The thorny way of truth - Free Energy Community

This- 124 -Invariance with translational non-acceleration motion may have acausal dependence, upon that entralnment of standing waves with themotion of the apparatus. The Lorentz formulation, with its timetransformation condition, becomes a mathematical consequence ofassuming that 'the physical constraints on the free electron or thefree wave are identically those applicable to bulk matter andstanding waves.It would seem that not enough is said on this subject in theliterature and, havlng'become concerned by this general problem, itbecomes very difficult to accept Lorentz invariance as proven. Arecent concluding comment by J. S. Bell, speaking to adistinguished scientific audience on the subject of action-at-adistancein quantum mechanics, was that Lorentz invariance has•become very problematic* and that 'an ether would be the cheapestsolution' [ 1] .really guides one to focus attention upon theissue of the preferred frame rather than paradoxical features ofrelativlstic time dilation.There are still so many crucial questions to be answered that itseems to the 'author to be somewhat premature to search for physicalJustification for the formal features of the theory of relativityuntil the answers are known.In :5pite of this we can reach some conclusions oninterpretation, and concerning the first question above, if weexamine how relativity applies to the simple electrodynamicinteraction between two parallel wires carrying electric current inthe same direction and both moving in that same direction.The observer sees positive electric charge carried one way bythe atomic lattice of the wire substance and an equal negativeelectric charge having two components of motion, one correspondingto it being carried along with the atomic lattice and the othercorresponding to the electric current Involved. The force betweenthe two wires .arises from the mutual Interactions of all these