Brad,

Don't you see that is the plan of a gatekeeper, to turn people off from ideas by turning people off from them. While Bedini did lie and say crazy things, he also copied a lot of people and shared truth here and there. Bearden also copied people. But Barrett is the real expert on these matters. Consider what you think is a distortion, in the following as the Aμ fields:

Topological Foundations of Electromagnetism by TERENCE W. BARRETT (see the book on Amazon) but pdf here:

https://epdf.pub/topological-foundations-of-electromagnetism.html"Maxwell’s equations are foundational to electromagnetic theory. They are the cornerstone of a myriad of technologies and are basic to the understanding of innumerable effects. Yet there are a few effects or phenomena that cannot be explained by the conventional Maxwell theory. This book examines those anomalous effects and shows that they can be interpreted by a Maxwell theory that is subsumed under gauge theory. Moreover, in the case of these few anomalous effects, and when Maxwell’s theory finds its place in gauge theory, the conventional Maxwell theory must be extended, or generalized, to a non-Abelian form."

"The tried-and-tested conventional Maxwell theory is of Abelian form. It is correctly and appropriately applied to, and explains, the great majority of cases in electromagnetism. What, then, distinguishes these cases from the aforementioned anomalous phenomena? It is the thesis of this book that it is the topology of the spatio temporal situation that distinguishes the two classes of effects or phenomena, and the topology that is the final arbiter of the correct choice of group algebra — Abelian or non-Abelian — to use in describing an effect."

Electromagnetic Phenomena Not Explained by Maxwell’s Equations

"The conventional Maxwell theory is a classical linear theory in which the scalar and vector potentials appear to be arbitrary and defined by boundary conditions and choice of gauge. The conventional wisdom in engineering is that potentials have only mathematical, not physical, significance. However, besides the case of quantum theory, in which it is well known that the potentials are physical constructs, there are a number of physical phenomena —both classical and quantum-mechanical— which indicate that the Aμ fields, μ=0,1,2,3, do possess physical significance as global-to-local operators or gauge fields, in precisely constrained topologies."

"A number of physical effects strongly suggest that the Maxwell field theory of electromagnetism is incomplete (too long to quote here)...."

"Formerly, treatment of the Aμ potentials as anything more than mathematical conveniences was prevented by their obvious lack of gauge invariance. 251,252 However, gauge invariance for the Aμ potentials results from situations in which fields, firstly, have a history of separate spatiotemporal conditioning and, secondly, are mapped in a many-to-one, or global-to-local, fashion (in holonomy). Such conditions are satisfied by Aμ potentials with boundary conditions, i.e. the usual empirically encountered situation. Thus, with the correct geometry and topology (i.e. with stated boundary conditions) the Aμ potentials always have physical meaning. This indicates that Maxwell’s theory can be extended by the appropriate use of topological and gauge-symmetrical concepts. The Aμ potentials are local operators mapping global spatio temporal conditions onto the local e.m. fields. The effect of this operation is measurable as a phase change, if there is a second, comparative mapping of differentially conditioned fields in a many-to-one (global-to-local) summation. With coherent fields, the possibility of measurement (detection) after the second mapping is maximized. The conventional Maxwell theory is incomplete due to the neglect of (1) a definition of the Aμ potentials as operators on the local intensity fields dependent on gauge, topology, geometry and global boundary conditions; and of (2) a definition of the constitutive relations between medium-independent fields and the topology of the medium.b Addressing these issues extends the conventional Maxwell theory to cover physical phenomena which cannot be presently explained by that theory."

"the A field was banished from playing the central role in Maxwell’s theory and relegated to being a mathematical (but not physical) auxiliary. This banishment took place during the interpretation of Maxwell’s theory by the Maxwellians,12i.e. chiefly by Heaviside, Fitzgerald, Lodge and Hertz."

"Both Heaviside and Poynting agreed that the function of a wire is as a sink into which energy passes from the medium (ether) and is convected into heat. For them, wires conduct electricity with the Poynting vector pointing at right angles to the conducting wire (cf. Ref. 19, Sec. 27-5). The modern conventional view on conduction in wires is similar, but modern theory is not straightforward about where this energy goes, yet still retains Poynting’s theorem. The energy flows, not through a current-carrying wire itself, but through the medium (ether) around it — or, rather, through whatever energy-storing substance a modern theorist imagines exists in the absence of the ether."

"But all dynamics were banished by Hertz. Hertz banished even the stresses and strains of the medium (ether) and was vigorously opposed in this by the British Maxwellians.12 Hertz even went far beyond his mentor, Helmholtz, in his austere operational formulation. Nonetheless, the Hertz orientation finally prevailed, and the modern “Maxwell theory” is today a system of equations describing electrodynamics which has lost its dynamical basis."

"1. Introduction

There are a number of reasons for questioning the completeness of the conventionally interpreted Maxwell theory of electromagnetism. It is well known that there is an arbitrariness in the definition of the A vector and scalar potentials, which, nevertheless, have been found very useful when used in calculations with boundary conditions known.253 The reasons for questioning completeness are due to experimental evidence (Sec. 3), theoretical (Sec. 4) and pragmatic (Sec. 5)."

The evidence is too lengthy and technical to quote here...

Thats !Heviside! component,and is nothing more than a Bearden distortion of what the Heviside component actually is,which has to do with distortions along transmition lines.

Anyway,i will no longer be visiting this thread.

Way to much talk,way to many claims,and totally void of any evidence what so ever.

These claims are exactly the same as Bedini's garbage.

Brad