain interaction force as Huygens understood it and having calculated impulse total time derivative we obtain Newton?s interaction force. It turns out that these forces physical sense and their mathematical description essentially differ. Gradiental part depends on charges velocities product and is equal to zero if at least one of the charges is in rest. This part incorporates force formulas earlier proposed by Ampere, Whittaker and Lorentz. The last one is usually defined by interaction of a certain charge called test charge and fields induced by other charge. Actually it coincides with force formula proposed by Grassman earlier. Proposed formula in contrast to Lorentz one satisfies the third Newtonial law. The second Newtonian part of the force formula depends on differences product of the charges velocities and accelerations. Therefore it predicts interaction in particular between moving and standing charges in addition to Coulomb one. It contains items earlier proposed for force description by Gauss and Weber. As in the case of Lorentz force formula it adds items which make Gauss and Weber force symmetric. Certain part of this force is light velocity c2 inverse and a part of it is c3 inverse. Apparently these items are essential for electroweak interaction. This paper is devoted to similar investigation of gravitational forces created by moving masses. Corresponding fields are described by Maxwell type equations in which first time derivatives are changed for the second ones. One can say that Electricity is a field of velocities and gravity is a field of accelerations. Solutions of such a system are used to construct interaction energy and interaction impulse. Gradient of scalar product of corresponding gravitational fields and second time derivative of vector product of gravimagnetic fields turn to be accurate analogues of electrodynamic interaction. But here forces depend not only on velocities and accelerations but on third and fourth derivatives as well.

Connections between electricity and gravity are investigated.

In previous papers, toroidal models of electron and proton were proposed. Tangential velocities of the particles drawing electron torus surface are equal to light velocity c in free ether. Therefore, electron does not induce additional vortices in ether at least as a first approximation. Meridional velocity of the particles drawing proton are 1.42c. This explains why proton induces series of vortices in the proton surrounding ether. The local light velocities in the first 194 vortices decrease up to (...) and then increase up to (...) making steps. Nuclear 194 vortices have mass of proton and atomic 137 vortices have mass of electron. There exists a transition belt of 1836 vortices between 194 nuclear and 137 atomic lines. Local light velocity in these 1836 vortices is stable and equal to (...)/137 and their mass decreases from the proton mass to the electron mass. Such gravitational belts with decreasing mass are essential in multi-electronic atoms. In particular, they define quantity of electrons in hulls(sp?) and character of X-ray radiation.

In the author's previous papers vortical models of electron and proton as a torus were proposed. Torus mass performs two rotational movements, in equatorial and meridional planes. Equatorial rotation defines electric charge and meridional rotation defines its spin. If the vectors of equatorial and meridional rotation constitute right triple, the particle posesses charge of one sign; if they constitute left triple, the opposite sign. The author's other papers tried to clarify the concept of magnetic moment for electron and proton and its connection with generalized Maxwell equations. This paper investigates the same problems for the neutron

Gauss and Weber proposed generalization of Coulomb?s law for the case of moving charges.Such interaction depends on relative velocities and accellerations of the charges. When Maxwell field approach was accepted by scientific community, Lorentz proposed his force formula which describes interaction between electric and magnetic fields induced in the space by a certain charge and another charge called test charge. Actually this formula describes interaction between these charges and depends on absolute velocities of the charges. It does not take into consideration charges? accelerations, and does not cover other force formulas proposed by Ampere, Whittaker and Gauss, although all of them were confirmed by experiment. A formula covering all mentioned ones and introducing some additional items was proposed by the author as a generalization of Maxwell?s equations and Lorenz force formula. The proposed report is devoted to analyses of gravidynamic force, which generalizes Newton?s gravitational law in the case of moving masses. It includes second, third, and fourth time derivatives.

This paper is aka "On Gravidynamic Force".

In papers and vortical models of electron and proton as a torus were proposed. Torus mass performs two movements: in equatorial and meridional planes. Equatorial rotation defines electric charge and meridional rotation its spin. If vectors of angular velocities in equatorial and meridional planes constitute right triple the particle possesses charge of one sign if they constitute left triple- the opposite one.

In paper concept of magnetic moment of electron and proton and its connection with idea of magnetic charge in generalized Maxwell equations was investigated. This paper tries to clarify sense of all those concepts for neutron.

