How Electric Charges Are Caused
The concepts of positive and negative charge are so familiar to us and the functions of nature that they aim to describe are so present and in our lives that it is easy to conclude that there are such things as a "positive" and "negative" charge.
Models using these terms to explain observations are very successful in describing what we see happening.
What they are not successful at, however, is explaining why these charges exist in the first place. We don't call a planet or a star "negative" or "positive"; why, then, do we conclude "charged particles" to be so different?
The truth is that this way of describing what is actually occurring is an approximation. The real underlying processes causing particles to behave in this manner are even simpler and have nothing to do with "charge".
The simplest examples are of a "positively charged particle" and a "negatively charged particle":
Positive charges are associated with field lines that point outward, while negative charges have field lines that point inward.
Why?
When we assume that "charge" actually exists, then the answer goes no further: "it is in their nature."
However, when we pause and consider if charge is fundamental to reality, the true explanation can reveal itself.
The key is that these are systems out of balance with their environment. Only when there is an imbalance is there a charge perceivable.
Balance is equilibrium. On Earth, when our surroundings are in equilibrium, we have calm weather. When there is an imbalance, we have high-pressure or low-pressure storm systems develop.
What is most telling is how these storms form and interact.
A high-pressure system, due to it being above equilibrium with its environment, pushes outward on the lower pressure zones surround it. Low-pressure systems, due to being below equilibrium with their environment, have particles pushed from the higher pressure zones surrounding it inward.
What this tells us is that "positively charged" particles are high-pressure systems relative to their environment, with higher outflows than inflows and "negatively charged" particles are low-pressure systems relative to their environment, with higher inflows than outflows. This pressure is ethereal in nature.
This is why "like charges repel", because they tend towards equilibrium, not further imbalance. Two proximal high-pressure systems push outward and against one another, thereby separating towards the lower-pressure surroundings. Two proximal lower-pressure systems are pulled apart by the higher pressure surroundings. When a high-pressure system and a low-pressure system are proximal, the particles creating the high-pressure zone have a place to rush into in the low-pressure zone and thereby they merge together into greater equilibrium.
Thus, the most accurate way to describe a system observed to be "positive" is as a high-pressure system, and the most accurate way to describe a system observed to be "negative" is as a low-pressure system.
Moreover, the flow of air in each of these storms is pertinent to the flow of electromagnetic fields produced by "charged particles", where high-pressure zones cause a central flow downward and low-pressure zones cause an upward central flow.
In other words, this is why electric and magnetic fields are perpendicular.
This is because an electromagnetic field is composed of particles. How electromagnetic fields are caused by gravity can be read about at this link. Indeed, all things are composed of particles in the infinite universe. The universe is infinite. Apparent "charge" is a manifestation of environmental conditions of relative high or low pressure zones within the infinite layers of ether particles, just as a storm on Earth is the result of pressure imbalances relative to its environment.
All things function the same.
For more information, you can check out my other posts here on Steemit. Visit this post for a compilation of the majority of my most relevant writings.
Additional links:
How Light Really Works (Gravity in the Infinite Universe)
Finding the Ground Level in Science
Thanks for reading!
-Steve Scully
CascadingUniverse.Org
Excellent article.. Nice to give us some more natural interpretations for observations considered as "clear" and "known" like electric charges and electromagnetic waves (previous article).
We use terms like "charged particles emit electromagnetic waves (waves of electromagentic field)" but... What kind of particles? Charged with what? Waves of what? Fields? What is electromagnetic "field"? Does it naturally exists (like matter)? There are so many unknowns in this sentence. Actually, it is just a "model" (approximation) for an observation, not a natural explanation, like this article.
However, the simple and natural reduction of all (either of small or large scale) observations (electromagnetism, light, nuclearenergy, black holes etc..) to our well-known gravity (force, energy) and naturally existing matter (dense bodies infinitely small or large) which move-function under the simple laws of classical mechanics (system balance-imbalance), can give us truly elegant and natural interpretations. Maths and models are a very useful tool to calculate and give us precision to an interpretation so as to compare, predict or control natural observations, not to give interpretations. What we should logically rely on to describe-explain an observation is matter and gravity and analogy (which is actually our human logic) as the only self-existing and building blocks of the universe, at least as we see it as humans.
Thanks! And wow, excellent response. So glad that you have been carefully reading my posts, and I hope you don't mind my saying, I couldn't have said it better myself. So happy reading this :D I don't even know if there's anything else I can say in response, I would say that is a "hit the nail on the head" kind of statement and all I can say is... heard dat! :D
Hello @stevescully! I would like to share some gentle advises so you can improve your future articles: