Four-vectors in Electromagnetism

Diego Saa
1
(1) Escuela Politecnica Nacional. Quito Ecuador.
e-mail: dsaa@server.epn.edu.ec
Abstract
A new mathematical structure intended to formalize the classical 3D and 4D vectors
is briey described. It is evidenced that this structure is more appropriate, for its use in
Physics and science in general, than any of the other mathematical structures of geometric
origin, such as the Hamilton (or Pauli or Dirac) quaternions, tensors, geometric algebra
(GA) and space-time algebra (STA). The application of four-vectors in electromagnetism
is demonstrated, where current concepts are reproduced, in some cases, and corrected in
others. Also, some new concepts are discovered, such as the following: It is suggested
the need of an electromagnetic scalar, the Lienard and Wiechert potentials are suggested
to be incorrect and also to have an incorrect origin, new equations for the handling
of energy-momentum are proposed with which it is proved that mass and momentum
have to satisfy the wave equation. Several other physical variables are also proved to
satisfy the wave equation, which is a strong argument for concluding that the universe
has an electromagnetic constitution. Maxwells equations are reduced to a simple four-
vector equation. As a byproduct, new values and units for the dielectric permittivity and
magnetic permeability of vacuum are proposed. Then, the electric and magnetic units
are expressed in terms of mechanical units only.
PACS: 02.10.Vr, 03.50.De, 12.10.-g
Key words: four-vectors, quaternions, four-vector derivative, electromagnetic theory
Contents
1 Introduction 2
1.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 The four-vectors 6
2.1 Advantages of four-vectors . . 6
2.2 Complex four-vectors . . . . . 7
3 Four-vector algebra 8
3.1 Sum, dierence and conjugates 8
3.2 Four-vector product . . . . . . 9
3.3 The norm . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.4 Multiplicative inverse . . . . . 10
3.5 Scalar multiplication . . . . . 10
3.6 Unit four-vector . . . . . . . . 10
1
4 Four-vectors in electromag-
netism 10
4.1 Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2 Dierential of interval . . . . 11
4.3 Velocities and accelerations . 11
4.4 Four-gradient . . . . . . . . . 12
4.5 Four-wave . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.6 Maxwells equations from elec-
tromagnetic four-vector . . . . 13
4.7 Electromagnetic four-vector
from potential four-vector . . 15
4.8 Solution of wave equation . . 17
4.9 Current four-vector . . . . . . 18
4.10 Momentum four-vector . . . . 19
4.11 Electromagnetic forces . . . . 22
5 Discussion 23
1 Introduction
1.1 General
Four-vectors have always been regarded as
the most proper mathematical structure
for handling the pervasive four dimensional
variables identied in the Physics of the
twentieth-century. However, there has not
been a correct algebra for the handling of
such four-vectors. The new non-associative
algebra, proposed by the present author in
a former paper [27], is briey revised in
the present paper, in order to make it self-
contained. It embraces vectors of up to four
dimensions and can be extended without un-
due eort to further dimensions (then they
should not be called four-vectors but sim-
ply vectors). If you are familiarized with
vectors you should nd it very easy to work
with this mathematical structure because it
is a rather obvious formalization of vectors.
Nevertheless, to the knowledge of the present
writer, this algebraic structure has not been
discovered before, despite the utmost and
acknowledged importance of vectors. The
scalar and vector products have not been de-
ned and operated before with a single inte-
grated and coherent vector structure compa-
rable to the one used here. The most simi-
lar mathematical structure proposed to rep-
resent the physical variables has been the
quaternions. Nevertheless they have not lived
up to the expectations of the physicists.
The discovery of the quaternions is attributed
to the Irish mathematician William Rowan
Hamilton in 1843 and they have been used for
the study of several areas of Physics, such as
2
mechanics, electromagnetism, rotations and
relativity [32], [19], [7], [2], [23], [13]. James
Clerk Maxwell used the quaternion calculus
in his Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism,
published in 1873 [22]. An extensive bibliog-
raphy of more than one thousand references
about Quaternions in mathematical physics
has been compiled by Gsponer and Hurni
[15].
The modern vectors were discovered by
the Americans Gibbs and Heaviside between
1888 and 1894. Their work may be consid-
ered a sort of combination of quaternions and
ideas developed around 1840 by the German
physicist Hermann Grassman. The notation
was primarily borrowed from quaternions but
the geometric interpretation was borrowed
from Grassmans system.
By the end of the nineteenth century the
mathematicians and physicists were having
diculty in applying quaternions to Physics.
Ryan J. Wisnesky [39] explains that The
diculty was a purely pragmatic one, which
Heaviside was expressing when he wrote that
there is much more thinking to be done [to set
up quaternion equations]. In principle, most
everything done with the new system of vec-
tors could be done with quaternions, but the
operations required to make the quaternions
behave like vectors added diculty to using
them and provided little benet to the physi-
cist.
Gibbs was acutely aware that quater-
nionic methods contained the most important
pieces of his vector methods. [39]
After a heated debate, by 1894 the debate
had largely been settled in favor of modern
vectors [39].
Alexander MacFarlane was one of the
debaters and seems to have been one of the
few in realizing what the real problem with
the quaternions was. MacFarlanes attitude
was intermediate - between the position of
the defenders of the GibbsHeaviside system
and that of the quaternionists. He supported
the use of the complete quaternionic product
of two vectors, but he accepted that the
scalar part of this product should have a
positive sign. According to MacFarlane the
equation j k = i was a convention that
should be interpreted in a geometrical way,
but he did not accept that it implied the
negative sign of the scalar product. [31]
(The emphases are mine).
He incorrectly attributed the problem to a
secondary and supercial matter of repre-
sentation of symbols, instead of blaming to
the more profound denition of the quater-
nion product. MacFarlane credited the
controversy concerning the sign of the scalar
product to the conceptual mixture done by
Hamilton and Tait. He made clear that the
negative sign came from the use of the same
symbol to represent both a quadrantal versor
and a unitary vector. His view was that
dierent symbols should be used to represent
those dierent entities. [31] (The emphasis
is mine).
At the beginning of the twentieth century,
Physics in general, and relativity theory
in particular, was lacking the appropriate
mathematical formalism to represent the
new physical quantities that were being
discovered. But, despite the fact that it was
recognized that all physical variables such
3
as space-time points, velocities, potentials,
currents, etc., must be represented with four
values, the quaternions were not being used
to represent and manipulate them. It was
necessary to develop some new mathematical
devices to try to manipulate such variables.
Besides vectors, other systems such as
tensors, spinors and matrices were devel-
oped or used to handle the physical variables.
During the twentieth century we have wit-
nessed further eorts to overcome the re-
maining diculties, with the development of
other algebras, which recast several of the
ideas of Grassman, Hamilton and Cliord in
a slightly dierent framework. An example in
this direction is Hestenes Geometric Algebra
in three dimensions and Space Time Algebra
in four dimensions. [16], [17], [20], [9] [18]
The commutativity of the product was
abandoned in all the previous quaternions
and in some algebras, such as the one of Clif-
ford. According to Gaston Casanova [3] It
was the English Cliord who carried out the
decisive path of abandoning all the commu-
tativity for the vectors but conserving their
associativity. [3]. Also the Hestenes geo-
metric product conserves associativity [18].
In this sense, the associativity of the product
is nally abandoned in the four-vectors de-
scribed in the present paper. This is a collat-
eral eect of the proposed algebra, and con-
stitutes a hint about the form the new four-
vectors handle, for example, a sequence of ro-
tations. Besides, the complex numbers are
not handled as in the Hamilton quaternions,
where the real number is put in the scalar
part and the imaginary in the vector part, but
a whole complex number is in each compo-
nent, so it is possible to have up to four com-
plex numbers in each four-vector. But, what
is more important, it is known that in quan-
tum mechanics, observables do not form an
associative algebra, so the present one seems
to be the natural algebra for Physics.
Our intent is to raise the interest in this
algebra and try to convince the reader
that the presented here is one of the most
important mathematical tools for Physics.
There are some hints to believe that the
matrix (or rather tensor) mathematics cur-
rently used in Physics is not the more ap-
propriate to describe the objective Nature.
For example, Mendel Sachs comments that:
in an article by Einstein (Annals of Mathe-
matics 46, 578 (1945)). He said that if one
wishes to fully exploit the theory of relativ-
ity, one should not only pay attention to the
geometrical logic in the theory, but also to
its algebraic logic. He was referring in the
latter to the underlying symmetry group of
the theory of relativity. I looked. . . very care-
fully and realized that the symmetry group of
the theory of relativity must be a continuous
group, that is, without any discrete trans-
formations, such as reections in space and
time; [then], when the reection symme-
try elements are removed from the symmetry
group of Einsteins tensor eld equation, to
yield the purely continuous underlying group
of general relativity (the Einstein group),
Einsteins eld equations factorize to a more
general form that of a quaternion eld equa-
tion. The solutions are then the quaternion
elds, q

