It seems clear that the rotational reference frame , the absolute reference frame as far as Newton was concerned explains magnetic behaviour and distinguishes radial electric behaviours.
This rotation occurs at all scales and gyroscopically the difference exists between spiralling in rotation and spiralling out , expansion and contraction in a rotating reference frame.
I wanted to take a moment to consider Newton's observation bout spherical rotations. If one references any dynamic point by a set of linear axes, then a wonderful fractal exists thereafter with every other point in which it is indeterminate which set of axes are absolute in the sense that they are invarian in every reference frame. Parallel lines do not give that kind of definitive resolution.
However, for every sphere there is a unique point, the centre from which one can absolutely base any reference frame uniquely. Thus a rotational motion that is precisely spherical has an absolute reference frame . But , choose any point in such a dynamic reference frame and it becomes the centre of rotation for the whole rotating system..
We have to choose 2 points in a rotating reference frame to determine a fixed dynamic cylindrical rotation and 3 to determine a fixed plane that rotates within that cylinder. We need 4 points to determine a fixed volume in space that rotates around one of an infinite number of axes.
Four points in a spherically rotating space one of which is the dynamic centre of rotation gives us a Spaciometry which is absolute in that context. No matter which of the 4 points I choose the relationship between the four is invariant if the space itself is rotating in a way that preserves the fixed relationships just described.
What this means it that the behaviour of crystal lattice can give us ignals about the dynamics of the rotating spherical space in which and of which it is made. Strains within these and other fixed parameters within crystals, arising as it were spontaneously, can be signals of how an absolute space is actually behaving.
Now newon observed that in a fluid the deviation from the crystal lattice in a rotating crystal would give information about the absolute forces involved. We take for granted that rotation causes or involves strain in solids and fluids, but Newton asked why? If points move in a sphere relative to that spheres centre and concentric ly there is no logical requirement for them to ever experience strain. But if a closed cylinder or sphere of those points are moved relative to their own centre of symmetry, by some external applied impulse or continuos force, the inate or inertial motion of those points will create strains in the system.
This strain arises as a consequence of inertial or systemic self organising equilibrium systems. In this sense inertial means the de facto dynamic of the space in which the test occurs. In terms of motives, an inate spherical motive in every point may be organised concentrically. Any motion that goes contrary to this will experience inertial forces that restore the perturbation to equilibrium. However empirical evidence would have to determine if that was the case.
The other possibility is that spherical motion is not concentric, in which case we old expect regional fractals of concentric behaviours to be evident. In addition we would expect some form of trochoidal motion, and finally we would expect " chaos" that is dynamics so complex we just cannot yet describe it.
Chas is a Greek notion for this kind of dynamic, and it is the root idea for the concept of " gas". Of all the fluids gas is the most difficult to apprehend. Thus we should not consider that we have apprehended it in either chemistry or fluid dynamics. In particular the simple motions for kinetic behaviours in gas are inadequate because they ignore the rotating frame of reference implied by the dynamics of space.
This means that the absolute forces that Newton surmised are experienced by us as electric and magnetic behaviours. However we have to look beyond the notions of electromagnetism and think in terms of the rotational interactions of spherically dynamic space as it rotates, expands and contracts along any arbitrary set of axes.
The laws of thermodynamics are not subjected to rotating reference frames. Consequently the laws are incorrect in 2 directions: firstly they apply to a closed system; secondly they are not applied to a rotating system. The consequence of this is the notion of entropy as "chaos" is incorrect. We can see that the effect of rotation is highly self organising, and while the system shows diffusion, it is highly stratified ie quantised.
The effect of variable rotation motives is not illustrated in the video, but it is clear that in equilibrium construction is balanced by destruction, the systems reciprocates between the organised and disorganised states.
In the current standard models the effect of electromagnetism is not balanced against the effects of thermodynamics. Even if they were the basic model is fundamentally flawed.
Further it is important not to be drawn into the pseudo myth that mathematical models predict anything. Mathematical models are t best mnemonic in that they collect together important parametric relationships so that the demonstrator can point to collections of symbols at the same time as he points to empirical results . This process of identifying collections of symbols with spaciometric dispositions is of course a late 19 th century trait. Newton for example provided a geometrical diagram to develop the proof of a theorem. The diagram modelled the relationships but not accurately as in an animation. Often further techniques are required to draw animations of the principles discussed.
A mathematical model is often very confusing, and this is revealed hen a programmer comes to code a function in a programming language. The complicated procedures and sub routines called to display a result illustrate the real nature of mathematical models. They are interpretative and mnemonic, and require elaborate decoding schemes and illustrative schemes to present even a simple animation of a scene.
Mathematical models are just there to help us remember.