The Closest Approach

How does the electric field change as two point charges move towards their closest approach? Is the field effect that causes immutability self-driven by a point charge, or is it a combined effect of the electromagnetic fields of two adjacent point charges? My intuition tells me it is self-driven, but math that maps to QM/QFT/QED/QCD will presumably reveal the truth.

This raises the question of the electromagnetic field strength as a function of distance as two point charges approach. Let’s start with two point charges approaching on the same straight line. Visualize the chart for the following four situations and look for symmetries and/or asymmetries.

  • electrino : electrino
  • electrino : positrino
  • positrino : electrino
  • positrino : positrino

Opposites will fully cancel electric fields at the midpoint, where the field direction will flip and the magnitude will increase on either side.

I will use the super awesome and easy educational PHET simulations hosted by the University of Colorado Boulder. In the snapshots the arrow indicates the vector direction of the electric field and the brightness is the intensity. Voltage is shown in red or blue shading and several lines of equipotential are shown in green.

electrino : electrino
electrino : positrino
positrino : electrino
positrino : positrino

It is evident that each of these dipoles implements C-symmetry. The positrino : electrino is C-symmetric with the electrino : positrino. Likewise the electrino : electrino is C-symmetric with the positrino : positrino.


It is also clear to see that for each of our C-symmetric cases, the electric field is P-symmetric in three dimensions.


We’ve shown that each of the possible point charge dipoles are C-symmetric and P-symmetric. What about T-symmetry? This has always struck me as such an odd question because absolute time moves forward only at a constant pace, by definition, since it is an abstract concept. Of course absolute time can’t run backwards.


To understand T-symmetry we must first understand how time is implemented by nature. Nature implements time via the frequency of the rotating dipole flywheels in an energy core(s) of a standard matter particle. What would it mean to reverse time given how nature implements time? It seems logical to interpret this as changing the direction of dipole rotation.

I am not exactly sure what to make of these deductions. It seems to me this would tie in perfectly to the field of particle physics. I am already on record as saying that I do not believe C, P, or T symmetries can be violated and that any experimental observations suggesting they are violated must be missing lower energy reaction products that are below the threshold of observability. This seems to be to be emminently reasonable given what has been shown in this post.

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California