(x), rather than the symmetric ten-

4
sor metrical eld solution g

(x), which ap-

pears in Einsteins eld equations. [28]
Paraphrasing Martin Erik Horn [19] about
quaternions, Having important conse-
quences for the learning process, the analysis
of four-vector representations of other rel-
ativistic relationships should be a further
theme of physics education research. . . Due
to its structural density, the four-vector
representation is without a doubt a more
unied theory in comparison to the matrix
representation.
I would add that the use of four-vectors
allows discerning constants, variables and
relations, previously unknown to Physics,
which are needed to complete and make
coherent the theory.
It has been an old dream to express the
laws of Physics with the use of quaternions.
But this attempt has been plagued with re-
curring pitfalls for reasons until now unknown
to both physicists and mathematicians. The
quaternions have not been making problem
solving easier or simplifying the equations.
I believe that this has been due to an
internal problem in the denition of the
product of the Hamilton quaternions. With
the vector algebra, proposed in the previous
paper [27] and briey revised here, the
author hopes that the interest and use will
reverse in favor of the four-vectors, instead
of the Hamilton, Pauli or Dirac quaternions,
tensors, geometric algebra, spacetime alge-
bra and other formalisms.
In the present paper, the synthesis of
all the Maxwell equations which are
equivalent to a simple four-vector product
is performed through the derivative (four-
gradient) of the electromagnetic four-vector.
As an application of four-vectors to elec-
tromagnetism, the four-vectors have allowed
the present writer to reproduce some known
formulas and develop others that describe the
interaction between charges, currents and the
electromagnetic elds.
It is found that several physical variables
satisfy the homogeneous wave equation. In
particular, the potentials and the charge-
currents satisfy such equation. This is impor-
tant and seems to conrm the possibility that
the Klein-Gordon equation, or inhomoge-
neous wave equation, is incorrect for Physics.
There are references such as [4], which es-
tablish that, after replacing the Lienard and
Wiechert solutions for potentials in the Klein-
Gordon equation, another wave equation is
unearthed. The fact that the electromag-
netic variables verify the wave equation pro-
vides condence to regard, the newly found
wave equation, as corresponding to the cur-
rents that appear in the right-hand side of the
Klein-Gordon equation. This could account
for the diculties, contradictions, inconsis-
tencies of the Klein-Gordon equation (see
for example [5] and the references therein).
Several derivations, mainly based in classi-
cal vectorial algebra, have been abridged in
order to maintain the length of this paper
within reasonable limits. The reader should
have no problem to reproduce them with the
suggestions provided.
5
2 The four-vectors
The four-vectors used in the present paper
were proposed by the present author in a for-
mer paper [27] and the basic algebra is re-
viewed in this and the next sections, in order
to do this paper self-contained.
The proposal is that the four-vectors are four-
dimensional numbers of the form:
A = e a
t
+i a
x
+j a
y
+ka
z
(1)
or, assuming that the order of the basis el-
ements is the indicated, those basis elements
can be suppressed and included implicitly in
a notation similar to a vector or 4D point:
A = (a
t
, a
x
, a
y
, a
z
) (2)
Where the elements of the four-vector can
be any integer, real, imaginary or complex
numbers.
The four basis elements e, i, j, k satisfy the
relations:
e
2
= i
2
= j
2
= k
2
= e = e i j k (3)
The following rules are satised by the basis
elements:
e i = i e = i,
e j = j e = j,
e k = k e = k,
i j = j i = k,
j k = k j = i,
k i = i k = j.
(4)
The group of relations (3) and (4) gives an
important operational mechanism to reduce
any combination of two or more indices to
one.
The e, i, j, k bases characterize the four-
vector product as not commutative but,
what is more important and dierent with
respect to the previous Hamilton and Pauli
quaternions as well as to the Cliord Algebra
(see [3], p. 5 axiom 3), the product is not
always associative. For example consider
the following product of the four symbols
((i e) j) k. With the use of (4), reduce
i e to i then i j to k and nally
k k to e. This is one result. Now
consider the same ordering of symbols but
with a dierent grouping: (i (e j)) k.
Then, rst reduce the two middle basis
elements e j to j, then i j to k and then
k k to e, we get the same result but with
the sign changed.
If we put these rules into a multiplication
table, for four-vectors they look like this:
** e i j k
e e i j k
i i e k j
j j k e i
k k j i e
2.1 Advantages of four-vectors
The four-vector operations have extensive ap-
plications in electrodynamics and relativity.
The present author believes that the use of
the proposed four-vectors, can replace advan-
tageously the matrices, classical vectors and
6
tensors in representation. Some of the advan-
tages proposed for the Hamilton quaternions,
Geometric Algebra and Space-Time Algebra,
which are also extended to our new four-
vectors, are:
1. four-vectors express rotation as a rota-
tion angle about a rotation axis. This is
a more natural way to perceive rotation
than Euler angles [6].
2. Non singular representation (compared
with Euler angles, for example)
3. More compact (and faster) than matri-
ces. For computation with rotations,
four-vectors oer the advantage of re-
quiring only 4 numbers of storage, com-
pared with 9 numbers for orthogonal ma-
trices [29]. Composition of rotations re-
quires 16 multiplications and 12 addi-
tions in four-vector representation, but
27 multiplications and 18 additions in
matrix representation...The four-vector
representation is more immune to accu-
mulated computational error. [29].
4. The real quaternion units dened by
Hamilton together with the scalar 1
(or rather e) have the advantage to
form a closed four element group, which
is not the case with the Pauli-units
[14].
5. Every four-vector formula is a propo-
sition in spherical (sometimes degrad-
ing to plane) trigonometry, and has the
full advantage of the symmetry of the
method [37].
6. Unit four-vectors can represent a rota-
tion in 4D space.
7. Four-vectors have been introduced be-
cause of their all-attitude capability
and numerical advantages in simulation
and control [34].
Quaternions have been often used in com-
puter graphics (and associated geometric
analysis) to represent rotations and orienta-
tions of objects in 3D space. This chores
should be now undertaken by the four-
vectors, which are more natural, and more
compact than other representations such as
matrices. Besides, the operations on them,
such as composition, can be computed more
eciently. Four-vectors, as the previous
quaternions, will see uses in control theory,
signal processing, attitude control, physics,
and orbital mechanics, mainly for represent-
ing rotations/orientations in three dimen-
sions. The spacecraft attitude-control sys-
tems should be commanded in terms of four-
vectors, which should also be used to teleme-
ter their current attitude. The rationale is
that combining many four-vector transforma-
tions is more numerically stable than combin-
ing many matrix transformations.
2.2 Complex four-vectors
The only dierence with respect to the
ordinary four-vectors is that the elements
are not purely real but complex numbers.
The collection of all complex four-vectors
forms a vector space of four complex
dimensions or eight real dimensions. Com-
bined with the operations of addition and
7
multiplication, this collection forms a non-
commutative and non-associative algebra.
There is no diculty in obtaining the mul-
tiplicative inverse of a complex four-vector,
when it exists, within the four-vector algebra
suggested below. However, there are complex
four-vectors dierent from zero whose norm
is zero. Therefore the complex four-vectors
do not constitute a division algebra.
However, the complex four-vectors are very
important for the study of electromagnetic
elds. The real components can represent the
magnetic eld and the imaginary components
the electric eld. Or, vice versa, the dual
convention can be used. The rst convention
is used in the present paper.
3 Four-vector algebra
A cursory revision of the four-vector alge-
bra is performed in the present paper. For
a more extended analysis of this algebra the
reader should refer to the previous paper of
the present author [27].
3.1 Sum, dierence and conju-
gates
The sum of two four-vectors is another four-
vector, where each component has the sum of
the corresponding argument components:
A+B =e(a
t
+ b
t
) +i(a
x
+ b
x
)+
j(a
y
+ b
y
) +k(a
z
+ b
z
)
(5)
The dierence of two four-vectors is de-
ned similarly:
AB =e(a
t
b
t
) +i(a
x
b
x
)+
j(a
y
b
y
) +k(a
z
b
z
).
(6)
The conjugate of a four-vector changes the
signs of the vector part:
A = ea
t
ia
x
ja
y
ka
z
(7)
From this denition it is obvious that
the result of summing a four-vector with
its conjugate is another four-vector with
only the scalar component dierent from
zero. Dividing by two, the scalar compo-
nent is isolated. The previous operation
denes the operator named the anticommu-
tator or the Hamiltons scalar operator S:
(A + A)/2 = SA. Similarly, the result of
subtracting the conjugate of a four-vector
from itself is a pure four-vector (that is, one
whose scalar component is equal to zero),
which divided by two denes the commu-
tator or the Hamiltons vector operator V:
(AA)/2 = V A
The complex conjugate or hermitian con-
jugate of a four-vector changes the signs of
the imaginary parts. Given the complex four-
vector:
A =e(a
t
+ ib
t
) +i(a
x
+ ib
x
)+
j(a
y
+ ib
y
) +k(a
z
+ ib
y
)
(8)
Then its complex conjugate is:
A

=e(a
t
ib
t
) +i(a
x
ib
x
)+
j(a
y
ib
y
) +k(a
z
ib
y
)
(9)
8
3.2 Four-vector product
Using relations (3) and (4), the four-vector
product is given by:
A B =e(a
t
b
t
+ a
x
b
x
+ a
y
b
y
+ a
z
b
z
)+
i (a
t
b
x
a
x
b
t
+ a
y
b
z
a
z
b
y
)+
j (a
t
b
y
a
x
b
z
a
y
b
t
+ a
z
b
x
)+
k(a
t
b
z
+ a
x
b
y
a
y
b
x
a
z
b
t
).
(10)
Using the notation of three-dimensional
vector analysis we obtain a shorthand for the
product. Regarding i, j, k as unit vectors in
a Cartesian coordinate system, we interpret
the four-vector A as comprising the scalar a
and the vector part a = i a
x
+ j a
y
+ k a
z
.
Then we write it in the simplied form A =
(a, a). With this notation, the product (10)
is expressed in the compact form:
A B = (a b+a b, a ba b+ab) (11)
where the usual rules for vector sum and
dot and cross products are being invoked.
The following properties for the product
are easily established:
1. If the scalar terms of both argument
four-vectors of the product are zero then
the resulting four-vector contains the
classical scalar and vector products in
its respective components.
2. The product is non-commutative. So, in
general, there exist P and Q such that
P**Q = Q**P.
3. Four-vector multiplication is non-
associative so, in general, P**(Q**R)
= (P**Q)**R
Note that this is dierent from the
Hamilton quaternions and the so-called
Cliord Algebras, see for example [1].
It reects the well known fact that
the associative law does not hold for
the vector triple product, for which:
P(QR) = (PQ) R.
4. The product of a four-vector by itself
produces a result dierent from zero only
in the rst or scalar component, which
is identied as the norm of the four-
vector. In this sense it is similar to the
dot product in vector calculus:
AA = (a
2
t
+a
2
x
+a
2
y
+a
2
z
, 0, 0, 0) (12)
Note that this expression is substantially
dierent with respect to the Hamilton
quaternions, in which the square of a
quaternion is given by
A
2
= (a
2
t
v v, 2 a
t
v), (13)
where v represents the three vector
terms of the quaternion. Not only the
scalar component has terms with the
sign changed, but appears a non-zero
term in the vector part of the quaternion.
This has been a source of diculty to
apply Hamilton quaternions in Physics,
which is overcome by the four-vectors.
5. The multiplicative inverse of a four-
vector is simply the same four-vector di-
vided by its norm.
9
3.3 The norm
The norm of a four-vector is dened by
|(a
t
, a
x
, a
y
, a
z
)| = a
2
t
+ a
2
x
+ a
2
y
+ a
2
z
(14)
It can be computed as the scalar component
of the product of the four-vector by itself.
3.4 Multiplicative inverse
The multiplicative inverse or simply inverse
of a four-vector P is denoted by P
1
.
The inverse of a four-vector P is the same
four-vector divided by its norm:
P
1
= P/|P| (15)
3.5 Scalar multiplication
If c is a scalar, or a scalar four-vector, and
q=(a, v) a four-vector, then c q = (c, 0) q
= (c, 0) (a, v) = (ca+0 v, cva0+0v)
Simplifying:
c (a, v) = (ca, c v)
3.6 Unit four-vector
A unit four-vector has the norm equal to 1.
It is obtained by dividing the original four-
vector by its magnitude or absolute value,
which is the square root of the norm.
4 Four-vectors in electro-
magnetism
4.1 Derivatives
The time derivative of a four-vector is
dened as is usual for vectors, deriving each
component separately.
The derivative, D, of a product of two four-
vectors has a form similar to the conventional
derivative of a product, but maintaining the
order (in the following formulae it is assumed
that the example four-vectors p and q are
functions of the variable t):
D[p q, t] = p D[q, t]+D[p, t] q (16)
or, with dot notation:
D[p q, t] = p q + p q (17)
Derivative of the square of a four-vector:
If in this expression we replace q by the p
four-vector:
D[p p, t] = p p + p p (18)
Now if we swap the order of the factors
in the last product, we get the conjugate
of the other so, adding both, we note that
the vector component is set to zero. There
remains only the scalar component dierent
from zero. The same can be achieved if we
derive the (scalar) obtained by rst multiply-
ing p by itself. This proves that the result of
10
the derivative of the square of a four-vector
is the same either if the four-vector is rst
multiplied by itself and then derived or if the
derivative rule of a product is applied before
deriving its components. The resulting scalar
component is of the form:
p p + p p =
(2(a a + b

b + c c + d

d), 0, 0, 0)
(19)
Derivative of the product of a four-vector
by its inverse:
The product of a four-vector p by its inverse
is the identity four-vector, which is a con-
stant. Therefore, in the right-hand side we
would acquire the null four-vector (zero in all
components):
D[p p
1
, t] =D[(1, 0, 0, 0), t]
= (0, 0, 0, 0)
(20)
Or, expanding the derivative of the prod-
uct:
D[pp
1
, t] = pp
1
+p p
1
= 0 (21)
4.2 Dierential of interval
Let us dene the four-vector ds . Let us pre-
serve the super- and sub- indexes just for
compatibility with previous knowledge:
ds

