M

#### Me

- Jan 1, 1970

- 0

Magnetic Field Due to Current

The model proposed by Maxwell that relies on the current loop and is worked

out by Gauss an example of fluid mechanics (to make the mathematics

beautiful and easy), and is based around the Pythagorean philosophy of

perfection is not only just a bit out by completely wrong based on the wrong

principles. The correct answer is by using the concept of 4 -perspective

with virtual photons emanating from individual electrons drifting through

the fixed positive charges in a conductor. The relative movement of the

charges makes an electrostatic force between current carrying conductors. I

the case of alternating current the real photons emitted by the electrons as

the change from one velocity to the next in the particle in a box ladder

(quantum mechanics) interact with the electrons around them to cause them to

change energy according to the rules of quantum mechanics. This gives rise

to a calculation (integration round the loop) that shows that another

current loop inside has a force of compression on it and a net force that

tend to move it to a position symmetrical about the axis. The force is

higher near the current loop and drops towards the axis. Measurements

support this. Since a solenoid is a series of loop this is true for these

too.

The model of flux flowing through a loop of current is the concept that is

wrong. The mathematics the gauss used is correct it is the physics that is

wrong.

Relativity - Affine Geometry?

Abstract:

Einstein addressed the twin paradox in special relativity in a relatively

unknown, unusual and rarely cited paper written in 1918, in the form of a

dialogue between a critic and a relativist. Contrary to most textbook

versions of the resolution, Einstein admitted that the special relativistic

time dilation was symmetric for the twins, and he had to invoke,

asymmetrically, the general relativistic gravitational time dilation during

the brief periods of acceleration to justify the asymmetrical aging.

Notably, Einstein did not use any argument related to simultaneity or

Doppler shift in his analysis. I discuss Einstein's resolution and several

conceptual issues that arise. It is concluded that Einstein's resolution

using gravitational time dilation suffers from logical and physical flaws,

and gives incorrect answers in a general setting. The counter examples imply

the need to reconsider many issues related to the comparison of transported

clocks. The failure of the accepted views and resolutions is traced to the

fact that the special relativity principle formulated originally for physics

in empty space is not valid in the matter-filled universe. Einstein's

special theory of relativity is about measurements between frames of

reference in a state of non acceleration. It is an observation that the

velocity of light is independent of the relative velocity between observer

and the source. From this Lorenz postulated a length contraction to allow

for this. Einstein derived the same equation from the observations. If you

look at this equation there is no special frame so any frame may be taken as

the reference frame. Let us consider the passage of mesons from the origin

in the upper atmosphere to their arrival at a counter on the earth's

surface. The observer "sees" the origin from his frame and since he is

"looking" at the meson then this point is only a few feet above the

laboratory roof because of the Lorenz contraction thus accounting for the

short passage time. The "meson" "sees" the path it travels from the upper

atmosphere to the surface as the same few feet as it is "looking" at the

observer's reference frame.

It seems to me that there is no real contraction, only an effect similar to

perspective as a result of the way light travels and is only an appearance.

Relativity is 4-space perspective. This would mean that a journey in a very

fast space craft to a nearby solar system (say 10 light years) would take a

time given after the length contraction and time contraction had been

allowed for. (This is called the 4-velocity) I suggest that the 4-velocity

is the "real" velocity and what we see is the result of 4-space perspective

V=v/sqr(1-(v/c)^2) V is the 4-velocity and the velocity in all frames. It

would therefore be possible for deep space journeys with a fast spacecraft

in normal time spans. (By fast I mean velocities close to that of light -

say closer than 99%c). It also strikes me that since all frames are

equivalent the "Twin Paradox" does not occur the two brothers will agree

both about the time and distance travelled.

Since perspective is the projection of 3-space to 2-space then relativity is

the projection of 4-space to 3-space.

So even the man himself admitted his idea had been misinterpreted by his

followers. The general theory relativity that deals with acceleration does

not map well into special relativity because the forces on the objects do

not influence signal exchanges in any way.

If you think of the star ship journey in terms of a two dimensional space

time diagram (other massive objects are too far away to be of any influence)

then you have a hill. Now in normal hills the distance over the hill is

longer than the distance along the flat, but in the relativity case the

distance over the hill is shorter than the flat because it is a negative

hill.

