[2] For an independent statement that electrodynamics, both classical and quantal, are in serious disarray, see Mario Bunge, Foundations of Physics, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1967, p. 176. Quoting: "...it is not usually acknowledged that electrodynamics, both classical and quantal, are in a sad state." Bunge points out many errors in electrodynamics. See also Terence W. Barrett, "Electromagnetic Phenomena Not Explained by Maxwell's Equations," in Lakhtakia, A. (ed.): Essays on the Formal Aspects of Electromaqnetic Theory, World Scientific, Singapore, 1992, p. 6-86. To find information on what's wrong with EM theory, one must read foundations literature, not the standard textbooks. One of my own contributions has been to point out that the notion of charge q is not unitary. In fact, electrical charge should be defined in terms of q ~ m(sub q)~(sub q). In other words, electric charge q has a massive part m, and a massless part consisting of its potential phi. Further, the magnitude of phi is just the change in the virtual photon flux of the ambient vacuum, due to the [quantum field theoretic] virtual photon exchange with the mass of the q. It follows that the true electrical charge of a particle is just its native potential ~, which is also a dynamic energy exchange with the surrounding vacuum. It also follows that this massless electrical charge changes whenever the particle is placed in a potential (in a different ambient virtual photon flux). After all, potentials superpose; that is their major characteristic. Note that the potential of the test particle is ignored in classical electromagnetics, whenever one speaks of the "E-field" upon the particle. Further, the actual structure of this virtual photon flux that comprises massless electrical charge, can itself be deterministically structured and utilized to generate nonlinear effects that do not appear at all in the present conventional theory. We will be covering many of these effects in future articles.

---