Historically, electrodynamics began when Gauss and Weber generalized Coulomb law for the case of moving charges. In the framework of this approach interaction force between two charges depends on their velocities difference, i.e. on their relative movement. Some authors (for instance [1]) show that this approach has not been exhausted yet. Spencer and her colleagues [2] have generalized this approach and shown that some experiments that cannot be explained within the framework of present-day electrodynamics may be naturally explained in terms of relative movement. These and other papers began a rebirth period for Gauss-Weber ideas. In particular Bernstein [3] shows that Weber?s formula has already covered all ?relativistic? effects. Historically, the Gauss-Weber approach was eclipsed by the field Maxwell approach, and forgotten by the end of 19th century. For instance, Einstein apparently didn?t know Weber?s papers. At any rate, he never mentioned Gauss and Weber, although the resemblance between the consequences of the two theories is surprising. Maxwell theory investigates the problem, not of charges interaction, but of the ?field? created by a moving charge in the surrounding space. In order to come to interaction force, an additional postulate is introduced. It is usually called Lorentz force formula. This formula describes interaction of the fields created by a moving charge with another charge called ?test charge?. This test charge is supposed not to create fields of its own but external fields created by the first charge are supposed to directly act on this test charge. Although Lorentz force formula predicts results of many experiments its effect in today form looks completely unsatisfactory. Many authors (for instance [2]) shows that Lorentz force formula isn?t able to explain a lot of experimental facts. Lorentz force asymmetry also leads to many theoretical and aesthetic problems. If it is considered exhaustive we come to contradiction to the third Newtonian law: it allows situations when one charge acts on the other and this other doesn?t act on the first one. In addition if we don?t accept either concept, then the very idea of ?absolute velocity? which appears in Lorentz force formula turns to be suspended. Actually dissatisfaction with this side of the formula stimulated Einstein with his Relativity Theory. In other terms Lorentz force formula in its present-day form is asymmetric and not universal. Ampere [4] and Whittaker [5] proposed formulas of their own to describe charge interaction force. They did this in terms of ?differential currents?. When paraphrased in terms of moving charges these formulas could expand and symmetries Lorentz force formula. But their ?field sense?, i.e., their connection with Maxwell equations, was not clear until recently. This paper?s author proposed certain generalization as Maxwell equation as Lorentz force formula [6], [7]. The generalized formula implies Lorentz, Ampere, Whittaker, Weber and Spenser formulas. It also includes some additional items not known previously. For instance it predicts cluster effect, Bohm-Aharonov effect and electro-weak interaction. The Weber formula has the same invalidity as the Lorentz one: it is asymmetric and not universal. The generalized formula includes items which make Weber formula symmetric and coordinate it to the whole set of experiments. The generalized formula for charge interaction is naturally modernized to describe photons interaction [8]. And this explains some quantum paradoxes.

**References**

- Andre K.T. Assis, Relational Mechanics (Apeiron, Montreal, 1999).
- D.E. Spencer, G. Coutu, W.W. Bowley, U.Y. Shama, P.J. Mann, "The Experimental Verification of the New Gaussian Equation for the Force between Moving Charges: Overhead Welding", International Conference on Space, Time and Motion., September 23-29, 1996, St. Petersburg, Russia.
- V.M. Bernstein, " Electrodynamics and Gravitation Based on Trends Preceeding Maxwell and Einstein", Galilean Electrodynamics 11, (5) 91 (2000).
- A.M. Ampere, Theorie mathematique des phenomenes electrodynamiques uniquement deduite de l?experience (Blanchard, Paris, 1958).
- E.T. Whittaker, A History of the Theories of Aether & Electricity, p 91 (Longman, Green and Co, London, 1910).
- J.G. Klyushin, " A Field Generation for the Lorentz Force Formula", Galilean Electrodynamics 11, (5), 83 (200).
- J.G. Klyushin, " Generalised Electrodynamics and Lorentz Force Formula", NPA conference proceeding, Storrs, Connecticut, 2003.
- J.G. Klyushin, " Wave Solution and Quantum Mechanics - Part 1", Galilean -Electrodynamics 15, Special Issues 2, GED ? East, Fall (2004).

