DR. KABBARY’S NEW EM EQUATIONS

jls.jpg (2408 bytes) Publisher’s Introduction
em_a.jpg (1661 bytes) s I have stated on occasion, this section of antenneX is primarily for "Guest Editorials" to provide a podium for our readers to voice their opinions to the rest of the world, which at this moment is 180 countries. This editorial thus provides space and a chance for folks to speak about antenna and radio-related subjects, including new theories and concepts. This month, to be followed by further installments, Dr. Fathi Kabbary, co-inventor of the Crossed Field Antenna, discusses his mathematical theories used to arrive at his corrections to Maxwell’s Equations presented in a paper more than a decade ago. That paper was produced to explain his theory about the Poynting Vector Synthesis that is the basis for the Crossed Field Antenna. It is indeed a very controversial subject as Maxwell’s Equations have been considered as rock-solid for 130 years, thus anyone who challenges them are treading in a very touchy subject.

None-the-less, one of the main purposes of antenneX is to provoke new thought and in doing so, it serves that purpose to present even what some will consider as controversial theories. It has always been thought that if Dr. Kabbary could more clearly present his “corrections” perhaps we could all better appreciate the concept of the Poynting Vector Synthesis.

What is lacking—and has been lacking from the start—is a step that has been performed for Maxwell's original work—the translation of the causal forms into mathematics for which there are quantitative solutions. Comparing the present set of equations derived from Maxwell's forms and from Kabbary's forms would provide substance to the Kabbary claims.

At present, the work has this form: if we look at matters from our (the CFA group) perspective, this is what the Maxwellian equations become in curl-notation form. The remaining question is what they become in mathematical form comparable to the differential equations derived for the originals, and what quantitative differences emerge from their new formulations. It is one thing to have a non-zero experimental result and quite another to have a set of equations that correctly predicts the non-zero quantity. It is hopeful as this series progresses, all gaps will be filled in IF the theories are correct.

I have left Dr. Kabbary's words as he sent them to me, with only minor edits for punctuation and spelling. This procedure is fitting in this editorial slot. For most of the content of antenneX, we carefully edit the content for quality presentation, technical accuracy, and even grammar. The personal and editorial nature of the columns in this series call for a different method of handling, one that preserves the words of the author just as sent to us as intended by this platform.We would not wish to alter the intended thought by a revision of the language of presentation. Dr. Kabbary promises that more will follow on this subject. — Jack L. Stone, Publisher

fmk.jpg (9846 bytes) DR. KABBARY’S NEW EM EQUATIONS
By Dr. F. M. Kabbary

his is to show that the present electromagnetic equations of Jim Clerk Maxwell are in trouble and in need for major corrections to find the solutions for many unsolved applied physics applications as the present uncontrollable nuclear fusion projects (e.g., the JET project) to save more future decades needed to solve the plasma dynamic stability problems, since the present shape of Maxwell's equations were the reason behind the delay of the progress for these projects to get them commercialized. Solutions will be provided when needed. This article can also explain the atomic radiation mechanism.

Also, Einstein was defeated to prove the wave particle duality because he had used the present (uncorrected) Maxwell's equations. Maxwell's equations were hard to solve because the fourth Maxwell equation was not correct.

This work has been started by us as an antenna group in Aberdeen and has reached its final stage later in Egypt.

Also to get the correct antenna theory rather than the present antenna theory which is full of the well known many approximations, assumptions and the unknown near field mechanism of field reaction of building wave propagation or power radiation, only the assumed far field, and its magnetic vector potential related to the assumed sinusoidal (of no proof) current distribution on the antenna elements, using moment methods and mode theory; both full of the severe approximations of the phase relationship in both macro and the neglected microscopic level, this microscopic level in which field reactions occurs.

Most of textbooks have derived the wave equations as follows:

The major discovery was that the displacement current (A.C) has appeared in D.C. circuits, while all textbooks have shown that the displacement current is zero in D.C. circuits, but we found it is not zero! This was enough to put the fourth Maxwell's equation in trouble to be not correct, confirming that the direct source of the magnetic field is the displacement current D', not the conduction current J, in both D.C. or A.C circuits, and the J term will not be a source of any field and only is the current flow rate no more.

We shall confirm now that Ampere's law does not exist, i.e. the J conduction current is not anymore the source of the magnetic field H for both D.C. current or A.C. current.

Ampere has started his phenomenon which was a magnetic field is appeared as circles around a current passing in a conductor; this was before Maxwell’s time, then Maxwell came and was worried about charge conservation problem, ignoring energy conservation, and he mathematically turned Ampere's phenomenon into:

Ampere's law                   J = curl H,
added it to his law              D' = curl H,
to has his fourth equation   J + D' = curl H

How naturally or physically the magnetic is produced form two different Mother sources J or D' or both, it is elegant Nature to get some have one Mother not more.

This means that either the J term or the D' term has to be dropped form the fourth Maxwell's equation to have only one source for the magnetic field .

Theory:
Consider a fixed point P (stationary frame) close to one charge moving with constant velocity v in the z direction in the microscopic level, i.e., D.C. condition, as shown in the figure 1 drawn below.

Through the point P, gives rise to time -varying electric field and thus displacement current D' appears at the fixed point P (see figure 1) located inside the conductor for D.C. condition. So, in D.C., the AC component D' appears. While textbooks have considered D' is zero for D.C.

From Maxwell’s Law, the resulting magnetic field distribution surrounding the moving charge is evaluated from the vector reaction equation

D' > curl H

This is to show that the direct source of the magnetic field H is the displacement current D' not J in D.C. circuits, as well as D' has appeared in D.C., which is a new discovery too.

This is exactly equal to the magnetic field created when D.C. current J is moving in the conductor.

So, in D.C. Ampere's law becomes Maxwell law and Ampere's law does not exist anymore. This means the fourth Maxwell 's equation has been reduced to Maxwell law and J became useless term for radiation or wave propagation.

The new electro magnetic equations became now, for this century:

p > div D

0> div B

B' > - curl E

D' > curl H

(The J term is defined as nqv but not a source of magnetic field, only charge flow rate)

The above four equations are causality not equality equations, mainly the third and fourth equations are the field reaction equations. These new equations will help to solve all non-solved problems of recent applied physics projects.

In conclusion, the above is further illustrated in Figure 1 below:

Figure 1

~ antenneX ~ September 2002 Online Issue #65 ~

Print/Save Article