That is because one of the dimensions is jct and the other is x now using

Pythagoras the hypotenuse for this negative hill, which is really just a

wobbly 'v' is 2*( x^2-(ct)^2)^0.5 and that is less than 2x. This is because

we are in hyperspace. x is the "rest" distance and "t" is the time

calculated at the x/v where v is the velocity. So the distance travelled is

2*(x^2-(c(x/v))^2)^0.5. and that takes (that distance)/v in real time.

The precise shape of the curve only means we need to do an integration along

the curve VIS differential geometry, I get it now, with my brand new brain,

fitted after they took out my old one a couple of months ago.

Get it! So space travel is really very easy you just have to fast enough.

"The faster you go, the quicker you get there" just like running a race!

I didn't win!

My understanding of special relativity is limited. However my opinion is

that the contraction effects are a 4-perspective effect due to the constancy

of the velocity of light, there is no physical contraction at all.

My mind forms a concept of a ^ shaped hill of the space-time trajectory of a

return particle path where the path over the hill is shorter that the path

taken at rest or very slowly, so the higher the velocity the shorter the

path over the hill. It is a metric space.

The other related point is the relativistic momentum now since the path

depends on the velocity then there is the notion of a real or true velocity

v/gamma. In the momentum of a particle the momentum as measured by collision

is m v/gamma so as the velocity increases the mass remains the same.

In the derivation of the kinetic energy the formula:

mv/sqr(1-(v/c)^2)

may be separated into to partial fractions

m x v/Sqr(1-(v/c)^2)

then you integrate with respect to v from 0 to a number less than c to find

the kinetic energy.

This gives the solution mc2 for the rest mass energy as with the older

Einstein version. He chose his method because of theological augment to make

the maths easier: he said "God would not choose such a 'complicated'

mathematics". God is not stupid either.

This method gives the idea of a true or real velocity of v/sqr(1-(v/c)^2).

However the time taken for a round trip works out different from the usual

relativity theory, as in a Metric space.

The general theory is a metric space where the distance shortest between

adjacent points is given by a metric resulting from the sum mass + energy

nearby. It could be represented by a matrix which could include the special

theory as terms in the matrix to work out the distance between adjacent

points.

Again there is no real contraction it caused by 4-perpective due the metric

caused by the constancy of the velocity of light.

The metric is the way (a formula - a set of rules) we calculate the distance

between points in a manifold. In ordinary Euclidian 3-space it is given by

Pythagoras: s^2=x1^2+x2^2+x3^2. In Einstienian 4 space it is

s^2=x1^2+x2^2+x3^2-(ct)^2 That is when nothing in the description is moving.

When things move the usage is to measure distances, usually of the observers

frame.

The metric tensor then contains the elements that are involved is special

relativity, transforming measurements from one frame to another. It

transforms one 4-vector to another 4-vector in the general case which

includes acceleration and gravity then the metric tensor contains these

elements as well.

But it still transforms from one 4-vector to another 4-vector in matrix

multiplication.

V2=V1 x M where M is the metric tensor.

In the differential form the transformation is between adjacent points in

4-space and using Fermat's theorem the path of least time can be found and

this is a geodesic in the non Euclidian space near a massive object of a

projectile moving at relativistic velocity - close to c.

Another important path is where the projectile is powered by a rocket and

here the object is accelerating.

I would have thought total energy description - langranian type description

may be easier in conjunction with Fermat's theorem of least time to compute

the trajectory in space time as a series of 4-vectors.

There is no electric field. The force between electrons is carried by

virtual photons that connect one electron with one electron in another

place. It is an exchange force. They do not drop in force with distance the

density of photons varies with distance as the inverse square of the

distance so the probability of interaction goes down with distance, for

massive objects it gives you the inverse square law of coulomb.

The electron itself is a photon that cannot propagate because of its own

self gravity. The enclosed self energy is such that the photon cannot

propagate. "Stuck light" in fact. This photon is waving outside the stuck

place so its influence can be felt over an infinite distance. In fact, using

the group x phase velocity = constant we have that for electrons the group

velocity is 0 and the constant is c so the phase velocity is infinite. so

for some interactions like entanglement (a consequence of Fermi (electrons

come in pairs - up and down) ) then the change of an electron up to down

that is tangled with it pair 10 light years away will be felt

instantaneously and the other member of the pair will change from down to up

with no loss of amplitude.

This might be of interest too ...

A virtual particle is one that does not exist (by definition).

