The idea I’m trying to introduce is that of an electric field intended as a deformation of the ether. Many thinkers tried to give a unifying explanation for all the existing things. It is the idea that everything physical is made of the same basic substance. The concept holds up well under modern science. Plato introduced Chora as a principle endowed with receptacle like properties. Aristotle did the same with his Hyle, indefinite matter that receives a form and definiteness. These are concepts which have much to do with energy or matter-energy.
The stress induced in the ether
In the same way, I would like to associate the electric field to a similar conception of the magnetic field B(r). This is a function of the distance and deformation or stress induced in the ether. It is possible to visualize the field strength lines of this deformation by putting some iron powder between two magnets on a table. You will see the powder to get arranged according to the magnetic field lines.
Electric and magnetic deformations
You could wonder what is the relation or maybe the difference between the electric and the magnetic fields. If they are both deformations of the ether, what could be the difference between the two? Electrical charges generate an electric field, while magnets generate a magnetic field.
Charges in motion
Øersted noticed that a magnetic needle posited near electric current deviates. An electric current (that is the result of charges in motion) generates a magnetic field. And this can be observed in addition to the electric one. Both, an electric and a magnetic field, can be the result of an electric charge. To generate a magnetic field, the charge has to move. If motionless, it generates only an electrical field and a magnetic needle is not affected in this case.
A single explanation of the whole
How can we explain this difference by staying within the boundaries of a simple, ethereal model? A lot of people tried to do this. They were dreaming to be able to explain gravity, celestial bodies motion, electromagnetism, the atom, optical phenomena, all of them within the limits of just a single model. Anassagora, Descartes, Lord Kelvin, Huyghens, Fresnel, Todeschini and, in antiquity, Plato and Aristotle, all of them strived to give an ethereal explanation of all things.
Perceiving the differences
Anyway, in order to give an explanation of the magnetic field, in my model, I have to understand what a magnetic field is. I want to know how is it produced, in what it differs from an electric field and why these differences can exist.
After Øersted had performed his experiment in 1820, scientists were in excitement. They verified that a conductor run by an electric current produces a magnetic field. It can attract another conductor run by another electric current. It was clear that the two currents produce a magnetic field able to attract one the other.
A strange thing happening
A conductor run by electric current can attract a magnet and vice versa. But a strange thing happens when you try to move an electric charge with a magnetic field. The charge doesn’t move. If the charge moves inside a Crookes tube and gets near a magnet, it deviates because the action of the magnetic field affects it. But if the charge is motionless the magnet doesn’t have any influence on it.
An experiment led by Faraday
An experiment led by Faraday in 1831, proved to be rather interesting. He was trying to move electric charges with an electromagnet, i.e. a coil supplied by a battery wrapped around a ferromagnetic torus. On the other side of the torus, he set a different coil. This was a wrapped coil connected with a galvanometer. By doing so, Faraday intended to register the movement of even the slightest charge induced by the electric coil.
A needle shortly deviating
Passage of current in the coil would produce a magnetic field able to deviate the needle of the galvanometer. Faraday saw that no current was generated in the torus until the switch was closed. When he opened the switch, he observed for a very short moment that the needle deviated with a short impulse.
Faraday understood that the static magnetic field that the battery generated in induction was not able to move the electric charges extant in the iron. It was necessary a variation in the magnetic field to move a charge and produce an electric current in the torus. When he opened the switch, as a consequence, the magnetic field was passing from the maximum value to zero in a very short time. This sudden variation produced an electric current in the torus registered by the deviation of the galvanometer.
An extension of the original experiment
Faraday extended this experiment trying to move a magnet inside a coil connected with a galvanometer.
He saw that a moving magnetic field, i.e. a variable magnetic field, due only to the movement, produced an electric current registered by the galvanometer.
Reasoning from an ethereal point of view
Now, I wonder how this phenomenon could be explained from an ethereal point of view. How can we justify the difference between the electric and the magnetic fields?
Let’s go back to the premises. An electric field is an etheron wind that moves toward or from the charge. Gravity is a wind of etherons with an acceleration of 9.81 m/s2. Similarly, an electric field is a wind that moves the etherons with a certain acceleration. The acceleration is necessary to move the charge.
The charge is a vortex that contains etherons, i.e. particles with a certain mass. The energy of the vortex has also some characteristics of the mass. To move a mass, as you know, a force is needed. According to the second principle of mechanics F=m*a, to produce a force an acceleration is necessary.
A new hypothesis
The hypothesis that I want now to introduce is that the magnetic field is a wind of etherons with the following characteristics:
- endowed with constant speed.
- does not possess any acceleration.
- devoid of the possibility to put in motion an electric charge.
An object is thrown into a river
Someone could think that, if a body is thrown into a river, it is led away by the current, in any case. It doesn’t matter if the speed of the water is constant or not. But, in this case, you have to consider that a charge is vortex made. A vortex in a river is motionless because it can cut the flux and it is not driven away by the water.
I can conclude that a magnetic field is static, with a constant speed of the etherons. To have acceleration the magnetic field has to move: you have this way a speed changing in time, i.e. acceleration. The acceleration is necessary to move a charge and create an electric current.
Understanding why a magnet can generate its own field
However, a further question comes to the mind. Which is the reason why two magnets are able to attract one the other? A static magnetic field is not able to move a charge but it can move another magnet. Why? We have to understand how a magnet generates its proper field.
In a magnet, according to Ampere, charges are continuously moving. They generate an induced magnetic field. This magnetic field enters into the second magnet where there are other moving charges. These charges interact with the incoming magnetic field, by producing a magnetic, attractive or repulsive force. This depends on the direction of the rotation of the charges.
So, even if the magnetic field is static, it can move another magnet. This is because, inside a magnet, the charges are already moving.
A short synthesis
In short, by this article, I have tried to explain that both, the electric and the magnetic field, are generated by the ether. An electric field is a wind of accelerated etherons, while a magnetic field is a wind of etherons moving at a constant speed.