= ds

= (c dt, i dx, i dy, i dz) (22)

The square of the interval is a relativistic in-
variant, which appears from the product of
the interval four-vector by itself:
ds
2
= ds

ds

= c
2
dt
2
dx
2
dy
2
dz
2
(23)
This is a great advantage that four-vectors
oer, since there is no dierence between the
contravariant and covariant forms of a four-
vector. The present author considers that in
Minkowski space-time both sets of basis vec-
tors coincide, so there should be no dierence
in the representation of a covariant and con-
travariant vector. The metric tensor, used
to raise or lower tensor indexes, results, as a
consequence, in a superuous identity.
4.3 Velocities and accelerations
An arbitrary interval dierential is expressed
as a four-vector in which each component is
the projection of the interval over each coor-
dinate axis. As an example, let us assume
cylindrical coordinates and an interval dier-
ential measured in the plane formed by the
rst two spatial coordinates. Therefore, the
component in the direction of the cylinder
axis (last component) is zero. Then, the in-
terval four-vector is as follows:
ds

= (c dt, i dr, i r d, 0) (24)

To simplify the presentation, let us suppress
in the following the imaginary units.
Factoring the time coordinate dierential and
dividing everything by the proper time dier-
ential, the velocity four-vector, with respec-
tive velocities in the temporal, radial and tan-
gential directions, is obtained:
U

= (c, r, r

, 0) (25)
The factor is the quotient of the coordi-
nate time dierential divided by the proper
11
time dierential and in practice can be dis-
regarded for small velocities. Its value is the
Doppler factor (do not use the Lorentz con-
traction factor [26]):
=

1 + v/c
1 v/c
(26)
Meanwhile,

, is the angular velocity, which
we are going to represent with

:
U

= (c, r,

r, 0) (27)
There is no need to express the (third) com-
ponent as the cross product of the angular
velocity and the radius, since the direction of
this value is implicit in the four-vector and,
besides, the component is not a vector. How-
ever, let us preserve the usual notation for
compatibility with previous knowledge.
In order to obtain the accelerations, one
possibility is to derive directly this veloc-
ity four-vector with respect to proper time,
with which we obtain the result in an inertial
frame of reference:
Ac

=
2
(0, r,

r +

r, 0) (28)
On the other hand, to obtain the acceleration
represented in a frame of reference rotating
with the vector, take the derivative of the ve-
locity four-vector, previously rotated through
an angle (t) (to generalize, an angular ve-
locity dierent from the one of the vector can
be used), and then unrotate the same an-
gle. The following four-vector acceleration is
obtained by this author, which includes the
well-known expressions for the accelerations:
Ac

=
2
(0, r

r),

r + 2

r, 0)
(29)
The centripetal acceleration has the same di-
rection as the pure radial acceleration, r.
While the tangential acceleration (third com-
ponent) contains the sum of the angular ac-
celeration plus the coriolis acceleration.
I do not have the explanation for the last
computation. Maybe the Lie derivative ex-
perts should explain why it works (as it seems
to work).
4.4 Four-gradient
We know that the total dierential (magni-
tude ds of the space scalar) is given by:
ds =
s
t
dt +
s
x
dx +
s
y
dy +
s
z
dz (30)
From this relation we extract the partial
derivatives and separate them from the inter-
val dierential, dened in section 4.2, so that
their product restores the magnitude ds . In
this way we discover the four-vector:

1
c
s
t
, i
s
x
, i
s
y
, i
s
z

s (31)
we recognize this as the four-gradient of the
position scalar s .
In general, if we suppress the position, s ,
and leave the rest as an empty operator, we
obtain the four-gradient:

1
c

t
, i

x
, i

y
, i

z

(32)
and simplifying:

1
c

t
, i

= (
t
, i ) (33)
12
where =

x
,

y
,

z

The product of the four-gradient by itself

gives the DAlembert operator:

1
c
2

2
t
2


2
x
2


2
y
2


2
z
2

(34)
This operator generates the wave equations,
when multiplied by some invariant scalar
such as the mass.
4.5 Four-wave
Let us assume some monochromatic har-
monic function M:
M = M
0
Exp [i ( t +k r)] (35)
Then, the derivative of M with respect to
time is:
M
t
= i M
0
Exp [i ( t +k r)] (36)
or, replacing (35),
M
t
= i M (37)
Similarly, for the spatial derivatives:
M
x
= i k
x
M,
M
y
= i k
y
M,
M
z
= i k
z
M,
(38)
Replacing these dierential operators (sup-
pressing the auxiliary M) in the four-
gradient (32), the gradient is converted into
the four-wave:

i

c
, kx, ky, kz

(39)
The variable is the Lorentz contraction fac-
tor:
=
1

1 v
2
/c
2
. (40)
4.6 Maxwells equations from
electromagnetic four-
vector
Let us assume that the electromagnetic four-
vector has the form:
M

= ( , M) (41)
or, expanding the spatial components:
M

= ( , Mx, My, Mz) (42)

where M is of the form
M = i E + c B (43)
Now, using the four-vector product (11),
let us multiply the four-gradient (33) by the
electromagnetic four-vector (41) in order to
obtain the Maxwells equations:

1
c

t
i M,
1
c
M
t
+ i i M

(44)
or, expanded with (43):

1
c

t
+ E i c B,
i
1
c
E
t
+
B
t
+ i
+E i c B

(45)
13
To reach to the Maxwells equations, this
four-vector has to be equated to zero. Each of
the real and imaginary components must be
equated to zero independently (so it is possi-
ble to simplify the imaginary units):
E =
1
c

t
(46)
c B = 0 (47)
E =
B
t
(48)
c B =
1
c
E
t
+ (49)
Let us compare these with the well-known
Maxwells equations:
Gauss electric eld law:
E =

0
, (50)
Gauss magnetic eld law:
B = 0, (51)
Faradays law:
E =
B
t
, (52)
Amperes law:
B =
0

0
E
t
+
0
J (53)
These two sets of equations are identical
when, rst, both the absolute permittivity of
vacuum,
0
, and the absolute permeability of
vacuum,
0
, are equal to the inverse of the
speed of light:

0
=
0
=
1
c
(54)
Denitions that uphold the known relation:
c =
1

0

0
= 2.998 10
8
m/s (55)
The physicists are aware that the choice of
units of many universal constants, like
0
and

0
, is completely arbitrary in current Physics.
The suggested above, as the inverse of the
speed of light, is not strictly necessary, but
is proposed as a more natural and simpler
choice, and justied precisely by the Maxwell
equations. For compatibility of units, it is
also required that the elementary charge, q,
be redened as equal to the square root of
the Plancks constant, h, multiplied, for com-
mon applications, by double the ne struc-
ture constant:
q =