In classical electromagnetism radiation from a dipole there are two Hertzian

waves, the space wave that leaves the dipole and carries energy and momentum

with it and the induction field which does not radiate but whose energy

passes back to to the radiator.

The space wave is a radiant energy field whose power is E.X.H (the vector

product of E and H) this is known as Poynting's (it is a man's name) vector

this has a frequency f. Now this actually consists of (E x H)/hf photons per

second each having an energy hf. These photons are the result of transitions

inside the conductor of the dipole as the electrons jump from one level to

another (according to microwave theory this is at the permitted frequency of

the exciter) as they do so the emit a photon carrying the energy hf, the

total momentum change. They do not weaken with the inverse square law they

connect with another electron in a random manner such that all their energy

and total momentum is taken up by the electron. The density of these photons

diminishes as the inverse square of the distance and with the polar diagram

of the radiator.

The induction field is the one with the virtual photons they do not

propagate and collapse back to their emitting electrons.

Mutual and Self Inductance

Mutual and Self Inductance are quantum mechanical effects involving photons

inside the inductance. Think of Fyneman.

The acceleration of charges generates photons according to hf where the

frequency of the sinusoid exciter if f and h Planck's constant. The number

of photons is the energy of the sinusoid divided by hf. These photons are

emitted and absorbed during the cycle making inductance. The photons are

emitted by one electron when it makes a transition to another level the step

is at the energy corresponding frequency of the exciter it is connected only

to one other electron that changes its energy by the same amount, the photon

also caries the angular momentum associated with the transition, this is the

change of angular momentum and the vector difference in momentum between the

two energy states. The photons interact randomly without any loss of energy,

momentum or angular momentum but the distribution of the interactions means

that the density falls according to the inverse square law and the radiation

polar diagram. This applies to mutual and self inductance and to normal

radiation from a wire.

When a solenoid is subjected to a step function then the photons have a

distribution of frequency similar to a radiating black body (see Planck who

worked out the messy equation) and are re-absorbed at the same time causing

the effect of self inductance.

If you make a single loop of wire bent into a circle and pass a regulated 1

amp current through it you will make a "magnetic field". According to Gauss

you have to imagine it is there and calculate accordingly. Then comes an

extraordinary performance of human intellect beginning with the magnetic

shells

construction that shows that the field is uniform across the plane of the

loop.

According to Carl Popper we should now measure it to see. Using a compass as

a tangent galvanometer with the earth's field as a reference you can measure

the relative strength of the field in the region of the magnet by measuring

its deflection (according to the field theory). I have done this and the

field is about three times higher near the wire than at the centre. This

disproves the magnetic shell construction.

Another basic algorithm is the idea that a series of loops is like one loop

multiplied. Well if you do the same thing for six turns then the compass

measurement is the same near the wire than at the centre.

This shows that the basic algorithm of what is true on one is true of many

as one times the number of repetitions, is false.

I would like to propose a different model: that the magnet is responding to

spin-spin interactions as a quantum mechanical effect. These are entirely

electrostatic in nature.

The magnetic field does not exist it is fictitious.

The model of the magnetic effect of current is in reality the Lorenz

contraction of the moving electrons relative to the fixed charges in the

wire and the electrostatic force is mediated by virtual photons.

Since the electrons always occupy the same space in the wire even though

they are moving it shows that special relativity is an effect like

perspective.

The inductive effect is in reality caused by the acceleration of electrons.

Now these little charged particles are governed by quantum mechanics and the

energy states up the ladder are discontinuous and the electrons jump from

one state to the next the two states overlap and during the transition a

fluctuation occurs and a photon emission occurs, just like the hydrogen

spectrum.

This photon interacts with just one electron in another wire or the same

wire and imparts momentum and energy to change the electron from its

original state to its new state. This also means that the photon carries

momentum both

linear and angular and energy.

This is both mutual and self inductance.

Electromagnetism

Electromagnetism theory reached its pinnacle in the nineteenth century with

Maxwell's famous equations.

Let us take two examples.

The case of two parallel conductors carrying current.

1. Currents parallel.

The current is a slow movement of electrons with fixed positive charges.

The

electrons are moving parallel in the two wires so are stationary relative to

each other. The positive charges are seen as moving. According to

Einstein's theory of relativity the length of the positive charge is

contracted as seen

by the electrons and so the electrons see an increased charge density over

the charge density of the electrons. This makes the force of attraction

between unlike charges slightly greater than the force of repulsion between

unlike

charges. This means that there is a net force of attraction.

