I can almost follow the interesting points being made. Don't bite my head off but one comment stuck out.

"So in my opinion Zo, which is 4pi times your R, is the fundamental property."

Now resistance is part of impedance in AC 101 studies.

This Zo would be the squareroot of the resistance squared plus the reactance squared.

Note the first line disclaimer. Lol.

First let me say that this site has proven to be a breath of fresh air. Exhilarating.

Great thought provoking questions. Great responses and insight.

Keep in mind that when studying electromagnetism this is a study wherein the

the teachers and instructors of it can't even agree on the units!

Dollard makes this observation.

There is bound to be some disagreement not only due to the unit mess but due

to how one has been taught to approach certain aspects of the discipline.

This is one reason why I stick to the dimensional analysis and the algebra.

It is virtually infallible. Given the reigning ambiguities over units one might think

this is doomed to failure. But bear in mind there are only 4 basic fundamental

units; mass, charge, length, and time.

(GFT demonstrates that even mass,charge, and length are equivalent, but that's grist for another mill.)

The point is, given these 4 units any and every physical entity can be expressed as some combination

of these 4, including temperature and heat.

Now having said that, this discussion on Z-nought demonstrates the different approaches one may

take in trying to get a handle on its function and expression. Now it is clear to me that my

R is indeed the fundamental resistance of space. There must be 3 such resistances such as xyz or

ijk. We have resistance, reactance,

*and* reluctance. Thus the R

_{x}, R

_{y}, and R

_{z}of one of my earlier posts. This isn't a guess. It has to be the case given the definition of reactance.

Z

_{0} is the resultant of these 3 aspects of my R. (And for those of you who take issue with

the phrase "it has to be" ,sorry, but algebra makes some conclusions ineluctable.)

Now here is where it gets exciting. Given these discussions, I can prove mathematically why and how Z-nought

assumes a spherical impedance. This also will provide a more concrete conceptualization of space curving.

Not only that but seeing my R as being an aspect of precession I can and will analyze it as such and will algebraically derive a whole host of expressions.

It will/should firmly establish my theory of the primordial magnetic field.

(It is posited by the GFT that it is the magnetic field, from which all issues forth, not the electric field. Again grist for another mill)

I will also show that reluctance is not a fiction.

It is real and it exists in its own right, just as an electromagnetic centrifugal force, exists and is real in its own right.

Some of these expressions will undoubtedly coincide with preexisting well established electromagnetic expressions.

Most likely I'll just reaffirm several of the equations of Steinmetz and Dollard.

But some may be new and novel expressions akin to my R. It has become obvious that R is actually the resistance of of this "inner space".

And yes I should be able to actually mathematically and even graphically demonstrate just what this inner space is.

But just as my induction equations demonstrate, algebra and units alone can take us very deeply into establishing

many of the rules and behavior of electromagnetism absent any/very little prevailing theory.

Perhaps some or one of these equations may take us closer to the realm of greater efficiency.