Papers [1] and [2] proposed to describe a gravidynamic field with the help of Maxwell type equations in which first time derivative is changed with the second one. Such a field is characterized by a certain constant that has dimension of acceleration. This characterizes a gravidynamic field just in the same sense as light velocity characterizes an electrodynamic field. One can say that electricity is the field of velocities and gravity is the field of accelerations. In order to describe interaction of two gravidynamic fields, a formula can be proposed similar to generalized formula for electrodynamic fields proposed in [3]. This formula shows that two masses interaction depends, not only on distance, but on accelerations and third and forth time derivatives in general. This is also similar to electric charge interaction, which depends on velocities and accelerations. In a static case, this formula naturally comes to Newton?s gravity law. The dynamic version of gravitational interaction predicts planets perihelion displacement, gravitational ?red shift?, differential rotation of the Sun and gaso-liquid planets, an additional force in galaxies which today is interpreted as ?dark mass?. On the Earth, this formula predicts continental drift, explains the observed character of oceanic and atmospheric currents, changes in the velocity of Earth rotation and some other effects. In the framework of this approach, a model of the electron as a massive torus is proposed. The mass drawing this torus performs two curling movement: in equatorial and meridional planes of the torus. Equatorial rotation defines charge and meridional rotation defines electron spin. Experiment shows that the force of electric repulsion of two electrons is 4.17 x 10^{42} times bigger than the force of their gravitational attraction. This helps to find angular velocity of electron equatorial rotation. It is 8.145 x 10^{20} rad/s. It coincides with De-Broglie frequency of electron in rest and radius of the greater circumference defining torus coincides with its Compton Wave length. If (omega) is the angular velocity of the electron equatorial rotation, then (...equation...) (1); Electron charge (...equation...)kg/c (2) Here *m* is electron mass also gained from electrodynamic reasoning and coinciding with the experimental value. Charge sign is defined by the screw which angular velocity of equatorial rotation constitutes with angular velocity of meridional rotation: it is right or left. If correlation (2) is established one can express all electrodynamic quantities in mechanical terms [4]. In particular dielectric constant has dimension of mass density and magnetic constant has dimension of compressibility of a certain medium that fills the space. Physical text books usually call it "physical vacuum". The author does not use this term because of its logic and aesthetic ugliness and prefers term "ether". Any "a priori" qualities are not prescribed to this term except those that are consequences of the experiments and proposed theories. In particular this means that light velocity in free ether is just speed of the sound in it and (...equation...) (3).

**References**

- J.G. Klyushin, "On the Maxwell Approach to Gravity", Report in seminar of
*St. Petersburg Physical Society*, St. Petersburg, Russia, 1995. - J.G. Klyushin, "Electro - and Gravidynamics", 13th NPA Conference, Storrs, Connecticut, 2003.
- J.G. Klyushin, "A Field Generalization for the Lorentz Force Formula",
*Galilean Electrodynamics*, 11, (5) 83 (2000). - J.G. Klyushin, "Mechanical Dimensions for Electrodynamic Quantities",
*Galilean Electrodynamics*, 11, (5), 90 (2000). - Additional information: http://www.physical-congress.spb.ru/.

Corollaries of papers [1] and [2] are not only an electron model, but a proton model as well [3-5]. The proton is also a torus. Angular velocity amplitude of its equatorial rotation is 1836 times less than of electron. But angular velocity of its meridian rotation is 3765 times bigger. This last fact makes the situation in ether in the vicinity of the proton essentially other than in the case of electron. Local light velocity in the vicinity of electron is equal to light velocity *c* in free ether. But it is equal to sqrt2 *c* in the vicinity of the proton. It is evident that it must come to at a certain distance from proton. But this convergence turns out to be discrete and non monotonic. In other terms, the proton gives rise to a system of standing waves or curls in the surrounding ether. A local light velocity in this curls decrease to *c*/137 and then increase up to *c* making 137 steps. These 137 curls or force lines in Faraday terms differ from all the other in that their radius is greater and angular velocity is less than of electron. This means that electron can be inside these and only these curls. In particular this means that electron in unstirred hydrogen atom is in rest inside the first atomic force line with local light velocity *c*/137 . In multi-electronic atoms, electrons with non-zero orbital momentum move inside their maternal force line. But in order electron could move infinitely long it must move under conditions of superconductivity. It was shown in [6] that such electron must move with double local light velocity. When it is knocked out of its maternal force line it comes to new force line with less velocity than it is necessary for superconductive movement on this new line. It moves on the new line with friction. The accumulated energy is radiated and the electron comes back perhaps not on the very material but lower force line (force line with lower local light velocity).

**References**

- J.G. Klyushin, "On the Maxwell Approach to Gravity", Report in seminar of
*St. Petersburg Physical Society*, St. Petersburg, Russia, 1995. - J.G. Klyushin, "Electro - and Gravidynamics",
*11th NPA Conference*, Storrs, Connecticut, 2003. - J.G. Klyushin, "Proton Construction: Experimental Approach",
*12th NPA Conference*, Denver, Colorado, 2004. - J.G. Klyushin, "Hydrogen Atom Structure: Experimental Approach",
*12th NPA Conference*, Denver, Colorado, 2004. - J.G. Klyushin, "A Field Generalization for the Lorentz Force Formula",
*Galilean Electrodynamics*, 11, (5) 83 (2000). - J.G. Klyushin, "Electron Dynamics in Ether",
*Galilean Electrodynamics*, 13, Special Issues Number 2, GED-East, 37, Fall (2002). - Additional information: http://www.physical-congress.spb.ru/.