2. Currents anti-parallel.

The electrons are now moving anti-parallel and so they see a length

contraction of the other electron charge. The positive charges are also

seen contracted but not as much. So the electrons are seen as having a

greater charge density than the fixed positive charges. Thus the force of

repulsion of like charges is greater than the force of attraction of unlike

charges. This means there is a net force of repulsion. Induction. Consider

two conducting wires parallel. One conductor has an alternating current

flowing in it. This means that the electrons are accelerating and thus

their electric field lines have a kink in them so there is a transverse

component this field moves the electrons in

the other wire. Thus producing an induced potential. The magnitude of the

induced potential would be proportional to the rate of change of the current

in the first conductor.

Electromagnetism

The reasoning below shows that there is no magnetic field it is a false

concept. Iron filings are not an indication of strength at all. It is a

fallacy.

This theory is based around the special theory of relativity and the

relative motion of electrons and fixed charges in a conductor.

With alternating current the electrons are accelerating and generate photons

at the exciting frequency and this radiation is responsible for other

aspects of electromagnetism. This includes the induction of current in one

conductor by alternating current in another.

Electromagnetism theory reached its pinnacle in the nineteenth century with

Maxwell's famous equations.

Let us take two examples.

The case of two parallel conductors carrying current

1. Currents parallel.

The current is a slow movement of electrons with fixed positive charges.

The electrons are moving parallel in the two wires so are stationary

relative to each other. The positive charges are seen as moving. According

to Einstein's theory of relativity the length of the positive charge is

contracted as seen by the electrons and so the electrons see an increased

charge density over the charge density of the electrons. This makes the

force of attraction between unlike charges slightly greater than the force

of repulsion between unlike charges. This means that there is a net force of

attraction.

2. Currents anti-parallel.

The electrons are now moving anti-parallel and so they see a length

contraction of the other electron charge. The positive charges are also

seen contracted but not as much. So the electrons are seen as having a

greater charge density than the fixed positive charges. Thus the force of

repulsion of like charges is greater than the force of attraction of unlike

charges. This means there is a net force of repulsion.

Induction

Consider two conducting wires parallel. One conductor has an alternating

current flowing in it. This means that the electrons are changing their

energy and emit photons at the exciting frequency these are emitted in

random directions like a messenger with the energy change and momentum

(angular and linear) and these are absorbed by electrons in another

conductor nearby and this information is transferred by photon collision to

make the electrons in the other wire move thus inducing an current.

In all these cases no magnetic field was required to account for the

phenomena involved. So invoking Occum's razor, the magnetic field in not

required and so does not exist. Consider two long straight copper conductors

each carrying the same current in the same direction. The electrons move

together at the same velocity in each cable. They repel one another. The

fixed positive charges repel each other. However the electrons wire A

attract the fixed charges in wire B but because the electrons are moving

relative to the fixed charges they will see a higher charge density than the

charge density due to the electrons in B so the attraction of electrons to

fixed positive charges is higher than the repulsion between the

same number of electrons in B. Similarly for electrons in wire B and the

fixed positive charges in wire A. n=number of atoms per meter e=electronic

charge d=separation l=length P=permittivity v=drift velocity of electrons

c=velocity of light

The force of repulsion is P*2*((e*n)^2)*l /d (= F)

And the force of attraction is P*(2*((e*n)^2)*l/d)/sqr(1-(v/c)^2)

So the resultant force is F-F/sqr(1-(v/c)^2)=F(1-1/sqr(1-(v/c)^2))

=F(1-(1-(v/c)^2)^(-1/2))

=F(1-(1+(1/2)(v/c)^2))

= F(v/c)^2/2

= (P*2*((e*n)^2)*l/d)(v/c)^2/2

= (P/c)*(((e*n*v)^2)*l/d)

=(P/c)*i^2*l/d (e*n*v=i)

So P/c is the "permeability" and the force is proportional to the current

squared and the length but inversely proportional to the separation. There

is no need for the idea of the magnetic field. There is no magnetic field

Experimental Test

Karl Popper has explained the scientific method. Use the predictions of the

theory and test experimentally when judging a philosophical idea.

Science in only science if you carry out experiments to test the theories of

yourself or another. To play philosophical games with words and equations

is not science.