2 h (56)
Such relation provides the conversion con-
stant, let us name it C, used to convert the
electrical units to mechanical units. When
this conversion constant is used, the electri-
cal units, such as the coulomb and the am-
pere, are not anymore indispensable, except
for compatibility with previous knowledge:
C =

2 h
q
(57)
The square of C divided by 2 is the von Kl-
itzing constant (about 25 812.808 ohm). CO-
DATA 2002 denes this constant as indepen-
dent and has about seven digits precision (in
1990 the CIPM adopted exact values for the
von Klitzing constant). With the above men-
tioned proposal the number of correct digits
can be duplicated. Several other constants
such as the elementary charge, Plancks con-
stant, ne structure constant and electron
mass, can also be obtained with several addi-
tional digits of precision by making use of the
14
quantum Hall conductance measurement.
This paper is not about physical constants
so I cannot go farther on this. However, the
above hints should be enough for the experts
to use protably to improve the precision of
several constants.
Second, the negative of the time derivative of
the scalar component of the electromagnetic
eld, , must be interpreted as the density of
electric charge, , multiplied by the square of
the speed of light,

t
= c
2
(58)
and, from Amperes law, the gradient of the
scalar of the electromagnetic eld is the cur-
rent density,
= J. (59)
Using Maxwell equations (46)-(47) let us
prove that the electric and magnetic elds
satisfy the wave equation. In both cases it is
necessary to use the following vector identity,
for any vector X:
(X) = ( X)
2
X (60)
Let us ignore the speed of light and let us
use dots to denote the derivatives. First, let
us take the time derivative of the Faraday
equation (48):

B =

E (61)
Replacing here the denition of

E from the
Ampere equation (49):

B = (B) (62)
The curl of the gradient is zero. Applying
the above mentioned vector equivalence, (60),
and using the Gauss equation for the mag-
netic eld, (47), the result is immediate:

B
2
B = 0 (63)
In a similar form, for the electric eld, let us
take the curl of the faraday equation, (48),
and use the vector equivalence (60):
( E)
2
E =

B (64)
Replacing the divergence of E by its equiva-
lent from the Gauss equation for the electric
eld, (46), we nd the equation:

+
2
E =

B (65)
Equating this to the time derivative of the
Ampere equation, (49), the result is immedi-
ate:

E
2
E = 0 (66)
4.7 Electromagnetic four-
vector from potential
four-vector
Let us dene the potential four-vector as:
A

= (, i c A) (67)
To obtain the rank 2 electromagnetic ten-
sor, in current physics, it is necessary to carry
out the following tensor operations:
F

(68)
The values and signs of the components of
this rank 2 tensor appear in the same order
as the ones provided in the multiplication
15
table for four-vectors, dened in section 2:
F

0 E
x
E
y
E
z
E
x
0 c B
z
c B
y
E
y
c B
z
0 c B
x
E
z
c B
y
c B
x
0

(69)
Therefore, with four-vectors we dene a
simple electromagnetic four-vector, which
contains more information than this rank 2
tensor (the four-vector includes information
about the scalar component, which is new
to Physics, and the four-vector product gen-
erates the correct signs), with the following
four-vector product, where the use of the in-
dexes is an abuse of notation:
M

(70)
Expanding this product with (11) we get
M

= (, i E + cB) =

1
c

t
+ c A,
i c
A
t
i + cA

(71)
Equating the corresponding components of
this equality, the electromagnetic scalar is, to
the best of my knowledge, new to Physics:
=
1
c

t
+ c A (72)
Its form is identical to the Lorentz gauge.
This gauge is normally assumed equal to
zero in current Physics. However, if this
were the case, we would get the homogeneous
Maxwells equations. This means that the
Lorentz gauge amounts to assume that the
charge and current densities are zero.
The author Koen van Vlaenderen [38] has
proposed the scalar component of the electro-
magnetic eld and exhibits some reasons to
justify its experimental need. Note however
that he includes new terms in the Maxwells
equations, which make them dierent from
the classical ones.
It is also found the well known denition for
the electric eld in terms of potentials:
E = c
A
t
(73)
and of the magnetic eld:
B = A (74)
The Gauss magnetic eld and Faraday
laws are reduced to identities after replacing
in them the last two denitions. The replace-
ment of these denitions into the other laws
is more interesting. Replacing in Gauss elec-
tric eld law simplies it to the wave equation
for the scalar potential :
(

A ) = (

+ A)

or

A
2
=

A
then

2
= 0
Whereas, replacing them in Amperes law,
simplies it to the wave equation for the vec-
16
tor potential :
(A) = (

A )

+(

+ A)
or
( A)
2
A =

+( A)
and then

A
2
A = 0
These two wave equations are dierent (in
the right-hand side) from the corresponding
ones in current Physics.
If we multiply the electromagnetic eld
four-vector (71) by itself, we nd the classi-
cal invariant scalar quantities, in the real and
imaginary components, plus the added elec-
tromagnetic scalar squared, which is new to
Physics:
M

=
c
2
B
2
E
2
+
2
+
i 2 c E B
(75)
Since E and B are proved later to be orthog-
onal, the last term is zero. It is also well
known that the electric and magnetic elds
hold equal amounts of energy, so the rst two
terms are compensated (equal to zero). In
classical Physics the expression formed by the
rst two terms is assumed invariant but the
present author has not found a hint that it is
zero, although it is well known that the elec-
tric and magnetic elds are orthogonal (the
above product is usually not indicated that is
a scalar product). The only remaining term
says that all the energy is accounted for by
the square of the electromagnetic scalar.
4.8 Solution of wave equation
Suppose that a function of space and time
u(x, y, z, t) satises the partial dierential
equation
1
c
2

2
u
t
2


2
u
x
2


2
u
y
2


2
u
z
2
= 0 (76)
where c is a constant with the dimensions
of a speed. The classical solution of this
equation is a periodic function, in some cases
represented as exponentials of complex vari-
ables. On the other hand, Coulombs law and
the potentials, in the solutions obtained by
Lienard and Wiechert, are not periodic. You
might wonder how are we going to reproduce
such results. As far as the knowledge of the
present writer, Coulombs law has never been
derived from rst principles, and even New-
tons law of gravitation has the same form
and, therefore, it is very probable, and rather
obvious, that its origin is also in the wave
equation.
The answer is that we have to pick a new
form as the ansatz of the solution. Let it be
u(r, t) =
a
t k r
(77)
This form (for electromagnetic and grav-
itational potentials), or some small integer
power of it (square for gravitational, electric
and magnetic forces), avoids the innities for
radius close to zero, and is a promising non-
harmonic solution also for problems in other
areas of Physics, in particular the present au-
thor proposes this form to describe the law of
gravitation.
Direct substitution in the wave equation
17
shows that an arbitrary function u(r, t) =
f( t k r), such as the suggested above, or
any linear combination of such solutions, sat-
ises the wave equation, where is angular
velocity, k is a wave vector pointing in any
direction (see its form in the section Four-
wave), and r is a position vector from an ar-
bitrary origin. a is an appropriate constant of
charge, charge density, amplitude of electric
eld, etc., depending on the problem being
solved.
After replacing the proposed solution in the
wave equation, the dispersion relation is ob-
tained:
= c k (78)
4.9 Current four-vector
Equation (59) denes the current as the gra-
dient of the electromagnetic scalar. We can
take the curl of both sides of such equation,
with which the left-hand side becomes zero
because the curl of any gradient is zero. This
proves that the (local) circulation of current
J is zero. This is new to Physics.
Next we can derive the equation of conserva-
tion of charge by obtaining the divergence of
the classical Amperes law, equation (53) and
replacing the divergence of E by its denition
in equation (50). But, instead of that, let us
take the divergence of our new equation (49).
The left-hand side becomes zero because the
divergence of any curl is zero. We obtain:
0 =
1
c

t
( E) + () (79)
Using the Gauss electric eld law, (46):
0 =
1
c

t
(
1
c

t
) + () (80)
From here and using equations (58) and (59)
it is easy to recover the conservation of charge
equation:
J =

t
(81)
However, equation (80) is equivalent to this
one and constitutes the wave equation for the
electromagnetic scalar:
1
c
2

