Why c is the limit

[Farsight]

]You evaded the answer again. You're evading the quantum of quantum mechanics.

Farsight, I think that you are being too literal-minded about the term "displacement current". And no, Maxwell-thumping doesn't count. You are willing to ignore his work when he makes time an independent variable, just as you ignore that in Newtonianism, relativity, and quantum mechanics.

I'm not being too literal-minded on displacement current. The electromagnetic wave is a field-variation without a charged particle. So there's a current. And Understanding Electromagnetism explains why it's a displacement current. And time remains an independent variable. But it's an emergent property of motion through space rather than something you can move through.

Farsight, you don't know what you are talking about. All you do is quote-mine nonmathematical descriptions and whine about how irrelevant mathematics supposedly is.

Not true.

That's related to timelike vs. spacelike intervals, I think. So it's another mined quote.

No it isn't. It's Einstein talking about relativity, making it clear that "The non-divisibility of the four-dimensional continuum of events does not at all, however, involve the equivalence of the space co-ordinates with the time co-ordinate". And this is backed up by fact. You have freedom of motion through space, you do not have freedom of motion through time. Now come on, admit that space and time are not coequal instead of dismissing historical information and scientific evidence in order to cling to conviction.

[newolder]

...If this isn't bullshit then how do electrons mange to cross the universe? Surely a 'spacewarp (is) travelling entirely through itself' means that it cannot travel anywhere else. Your bullshit prediction...

Read the OP to find out.

What is your evidence that this applies to leptons too?

Pair production, annihilation, spin angular momentum, magnetic dipole moment, Einstein de-Haas effect... But forget it newolder. You keep on dismissing the evidence.

You seem very keen I 'forget it'. This confuses me because I'm one of those who cannot understand something unless/until I've either built 1 myself or seen evidence of the method at work in the hands of other monkeys such that the final product is seen across the tubez.

Massless, spin 1 bosons splitting into pairs of massive fermions (pair creation) is related to topological charge how? The skyrmion link you gave supplies a maths of the shell model of the atomic nucleus. How do you fold/cut/slice the 'topological distinct' skyrmion solutions without creating a discontinuity in the proposed solution? Especially since these are 'not allowed' in physics?

[Farsight]

You seem very keen I 'forget it'. This confuses me because I'm one of those who cannot understand something unless/until I've either built 1 myself or seen evidence of the method at work in the hands of other monkeys such that the final product is seen across the tubez.

You can't understand it because you dismiss the evidence. Evidence like pair production:



..along with annihilation, spin angular momentum, magnetic dipole moment, the Einstein de-Haas effect, and so on. This evidence tells you that the electron is quite literally made from light, and that the rotation is real.

Massless, spin 1 bosons splitting into pairs of massive fermions (pair creation) is related to topological charge how? The skyrmion link you gave supplies a maths of the shell model of the atomic nucleus. How do you fold/cut/slice the 'topological distinct' skyrmion solutions without creating a discontinuity in the proposed solution? Especially since these are 'not allowed' in physics?

You don't. You create two solitons with opposite rotation like you create two opposite eddies. I explained this in Understanding Electromagnetism, where I gave ample scientific evidence along with historical references. You dismissed that too. That's all you ever do, newolder.

[colubridae]

You seem very keen I 'forget it'. This confuses me because I'm one of those who cannot understand something unless/until I've either built 1 myself or seen evidence of the method at work in the hands of other monkeys such that the final product is seen across the tubez.

You can't understand it because you dismiss the evidence. Evidence like pair production:



..along with annihilation, spin angular momentum, magnetic dipole moment, the Einstein de-Haas effect, and so on. This evidence tells you that the electron is quite literally made from light, and that the rotation is real.

Massless, spin 1 bosons splitting into pairs of massive fermions (pair creation) is related to topological charge how? The skyrmion link you gave supplies a maths of the shell model of the atomic nucleus. How do you fold/cut/slice the 'topological distinct' skyrmion solutions without creating a discontinuity in the proposed solution? Especially since these are 'not allowed' in physics?

You don't. You create two solitons with opposite rotation like you create two opposite eddies. I explained this in Understanding Electromagnetism, where I gave ample scientific evidence along with historical references. You dismissed that too. That's all you ever do, newolder.

Where are the missing positrons?

and who is loren?

[newolder]

You seem very keen I 'forget it'. This confuses me because I'm one of those who cannot understand something unless/until I've either built 1 myself or seen evidence of the method at work in the hands of other monkeys such that the final product is seen across the tubez.

You can't understand it because you dismiss the evidence. Evidence like pair production:

Sure.

..along with annihilation, spin angular momentum, magnetic dipole moment, the Einstein de-Haas effect, and so on. This evidence tells you that the electron is quite literally made from light, and that the rotation is real.

Bullshit.

Massless, spin 1 bosons splitting into pairs of massive fermions (pair creation) is related to topological charge how? The skyrmion link you gave supplies a maths of the shell model of the atomic nucleus. How do you fold/cut/slice the 'topological distinct' skyrmion solutions without creating a discontinuity in the proposed solution? Especially since these are 'not allowed' in physics?

You don't.

Then why did you bring skyrmions to the topic?

You create two solitons with opposite rotation like you create two opposite eddies. I explained this in Understanding Electromagnetism, where I gave ample scientific evidence along with historical references.

Why do I have to do anything? Isn't physics independent of me?

You dismissed that too. That's all you ever do, newolder.

Nope. Sometimes I ride a bike.