Go get a bit of wire make a straight part 40 cm long and connect it to a

constant current source of say 1 amp.

Get the old electrostatic kit out of the 18th century box and using a glass

rod wiped with silk make a pith ball coated with gold leaf charged by

bringing the glass rod close to the ball and touch the ball briefly with a

finger. The ball will be repelled by the glass rod.

Put the pith ball (suspended by a silk thread from a curved glass stand)

near the wire and note the deflection from the vertical when the current is

switched on.

I predict it will be repelled if negatively charged and attracted if

positively charged. (confirmed)

A bar magnet is in fact a group of spinning electrons which are coupled by

spin-spin interactions (Quantum mechanics) that are mediated by virtual

photons again a force that is electronic and connected to the Lorenz

contraction.. The force on another bar magnet is actually due to spin-spin

interactions (Quantum mechanics) which is electronic and related to the

Lorenz contraction. A loop of wire carrying a current is again interacting

with another current carrying conductor by the electrostatic force (mediated

by virtual photons) and is again a result of the Lorenz contraction. The

calculation to use is the biot-savart hypothesis (force between current

elements) integrated. In view of this new insight we should re-name

magnetism as the "Lorenz force". It also means that many of our reasoning

based on observations made 300 years ago before Einstein developed his

special theory of relativity are misconceived as they are based on the wrong

model.

The Gaussian construction of magnetic shells does not come into it there is

no magnetic flux or lines of force.

As a disclaimer I will point out that I am not the first or only person to

point this out.

String Theory

String theory started as a simple way of modelling the characteristics of

elementary particles as the result wave movement on a tiny circular string

so that the various quantum states that produce particles are dependant on

the number of standing waves around this string So more massive particles

with more energy had more nodes in the waves thus more waves around the

string.

Going back from this, the idea came from an electromagnetic representation

of a particle as a photon going in a circle trapped by its own self gravity.

So a photon pair when collided can form a little circulating standing wave

and the electrical energy so contained makes for a gravitational bending of

space so that the photon travels in a circle, when there is only one

wavelength round a particle is formed in its ground state and thus lowest

mass, higher energy states occur with more waves and thus higher frequency.

The relationship of the trapped energy to frequency gives Planck's constant.

It is discontinuous because only some combinations of wavelength to circular

path and gravitational curvature fit.

I originally discussed this with Jonathan in about 1967-1968, he thought

straight strings with mass and tension was easier to calculate, hence

"string theory", when we were both working at the Rutherford Laboratory,

Oxford. The original Idea, that I had in about 1961, was based on a

unification of Gravity and Electromagnetism and Quantum Mechanics. The

theory was much simpler than it sounds. Basically it said that

Electromagnetic fields had energy and the energy content warped space time

according to General Relativity so if the Electromagnetic field was strong

enough the Gravitational effect would make the electromagnetic wave orbit

and not travel. This trapped wave then is a particle. You have then to

quantize it by saying that the Energy of the wave is related to its

frequency by the Planck equation and then that only integer wavelengths are

allowed round one of these orbits. These trapped waves form all our

particles. They have different frequencies and can form from more than one

frequency photons hybridising, so that a very large number of separate

particles may come into existence.The radius of the tron to stop light

escaping (the Swartzchild radius) is when the escape velocity equals the

velocity of light. I make this:

given by Gm/r^2=c........1 (This is the escape

velocity at distance r from m (I think if I remember correctly))

and the energy of the mass m as:

E=mc^2.

The frequency of light of this energy is given by the Planck equation:

E=hf

So f=mc^2/h ... This is the frequency of the

photon to make up a mass m.

Now for a photon wave to fit the Swartzchild circumference so it goes round

an integer wavelength times, then (fL=c) and nL=2.pi.r so nc/f=2.pi.r

so nc/(mc^2/h)=2.pi.r.......2

Solving these two conditions for m gives:

m=2(c/G)r^2 and m=n(h/2.pi)(1/r) where n is a positive integer.

This gives a series of increasing values of m with each n as m increases

then r increases By eliminating r and taking n=1 we can get an interesting

relation between fundamental constants: h=2.pi.sqr(G(m/c)^3) where m is the

mass of the electron. I do not know if this works out.

