Is this the same IEEE that would not let Heaviside publish in their journal?
Is this the same IEEE that called Heaviside a crackpot when he came up with his equations?
Is this the same IEEE that conceded that his equations worked when they fixed the telegraphy cable?
Is IEEE the same organization it was 150 years ago (controlled by 1 senior engineer by the name of William Preece who didn't understand Heaviside's vector calculus because Heaviside's vector calculus was truly brand new to physics and engineering)?
But sure... you're just like Oliver Heaviside and electrons are photons.
Do you have a paper or any mathematics at all?
No, my math is weak. I have trouble with Heaviside's vector versions of Maxwell's quaternion equations. But i get the gist. But i don’t have any ready paper, but i have written heaps over the years, lots of physics stuff, mainly aetheric stuff.
Everyone (on youtube etc) seems to agree that electric energy is transmitted outside the wires, but i suspect that everyone has a slightly different version of what happens. We have versions by i think Faraday, Maxwell, Heaviside, Dollard, Nick (Science Asylum), Derek (Veritasium), Brian (AlphaPhoenix), Mehdi (electroBoom), Bob (RSD Academy), Dave (EEVblog), etc.
They all have a different explanation for the roll of electrons or electron drift (or would, if they went into more detail).
They all have a different explanation for the roll of the Poynting Field (or would, if they went into more detail).
But i feel sure that the IEEE would soon sort all of that out (& a murmuration of pigs will darken the Sun).
Heaviside of course didn’t mention electrons or photons in the early years. And he died 98 years before electons were discovered. But, every material thing is made of photons. Because all elementary particles are made of photons. Photons are the fundamental building block of our universe, ie the universe that we can feel & see & measure. Aether being the fundamental essence of the dark universe that we can't readily feel & see (but we can measure).
Lots of people say that wires are waveguides. The only way they could be guides is if something hugs them.
Unless the wave is inside the wire. And that silly skoolkid idea duznt work. Which is why the IEEE embraces it.
Have you ever even taken an Applied EM course? No gatekeeping to knowledge - but I see a profound lack of understanding of the terms and definitions.
Addendum on seeing your latest post: And seeing your latest post - we have gone full crank. No length contraction/time dilation of moving charges, eh? I'd be fascinated to see how you explain the muon.
I did electricity-1 & 2 but didn’t do electricity-3 or 4.
All of Einsteinian Relativity is nonsense. The worst bit is the time dilation stuff. There is no such thing as time, & even if there was it would not dilate. But i don’t want to argue about muons today.
Einsteinists invoke length contraction to explain the magnetic field around a current in a wire. Veritasium has a youtube about that. Complete nonsense. There might be a thread here about that, or i could start one myself. Relativistic length contraction must exist, but not Einsteinian length contraction. What we must have is a form of what can be called neoLorentz length contraction. But if i started such a thread then i would need to finish the job by inventing my own explanation for magnetism around a wire. And to do that i would have to start at the beginning & explain that everything is a process of the aether. Along the way i would explain (aether would explain) the magnetic nature of the Faraday Disc Paradox.
Pointing out the stupidity of Einsteinian time dilation would be easy. I would then need to finish the job by explaining the real version of what happens -- what i call ticking dilation. This ticking stuff does indeed affect electricity, & hence deserves to be on this forum, but it would involve a lot of work for me, & i am fully busy on my new electricity (alltho in a sense my new electricity overlaps with all of this stuff).