This might be a bit confusing for some, but I thought that I would post it anyway.
I discovered an interesting distinction in what physics calls “electromagnetic potential” or simply “charge potential” and the simpler electromagnetic potential involved in charged sub-atomic particles, and how they relate to economics, society, and psychology.
In physics one can have an electromagnetic pulse. The magnitude of the pulse could possibly be anything and either positive or negative. The pulse could be narrow and fast or could be wide and slow. But the energy content and physical size of the pulse limits its peak charge potential. A pulse of a specific physical size cannot have a potential of any more than a specific amount. And such pulses contain no particles such as electrons. They are pure radiant energy, “EMR” or “light”.
One can also have a charged mono-particle, such as an electron. And it is designated to have exactly -1eV charge potential. And by having many electrons, one can raise how much charge potential up to any level.
But interestingly, these two “charge potentials” are not actually the same measurement.
At every point in space, there is a degree of existence, always positive relative to zero existence. There cannot be a negative existence. And a potential, not being a substance, is merely a local situation that can inspire either more existence or less in that location. If the situation inspires less existence, it is called a “negative potential”. A negative EMR pulse is actually an effort to remove existence or remove energy from a location. Of course the removal of energy constitutes energy being applied. So the existence or energy is actually merely relocated by the potential, leaving a temporary relative void. And absolute zero existence would be the absolute maximum negative potential possible (if absolute zero was possible).
So if a negative pulse is removing existence and there can never be less than zero existence, what is the limit for a negative potential? It would seem that there must be at least as much existence present for there to be a negative potential to remove it. And that would limit how great a negative pulse could be at any given location. Yet physical experiments don’t see it that way. Science can produce basically any negative electric potential it wants. Yet they certainly can’t be creating negative existence.
The simple truth is that science can never measure the potential in merely a single infinitesimal location. And when they measure a potential, what they are measuring is actually an aggregate of a great many locations. And the potential that they measure is more an issue of how much total existence can be removed from an area within a certain amount of time. They are never really measuring how much existence any one point has, but rather how much is in an area.
The interesting bit is that in each location within such an area, the negative potential can only be equal to the amount of positive existence that was already there. In any one location, the level of existence can only drop to near zero. And any reading that implies that there is a greater negative potential is actually measuring the number of points being reduced to a lower level, a reduction of volumetric energy density.
The original idea developed by Coulomb and crew was that an electric potential was a measure of the number of free electrons. Later it was decided that actual electrons are not required except to store or hold onto a potential. There could be radiant field potential, “Electromagnetic Radiation”, EMR. And James Maxwell conveniently derived his famous set of equations to relate those two concerns.
But what they have been measuring this whole time has not been the actual magnitude of the negative potential, but rather the total mass of negative potential that can be actualized over time. It is like the difference between measuring the voltage of each battery verses measuring the total energy of all of a group of batteries. And just like a group of batteries requires more space, a greater negative potential requires either more space or a higher positive existence to begin with (a greater positive field). Space has a limit as to how much negative potential can be within any volume because it simply runs out of positive existence within that volume. If a greater negative field is desired, more space is required.
This is a small display in an attempt to show what I was talking about. The green “neutral potential” is the level of existence (the “energy content”) of normal ambient space. A negative impulse is displayed in orange. That pulse can be of any size from infinitesimal to nearly infinite, but limited if it is merely a single impulse in a single location. If it is a single impulse, it could never reach below zero existence.
The larger orange groups of impulses represent a negative monoparticle, an electron. Note that near the center, an electron can have an impulse that reaches down to zero, but never further. And what has been declared “-1eV” is a measure of about how much negativity with within that electron considering its size. Again, it is NOT a measure of the greatest negative impulse within the electron. And that greatest negative impulse can never be greater than the level that the “neutral ambient space” provided as above zero space. If the neutral, “normal space” had been within a larger positive field, the greatest negative impulse could be equally greater. It can always reach down to zero. And the actual size of the electron will reflect how positive the ambient field was.
But then there is the magic. That red pulse indicates what is measured by science and indicates less than zero existence. The reason is that they are measuring the total amount or mass of negative potential, not the actual magnitude of any pulse within. They are measuring the potential that can be delivered at the speed of light, not the peak potential. And that is what I call “Macro-Charge Potential” because it is a measure of the larger aggregate of potentials although seen as if measuring only one.
Economics
To many this particular “magic” is far more relevant when it comes to money. Money is merely the economic form of “potential”. And just like there can be no negative existence and thus a limit on reduced potential, there can be no actual negative money and a limit on how much can be taken away. But then, just as with the volume of space, a larger volume of people with money represents the potential to take more away, a “greater negative macro-charge potential”.
Any one person can actually only lose as much money as he actually had. But a group can lose more money than any one of them could have ever had. And that is about where the similarity between physical reality and post modern economics ends because Man can pretend and create “debt”, a “negative amount of money” (which was Constitutionally illegal in the USA until the FED came along). Now it is possible for a nation to have a greater amount of negative potential than could have ever existed not only in that nation, but actually in the entire world.
Debt, being purely imaginary, can become greater than the total amount of money in the entire world, a negative existence. In fact, it can become so great that the entire world would never have enough actual money to offset the debt for millions of years. And interestingly, the “positive money” can be equally imaginary. The actual amount of money that exists in the world today is only a fraction of how much “money” certain people “own”. That is to say, that if required, the richest people in the world could not pay but a fraction of the amount of money that they supposedly have. And of course, the poorest could, as always, never gain enough money to pay the imaginary debt that he has.
Modern economics is fantasy physics with no limits preventing the amount of money claimed to be owned and claimed to be owed. It is of course, a formula for directed war (the very purpose of creating the fantasy). Exactly like electric potential, fantasy money is used to direct financial energy, “currency” rather than “current”, and the directed movement of the masses rather than mass. The exact same equations apply with the exception of not having to bother with physical reality.
Psychology
The analogy of potential or charge in psychology is the Perception of Hope and Threat, PHT. A negative potential is a perceived threat. And unfortunately the exact same fantasy physics (along with the exact same equations) comes into play in the post modern world of Man. There is the actual negative potential of any given event and there is the aggregate sum of the negative potentials for a series of events perceived/measured as a single threat. But more than that, there is the imaginary degree of hope or threat that can’t never be actually real.
The point to terrorism and torture is to cause the perception of a threat that will build in the minds in order to stir the masses. And a close cousin, intimidation or coercion, is used more to direct passions and movement of the masses. And again, with the mind, the exact same equations apply with the exception of not having to bother with physical reality. There is no limit to the imagined threat potential, thus one can easily become traumatized or fear stricken by merely an imagined threat, or lethally lured by an imagined hope (the very purposes of creating such fantasies).
Fortunately despite efforts to cause it to be otherwise, physical reality pays little to no attention to the imagination of Man. Physics has limits that Man can never change through the magic of pretended potentials. Without physical reality making certain things impossible, Man would have died out long ago via his imagination and lust to control the potentials of others. Nothing is possible until something is impossible. Be glad there is something besides those equations that is impossible for Man’s imagination to alter. He would be wise, I think, to learn sooner rather than later to not conflate imaginary macro-potentials with the reality of his potential existence.