Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies (AIAS)

The concept of field was inferred by Faraday in his electrotonic state, not by Maxwell.

Maxwell inferred only one new concept, the displacement current. His equations otherwise put together well known laws - those of Coulomb, Gauss, Faraday, and Ampere. Maxwell's work is important, but not unique.

In 1865 Maxwell produced twenty equations in twenty unkowns, based on Hamilton's quaternions.

In 1873 Heaviside inferred the much simpler and much more powerful vector laws of elctromagnetism, without which Maxwell's treatment is unworkable.

The potential in electromagnetism is a physical object, with clear physical effects as in the Aharonov Bohm effects and as in ESR, NMR and MRI. These are all based on Dirac's use of a physical potential via the minimal prescription.

Gauge theory is incorrectly based on the assumption that the potential in the Maxwell Heaviside (MH) equations is unphysical. The correct ECE equations show that the potential is the tetrad form within a proprotionality constant. There is no further need for gauge theory post ECE theory.

The gauge symmetry of electromagnetism cannot be U(1), becasue if so there would be no non-linear optical effects such as the inverse Faraday effect. There are many known flaws of this U(1) gauge theoretical approach to electromagnetism, pointed out by numerous distinguished scientists over one hundred and fifty years. These are again ignored by a small group of unscholarly adherents so the standard model.

The MH equation cannot describe all known electromagnetic phenomena as claimed by the standard modellers. It cannot describe for exampel the Faraday disk generator of 1831 or the Sagnac effect. It has only a phenomenological explanation for non-linear optics via constitutive relations extarneous to the MH field equations themselves, and phenomenological. The MH equationd are not complete descriptions of optics and electrodynamics, even on the classical level.

Quantum electrodynamics is not the most precise theory of physics. In fact it is internally inconsistent to an alarming degree (papre 85 of www.aias,us) and contains adjustable parameters. It is not a foundational theory of physics, it is phenomenological and based on cocnepts extraneous to relativity.