Here is a more general relation:

If the energy of an element of a electromagnetic wave is E^2/c where E is

the local electric field then the equivalent elemental mass is given by the

relation dmc^2=E^2/c. so dm=E^2/c^3. The gravitational force between

elemental masses is Gdm1.dm2/(r12)^2 So the gravitational binding energy of

the whole wave is:

GSum(dm(n).dm(n)/(r(m,n))^2) over all m,n m<>n.

For a particular element this sum is the energy at that point:

GSum(dm.dm(m)/r(m)^2) goes to GIntegral(dm.dm/r^2)

The differential form is Gdm/r

Using the plank relation hf=energy then f=energy/h and energy is potential

plus kinetic. The potential energy is the

gravitational potential and the kinetic energy is Poynting's electromagnetic

vector as a scalar.

So f=-Gdm/r/h+E^2/hc

So f=-GE^2/hrc^3+E^2/hc=E^2((-G/hc^3)(1/r)+1/hc)

f=E^2/hc((G/c^2)(-1/r)+1)

I can't go any further, but it looks like a relation between r, E and f that

can be made into a differential equation that will give a similar equation

to the Schrödinger equation for an electron orbital, but instead applying to

the photon trapped by gravity to form the electron. I think Schrödinger

itself could be a case where the proton wave and the electron wave interact

to make something new.

When a Proton (very heavy) unites with an electron to form a hydrogen atom

it is known that the photons that make them up interact so that the electron

occupies more space as Schrödinger said, with the proton photons interacting

by interference with the electron photon the Electron Proton pair having

lower energy than either separately and the bonding changing the photon in

the electron's behaviour. In fact the electron may end up surrounding the

proton with the proton inside the electron so the photons that make them up

form an interference pattern that is the atom. So an electron is therefore a

photon that has been trapped, or frozen, by its own mass/energy

gravitational field so it cannot propagate. So all particles are like this

and are made of photons of various frequencies, and indeed there could be

particles containing more than one photon.

There is no electric field.

The force between electrons is carried by virtual photons that connect one

electron with one electron in another place. It is an exchange force. They

do not drop in force with distance the density of photons varies with

distance as the inverse square of the distance so the probability of

interaction goes down with distance, for massive objects it gives you the

inverse square law of coulomb. The electron itself is a photon that cannot

propagate because of its own self gravity. The enclosed self energy is such

that the photon cannot propagate. "Stuck light" in fact. This photon is

waving outside the stuck place so its influence can be felt over an infinite

distance. In fact, using the group x phase velocity = constant we have that

for electrons the group velocity is 0 and the constant is c so the phase

velocity is infinite. so for some interactions like entanglement (a

consequence of being fermions (electrons come in pairs - up and down) ) then

the change of an electron up to down that is tangled with it pair 10 light

years away will be felt instantaneously and the other member of the pair

will change from down to up with no loss of amplitude.

This might be of interest to ... A virtual particle is one that does not

exist (by definition). In classical electromagnetism radiation from a dipole

there are two Hertzian waves, the space wave that leaves the dipole and

carries energy and momentum with it and the induction field which does not

radiate but whose energy passes back to to the radiator. The space wave is a

radiant energy field whose power is E.X.H (the vector product of E and H)

this is known as Poynting's (it is a man's name) vector this has a frequency

f. Now this actually consists of (E x H)/hf photons per second each having

an energy hf. These photons are the result of transitions inside the

conductor of the dipole as the electrons jump from one level to another

(according to microwave theory this is at the permitted frequency of the

exciter) as they do so they emit a photon carrying the energy hf, the total

momentum change (think of it like a messenger). They do not weaken with the

inverse square law they connect with another electron in a random manner

such that all their energy and total momentum is taken up by the electron.

The density of these photons diminishes as the inverse square of the

distance and with the polar diagram of the radiator. The induction field is

the one with the virtual photons they do not propagate and collapse back to

their emitting electrons.

Try thinking in terms of photon "messenger". It looks like a short burst of

electric wobbles, but in fact it is the signal from a distant electron

interfering with itself as it settles to its new state. The influence is the

electron itself waving that is felt at a distance.

Spectra

It is in reality the "stuff" of matter interacting with another matter a

distance away.

The electron is energy (shall we say a disturbance in the shape of electric

space) that cannot propagate because the energy it made changes the geodesic

it is in into a loop so it gets stuck. This can influence other electrons at

a distance after a propagation delay as their wave functions interact.

Not what you think at all.