>>16841275
In Peter’s view, and later his son Neal’s, the field-based model had missed the point entirely. We don’t observe electromagnetic fields. We observe the forces that matter feels. And Ampère’s law described those forces directly, not as a delayed field effect, but as an instantaneous interaction between currents, falling off with distance, but never truly vanishing.

They argued that what we call an electromagnetic wave is not a self-sustaining interplay of electric and magnetic fields moving through empty space, but the collective effect of countless direct interactions between charges, nearest neighbours giving the strongest nudges, more distant ones giving smaller nudges. This is one of the phenomena I've attempted to model & in Ampère’s view, the “wave” is simply the cascading pattern of those interactions, which we interpret as having electric and magnetic components, but which are in fact two aspects of the same underlying force. Together, their work stood as a modern echo of Ampère’s discovery. Measured. Published. And quietly ignored.