2
t

2
= 0 (82)
There is no need to continue with these op-
erations. It is more protable to question
whether four-vectors can generate this kind
of equations. The answer is, of course, in the
positive. First, we have to apply the gradient
four-vector, (33), to the negative of the elec-
tromagnetic scalar, , with which we obtain
the current four-vector:
J

() =

1
c

t
, i

(83)
In other words,
J

c, i J

(84)
Next, apply (of course, this means apply
the four-vector product) the gradient four-
vector to the current four-vector just dened:

1
c

t
, i

c, i J

(85)
The resulting four-vector, equated to zero,
produces three equations that dene the be-
havior of the charges and currents, where the
18
rst is the classical equation for conservation
of charge:

t
+ J = 0 (86)
1
c
J
t
+ c = 0 (87)
J = 0 (88)
The last equation is a completely reasonable
vector equation since in equations (83) and
(84) (or in 59) we had dened the current
(3D) vector as the gradient of the electro-
magnetic scalar. Remembering a theorem of
dierential calculus of vectors that says that
the curl of a gradient is zero [10], the identity
is proved.
We can take the time derivative of (86) and
subtract the divergence of (87) with which we
nd that the charge density satises the wave
equation:
1
c
2

t
2

2
= 0 (89)
Also, take the time derivative of (87), sub-
tract the gradient of (86), apply the vector
equivalence (60) and simplify with (88). We
conclude that the current density satises the
wave equation:
1
c
2

2
J
t
2

2
J = 0 (90)
4.10 Momentum four-vector
The origin of the momentum four-vector (or
energy-momentum) is completely similar
to the current four-vector, except for the mul-
tiplication of the velocity four-vector by a dif-
ferent scalar, which is the mass or mass den-
sity, in the case of momenta, and the charge
density in the case of currents. Therefore,
it is reasonable to conclude that the momen-
tum four-vector should satisfy similar equa-
tions as the ones visualized for the charge-
current four-vector.
Note that, in general, the scalar components
of our four-vectors have the same units as
their vector counterparts. Consequently, if
we eventually speak of energy-momentum
is just for compatibility with previous knowl-
edge. The fact is that our momentum four-
vector has momentum both in the scalar and
vector components:
P

= (mc, i mv) = (
E
c
, i p) (91)
Note the form of our velocity four-vector in
section 4.3.
If we take the gradient of the momentum
four-vector, where E represents the energy:

1
c

t
, i

E
c
, i p

(92)
The resulting four-vector, equated to zero,
produces three equations that dene the be-
havior of the mass and momentum, where the
rst is the equation for conservation of mass
or continuity of energy-momentum:
m
t
+ p = 0 (93)
p
t
+E = 0 (94)
p = 0 (95)
Equation (94) expresses that the force (that
is the time derivative of momentum) is equal
to the negative of the gradient of energy.
19
From equation (95) we notice that the mo-
mentum must be the negative of the gradient
of some action scalar, S, since the curl of any
gradient is zero:
p = S. (96)
This action scalar is, obviously, the Hamil-
tons principal function. When replaced
such gradient in equation (94), we conclude
that the energy is the time derivative of
that action scalar, E = S/t, with which
we obtain the so-called Hamilton-Jacobi
equation:
H =
S
t
. (97)
where, to follow the usual terminology, the
variable E was replaced by the Hamiltonian,
H.
In summary, the momentum four-vector
is the four-gradient, (33), of the action scalar:
P

= (t, i)S = (
1
c
S
t
, iS) (98)
This denition gives the direction of the mo-
menta, as a vector, which is not given ex-
plicitly by the comparable Hamiltonian de-
nition: p = S/q.
If we further replace the momentum and
energy, expressed in terms of action through
equations (96) and (97), in equation (93), we
nd that such action scalar must also satisfy
a wave equation.
It seems like the action dierential can be
computed by multiplying the momentum
four-vector by the space four-vector, (22):
dS

= P

ds

= (
H
c
, ip)(c dt, i dr) =
(H dt p dr, i
H
c
dr i c pdt p dr)
(99)
This dierential of action must be zero in
order to minimize the action. In particular,
when we equate to zero the scalar term,
which is called the Lagrangian in current
Physics, we recover again the Hamilton-
Jacobi equation, where the Hamiltonian is
now given as the dot product of momenta
and velocity.
The study of the implications of these
equations requires further work.
Let us examine how the speed of light
depends on gravity.
Dividing equation (94) by the mass we ob-
tain the force per unit mass. This is equal
to the gradient of the speed of light, or equal
to the gravitational eld strength, or equal to
the acceleration produced over a xed object
at that point, of value:
a = c
2
= (100)
The dimensions of the potential, , are
the ones of a speed squared.
The square root of this potential is the proper
speed or speed associated with this potential.
This proper speed is greater around a greater
mass and at a shorter distance of a given
mass.
20
The essential idea needed to understand
the functioning of clocks in a gravitational
potential, according to the present writer,
is that a clock located at a given potential
should be moving at the proper speed corre-
sponding to that potential, in order to run
at the same rate as if it were in an inertial
frame. Otherwise, the present author guesses
that, if the clock located at that potential
moves slower than the proper speed, then
it runs slower, at a proportion given by the
square of the Doppler factor, , which gives
the proportion between the times in the two
frames of reference, and vice versa if it moves
faster. The speed to be used is the dierence
between the actual speed of the clock and
the proper speed at that point.
If this guess is correct, it should provide the
correct equations to compute the movement
of bodies within gravitational potentials.
Let us proceed to demonstrate that both
the energy and momentum satisfy the wave
equation. First, take the time derivative of
(93) and subtract the divergence of (94), with
which we nd that the energy (and the mass
and the Hamiltonian) satises the wave equa-
tion:
1
c
2

2
E
t
2

2
E = 0 (101)
This is new to Physics and of the utmost
importance to understand the electromag-
netic character of our universe.
By noticing that the gravitational poten-
tial is given by the energy divided by mass,
this result is also extrapolated to potentials.
The solution for potential should be of the
form (77), which is close to the classical new-
tonian expression: G M/r, and also close to
the form for the retarded potentials of elec-
tromagnetism. However, as we suppose that
mass is electromagnetic, its speed should be
that of light, whereas the speed computed
with Newtons law is simply a distortion pro-
duced by gravitation. This distortion causes
that our clocks run at a dierent rate when
they are in a gravitational potential. It is
known that the quotient of this value and the
square of the speed of light is the correction
we need to apply to a clock which is xed in
that potential. For example, if we measure in
an Earth xed frame the rate of a clock xed
at an Earths radius of distance, r, from the
Earths center, it runs slower than a clock in
an inertial frame by the proportion:
GM
rc
2
= 6.9535 10
10
(102)
where G is Newtons gravitational constant
and M is Earths mass.
This is due to the fact that the energy of a
given photon, computed as the product of
Plancks constant multiplied by frequency, is
also distorted, between the same frames of
reference, according to the same proportion.
Next, take the time derivative of (94), sub-
tract the gradient of (93), apply the vector
equivalence (60) and simplify with (95). This
proves that the momentum satises the wave
equation:
1
c
2