Theories of electro- and gravi-dynamics were proposed in [1], [2], and [3] yield that electric charge *q* moving with speed *V* is acted by force of ether resistance *qV* . This is an essential difference between electrically charged and electrically neutral body movement. In accord with well known Newton ether law doesn?t resist steady movement of electrically neutral body. Such resistance appears only when the body is accelerated. It is also well known that an external energy is necessary in order to sustain steady electric current. It is believed nowadays that this is because electrons in their movement collide with conductor?s atoms. But this is also necessary for charge movement in free ether. In other terms electron movement in free ether resembles rather car movement on a road then puck movement on ice. Electron moving with constant speed *V* is actually a neutral mass *m* moving with acceleration (omega*)V,* where (omega) is equatorial rotation angular velocity of the torus defining electron [3]. This problem is thoroughly investigated in [4]. Formulas describing electron movement under different conditions with subluminal and superluminal speed are found in [4]. In particular it is shown that electron must move with double local light velocity to achieve superconductivity. When matter temperature is lessened local light velocity in it is also lessened. And this enables electron moving with ordinary velocity to overcome super-conductivity barrier. It is shown in [5] that hydrodynamic effect of "additional mass" actually takes place in well known Kaufmann?s experiment now interpreted as ?relativistic effect?. This result takes place in full accord with above mentioned peculiarity of electron movement and generalized formula far Lorentz force [2].

**References**

- J.G. Klyushin, "On the Maxwell Approach to Gravity", Report in seminar of
*St. Petersburg Physical Society*, St. Petersburg, Russia, 1995. - J.G. Klyushin, "A Field Generalization for the Lorentz Force Formula",
*Galilean Electrodynamics*, V11, D5, p83. - J.G. Klyushin, "Electro - and Gravidynamics", 11th NPA Conference, Storrs, Connecticut, 2003.
- J.G. Klyushin, "Electron Dynamics in Ether",
*Galilean Electrodynamics*, Fall Special Issue, D2, p37, 2002. - J.G. Klyushin, "Generalized Electrodynamics about Forces Acting on Charge Moving in Capacitor and Solenoid", Proceeding of the Congress 2000, "Fundamental Problems of Natural Science and Engineering", v1, St. Petersburg, Russia.
- Additional information: http://www.physical-congress.spb.ru/.

The traditional Lorentz force formula involves a probe charge and an externally generated electromagnetic field that acts on that charge. Therefore, the Lorentz force formula is incapable of describing the interaction of photons, which possess electromagnetic field but do not possess charge. On the basis of a generalized force formula proposed in Part I, which describes the interaction of electromagnetic fields independent of whether they are originated by charges or not, formulas for momentum, energy, and force interaction between two photons, two charges, or one charge and a photon, are found here.

An earlier paper proposed equations of gravidynamic field, and based on that, a vortex-shaped model of the electron. By analogy with the electron vortical model, a model of proton is here constructed. Like the eletron, the proton is also considered as a massive vortical torus, but its equatorial angular velocity is 1863 times less and its meridional angular velocity is 3672 times more.

This article further develops vortical models of the electron and the proton and the proton, in which each particle is a massive torus with two degrees of rotation. The article is devoted to investigating standing waves originated in the ether by a proton. Just such waves define discrete spectra of optical electrons and bremsstrahlung. Standing waves in the vicinity of the proton define nuclear forces.

A wave version for generalized Maxwell equations is proposed. The wave created by a moving electron is described on the basis of a torus model proposed earlier in a paper devoted to a Maxwell approach to gravity. This wave is described by torsion oscillations. A corresponding vortex carries mass. Therefore, moving electrons and photons possess qualities as both waves and particles. Conformity of the derived results with experiments underlying quantum mechanics is verified. A fact that staggered the author was found: the electron creates a time-independent standing wave that defines the Coulomb force. In particular, this means that the Coulomb force is a long-range one.

A model is proposed in which an electron moves in a fluid medium, or ether, which is assumed to fill all space. This model explains many ?relativistic? effects, plus the results of many experiments that are now explained in only an ad hoc manner, or not explained at all.