2
p
t
2

2
p = 0 (103)
21
4.11 Electromagnetic forces
The forces over a test charge are given by the
product of the charge, q by the electromag-
netic four-vector:
F

= qM

= q

, i E + c B

(104)
This is the classical Lorentz force plus a
new scalar force. The imaginary component
provides the force in the direction of the
electric eld and the real component is the
force in the direction of the magnetic eld.
The scalar force was found by Whittaker [21]
The power associated with currents in an
electromagnetic eld is an extrapolation of
the previous formula, reached by multiply-
ing the current four-vector by the electromag-
netic four-vector:
F

= J

c, i J

, i E+ c B

(105)
Here, the imaginary component provides the
energy-momentum in the direction of the
electric eld, while the real component is
the energy-momentum in the direction of the
magnetic eld. Let us put this in a form
somehow reminiscent of the Maxwell equa-
tions:
c = J E (106)
c J B = 0 (107)
J E = c
2
B (108)
c BJ = c E J (109)
From equation (107) it is evident that the
current, J, and the magnetic eld, B, vec-
tors are orthogonal, while equation (106) says
that the charge density must be greater than
zero (radiation not in vacuum) for J and E
to be non-orthogonal. Also, the elds E and
B are proven orthogonal, for example solving
(109) for the right J and replacing it in (107)
the equation simplies to EB = 0. The mag-
nitude of the current vector J can be obtained
premultiplying (109) by J and simplifying
with (107) and (108) or, more simply, pre-
multiplying (109) by J and simplifying with
(106). It is concluded that J J =
2
c
2
.
Poyntings theorem can be reproduced by
solving the Amperes law, equation (53), for
J and replacing in (106), obtaining
c = c E (B)
1
c
E
E
t
(110)
then apply the vector equivalence
E(B) = (EB)+B(E) (111)
with Faradays law, equation (52), simplify
so the nal result is:
c = c (E B)
1
2c

t
(c
2
B
2
+E
2
)
(112)
The left-hand side is new and can be replaced
with JE by equation (106). The energy den-
sity
1
2
(c B
2
+E
2
/c) is usually called u, and the
Poynting vector c E B is usually called S.
Feynman [10] explains, in chapter 27 of his
Lectures that he has not really proved
the Poynting formulas. The support is found
in the faith of some unidentied persons: ev-
eryone always accepts the simple expressions
we have found for the location of electro-
magnetic energy and its ow. And although
sometimes the results obtained from using
22
them seem strange, nobody has ever found
anything wrong with them. Confront our
previous derivation with Feynmans deriva-
tion, which seems to be pulled out of the
sleeve. Besides, such derivation at most de-
scribes the energy but not the momentum of
the electromagnetic eld, which corresponds
to our equations (108) and (109).
The Hall eect experiments have suggested
an equation comparable to equation (109).
Nevertheless, such equation shows only par-
tial theoretical justication and is dierent
from the one identied in this paper with the
number (109). As a matter of fact in current
Physics the electric eld E appears instead
of the current J in the cross product (see for
example [11]).
5 Discussion
Mathematics can be very precise, but incor-
rectly applied to physical problems. Physics
can also be assembled very precisely, via a
sequence of theorems and proofs, but applied
over ctitious objects. The conclusion is that
there must be a delicate balance between
the correct mathematical tools and the real
physical objects being studied and handled.
One has to also be aware that mathemat-
ics clearly aects the ontology of physics [12].
The four-vectors, in the form proposed
by the present author, emerge in this paper
as the correct mathematical tool to study
the fundamental physical variables and their
describing equations.
This new mathematical structure is a
formalization of the classical vectors. Its
simplicity contributes to the possibility
of more extended and fruitful uses in all
branches of science.
As an illustration of such applications,
the four-vectors have allowed, in this paper,
to identify a new component of the electro-
magnetic eld, which is the electromagnetic
scalar.
The most important physical variables,
such as charge and current densities, scalar
and vector potentials, electric and magnetic
elds, electromagnetic scalar, action scalar,
mass, energy, and momentum, have been
proved here to satisfy the homogeneous wave
equation.
These results give us a strong argument to
conclude that the constitution of all Nature
is electromagnetic.
This is the particular position of the present
writer. A former paper describing the elec-
tromagnetic constitution of the elementary
particles, with photons in circular orbits,
was rejected publication despite the fact
that this postulate explains a lot of particle
parameters, because physicists consider that
photons can only travel in straight lines.
Well, now I challenge you to explain how is
it possible to have nite particles that satisfy
the wave equation, with photons traveling
only in straight lines, without becoming
entangled in some unbelievable universes of
more than four dimensions. Besides, the
current Standard Model of Physics does
not give the slightest hint about the inner
23
constitution of the elementary particles and
of matter.
The periodic solutions of the wave equa-
tion are well known, but the non-periodic
solutions have been usually ignored despite
their importance to Physics. The classical
equations for the electrostatic and gravita-
tional forces and potentials are traceable to
the wave equation, which is rather natural
after acceptance of equation (56) for the
interconversion of mass and charge. The
non-periodic solutions are postulated as the
correct expressions for these phenomena.
Some reasons have been suggested to con-
vince the reader that the wave equation with
sources, inhomogeneous wave equation, or
Klein-Gordon equation, which has the same
form as the equations used by Lienard and
Wiechert to nd their solution for potentials,
should have no place in Physics.
It is evident that physicists lack the correct
attitude to correct the problems in Physics,
which is Believe nothing, no matter where
you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have
said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. Buddha
(563BC-483BC) [35]. Or, in the cartesian
precept (1637 AD), of never to accept any-
thing for true which I did not clearly know
to be such; that is to say, carefully to avoid
precipitancy and prejudice, and to comprise
nothing more in my judgement than what
was presented to my mind so clearly and dis-
tinctly as to exclude all ground of doubt. [8]
Maybe one should have some reasons to
doubt of something. However, in Physics
there is a proliferation of concepts of dubious
character, such as the neutrinos, gravitons,
the big-bang, the ether and others (e.g.
quarks) that this author does not know very
well but seem suspicious.
On the other hand, the present writer has
found that Physics shows important decien-
cies in all the areas he has been able to study.
For example, the above mentioned problem
about the constitution of matter, the many
paradoxes in relativity [26], the incorrect
law being used for spectral radiation distri-
bution [25], the explanations not provided
about the origin of gravitation or of the ne
structure constant, the decient handling
of physical units (the units for angles are
not used within the formulae), as well as for
the problems abiding in electromagnetism,
where the present paper gives some hints
to correct them. However, most physicists
and mathematicians do not seem the least
worried about these deciencies and, arro-
gant as they are, simply dub as crank,
or worst epithets, to whoever attempts to
question or tries to correct some of these
problems. Physics has sunk into its current
mess largely because of lack of it [tolerance]
[24]. Besides, there are problems in mathe-
matics and epistemology: The complaints
of critics about the intrusion of unintelligible
mathematical procedures are particularly
important; diculties generally can be seen
to be of mathematical origin... symptoms of
cognitive failure at an alarmingly elementary
level (concepts of elementary geometry; an
24
absurd confusion of dierent algebras)...
but the very nature of the diculties can
leave no doubt that a radical inquiry into
the foundations of knowledge is needed. [30]
This writer has, in general, never received a
reaction, positive or negative, for his papers.
However, in the present case he would like to
know if the kind reader has found something
right or even, as Pauli said, if this paper is at
least wrong, together with some explanation.
References
[1] G. Aragon, J.L. Aragon and M.A.
Rodrguez. Cliord algebras and geomet-
ric algebra. Advances in Applied Cliord
Algebras 7 No. 2, 91-102. 1997.
[2] John C. Baez. The Octonions.
At Cornell University arXiv:
math.RA/0105155 v4. May 16, 2001.
[3] Gaston Casanova. LAlg`ebre de Cliord
et ses applications. Advances in Ap-
plied Cliord Algebras. Universidad Na-
cional Autonoma de Mexico. Vol 12.
May, 2002.
[4] Andrew E. Chubykalo and Roman
Smirnov-Rueda. Action at a distance as
a full-value solution of Maxwell equa-
tions: basis and application of sep-
arated potentials method. August 31,
1996. At Cornell University arXiv: hep-
th/9510052 v2.
[5] E. Comay. Diculties with the Klein-
Gordon Equation. Apeiron, Vol. 11, No.
3, July 2004.
[6] Erik Dam, Martin Koch and Martin Lill-
holm. Quaternions, Interpolation and
Animation. Technical Report DIKU-
TR-98/5. Department of Computer Sci-
ence. University of Copenhagen. Den-
mark. July 17, 1998.
[7] Stefano De Leo. Quaternions and special
relativity. American Institute of Physics.
J. Math. Phys. 37 (6). June 1996.
[8] Rene Descartes. Discourse on the
method of rightly conducting the
reason, and seeking truth in the
sciences. 1637. In project Gutemberg
http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext93/
dcart10.txt
[9] Chris Doran & Anthony Lasenby. Geo-
metric algebra for physicists. Cambridge
University Press. 2003.
[10] Richard Feynman. The Feynman Lec-
tures on Physics. Vol. II., Leighton &
Sands. California Institute of Technol-
ogy. Addison Wesley. 1964.
[11] George Galeczki. Beyond Maxwell-
Lorentz Electrodynamics. Equation (9).
Episteme 6, December 21, 2002. At URL
http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme
/ep6/ep6-II.htm
[12] Yves Gingras. What Did Mathe-
matics Do to Physics?. Cahiers
D

Epistemologie. Departement de
25
philosophie, Universite du Quebec a
Montreal. Cahier 2001-01, 274
e
numero.
2001.
[13] Martin Greiter & Dirk Schuricht. Imag-
inary in all directions: an elegant for-
mulation of special relativity and classi-
cal electrodynamics. At Cornell Univer-
sity arXiv:math-ph/0309061 v1. June 4,
2005.
[14] Andre Gsponer and Jean-Pierre Hurni.
The physical heritage of Sir W. R.
Hamilton. Presented at the Confer-
ence: The Mathematical Heritage of Sir
William Rowan Hamilton. Trinity Col-
lege Dublin. 17th-20th August.1993.
[15] Andre Gsponer and Jean-Pierre Hurni.
Quaternions in mathematical physics.
Independent Scientic Research Insti-
tute. At Cornell University arXiv: math-
ph/0510059 v3. March 4, 2006.
[16] David Hestenes. Space-Time Algebra.
Gordon and Breach, New York, 1966.
[17] David Hestenes and Garret Sobczyk.
Cliord Algebra to Geometric Calculus.
D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1984, 1985.
[18] David Hestenes. Oersted Medal Lecture
2002: Reforming the Mathematical Lan-
guage of Physics. Department of Physics
and Astronomy Arizona State Univer-
sity. 2002.
[19] Martin Erik Horn. Quaternions in
University-Level Physics Considering
Special Relativity. German Physical So-
ciety Spring Conference Leipzig. 2002.
[20] Joan Lasenby, Anthony Lasenby, Chris
Doran. A Unied Mathematical Lan-
guage for Physics and Engineering in the
21st Century. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond.
A. 1996.
[21] Stefan Marinov. Marinov: Annus
Horribilis (The Story of ) A Payed
Advertisement Published by Nature. At
URL http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/
episteme/ep6/ep6-marin.htm
[22] James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Elec-
tricity and Magnetism. Dover, New
York. Reprint, third edition. 1954.
[23] R. Mukundan. Quaternions: From Clas-
sical Mechanics to Computer Graphics,
and Beyond. Proceedings of the 7th
Asian Technology Conference in Math-
ematics 2002. Invited Paper. 2002.
[24] Natural Philosophy Alliance
(NPA). 2003. At URL http:
//mywebpages.comcast.net/
Deneb/npahome.html
[25] Diego Saa. On an improvement of
the Planck radiation energy dis-
tribution. At Cornell University
arXiv:physics/0603117 v3. Jul 18,
2006.
[26] Diego Saa. Frequent Errors in Spe-
cial Relativity. At Cornell University
arXiv:physics/0506207 v3. Sep 26, 2006.
26
[27] Diego Saa. Four-vector alge-
bra. At Cornell University arXiv:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0711.3220 . Nov
20, 2007.
[28] Mendel Sachs. The Inuence Of
The Physics And Philosophy Of
Einsteins Relativity On My Atti-
tudes In Science: An Autobiography.
World Scientic (Ed.). 1999. At URL:
http://www.compukol.com/mendel/
articles/articles.html
[29] Eugene Salamin. Application of
Quaternions to Computation with
Rotations. Working Paper, Stan-
ford AI Lab. 1979. At URL:
ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/
quaternion/stanfordaiwp79-
salamin.ps.gz
[30] Sapere aude. 2002. At URL:
http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/sapere-
1.htm
[31] Cibelle Celestino Silva & Roberto de An-
drade Martins. Polar and axial vectors
versus quaternions. Am. J. Phys. 70 (9),
September 2002. pp. 958-963.
[32] L. Silberstein, Ph.D. Quaternionic Form
of Relativity. Phil. Mag. S. 6, Vol. 23,
No. 137, pp. 790-809. May 1912.
[33] Andrew James Sinclair. Generalization
of rotational mechanics and applications
to aerospace systems. PhD Dissertation.
Texas A&M University. May 2005.
[34] Brian L. Stevens, Frank L. Lewis. Air-
craft Control and Simulation. 2nd Edi-
tion. Wiley. October 2003.
[35] Suppressed Science. At URL:
http://www.suppressedscience.net/
[36] Douglas B. Sweetser. Doing Physics
with Quaternions. 2005. See URL:
http://world.std.com/~ sweetser/
quaternions/qindex/qindex.html
[37] Peter Guthrie Tait. Encyclopdia Bri-
tannica, Ninth Edition, Vol. XX, pp.
160-164. 1886.
[38] Koen van Vlaenderen. Generalised
Classical Electrodynamics for the pre-
diction of scalar eld eects. In URL:
http://home.wanadoo.nl/raccoon/kovavla.
March 12, 2005.
[39] Wisnesky, Ryan J. The Forgotten
Quaternions. June 2004. At URL:
http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~ryan
/stu/quat.pdf
27