Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: "Significant Zero" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:41:26 +0100
"sue jahn" <susysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:42d198f4$0$18647$14726298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| "Significant Zero" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1121027931.10233.1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| >
| > "sue jahn" <susysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:42d162be$0$18639$14726298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | "Significant Zero" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1121013883.18182.2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | >
| > | > "sue jahn" <susysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > news:42d0fd5a$0$18637$14726298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | snip
| > | > | > | > >
| > | > | > | > > 1/r^1 = 1 so anything with 1/r^1 is an inertial ballistic
| > object ?
| > | > so
| > | > | > I
| > | > | > | > > don't know why that guy was quoting Coloumbe at 1/r below.
?
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | It is the same as gravity. If you were a proton in the center
of
| > an
| > | > | > | electron cloud half the e- minus would be on you right, half
on
| > your
| > | > left.
| > | > | > | If you were on the surface of the e- cloud, 100% the
electrons
| > would
| > | > | > | be on one side of you. Same as gravity, 1/r^1 inside the
cloud.
| > | > | > | 1/r^2 as you move away from the cloud.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Its not 1/r^1 see the internal gravity slope graph I mention
above
| > its
| > | > more
| > | > | > complex than that, inside a planet anyway. I will thing about
your
| > | > example
| > | > | > as I don't think that equates to the field law slope inside a
| > planet. I
| > | > | > think your example at particle level to equate to a planet would
| > have to
| > | > be
| > | > | > stating the coulomb force experienced by an electron as it
burrowed
| > into
| > | > the
| > | > | > centre of a proton and to make the gravity and coulomb examples
| > parallel
| > | > you
| > | > | > would have to be talking about the forces experienced by a
proton as
| > it
| > | > | > burrowed its way to a cloud of electrons which would not be 1/r
but
| > a
| > | > | > complex slope as per gravity so the bloke who quoted 1/r below
has
| > not
| > | > | > thought about it enough ?
| > | > |
| > | > | You won't like to hear this, but I am not sure protons have
gravity
| > | > either.
| > | > | Perhap they do if we can detect FQHE.
| > | >
| > | > They do but it would just be a component of the charge and would
| > probably be
| > | > immeasurable small between two hydrogen atom ? Clue me FQHE I'm
terrible
| > | > with abbreviations sometimes.
| > | http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=FQHE&btnG=Google+Search
| > |
| > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | Regarding R and r
| > | > | The mathymatishun in you, wants to see a smooth curve but see
here:
| > | > | http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/circles/u6l3e5.gif
| > | > |
| > | > | Missing on that graph is a nearly vertical red line representing
| > | > | force below the surface.
| > | >
| > | > The force below the surface is equal to the acceleration and that is
| > what
| > | > that upside down tick is displaying.?
| > | No. You need to draw a line from 0,0 up toward the
| > | one o'clock position to meet with the highest point on the
| > | red line.
| >
| > I have lost you here as we are debating what happens inside a planet or
body
| > and this according to the link you gave earlier is an inverted tick and
does
| > not match 1/r^2 or 1/r
|
| What happen inside is induced dipoles in the planet coupled to induced
| dipoles in the miner's body. All you have to do is ratio the dipoles above
him
| to the dipoles below him to calculate his weight. At earth center it is
| 50% above 50% below for a weight of zero.
| >
| >
| > ~ acceleration inside earth
| >
| > /\ surface
| > /
| > /
| > center
|
| That *%#!0# patent examiner has you hooking rockets on our
| poor little miner...don't he? You trying to smash his helmet on
| the cave ceiling or ya gonna let him stand in the shaft before ya
| light the fuse? :o)
|
| There ain't no *acceleration* in those VDW and London
| calculations... just FORCE. :o)
Acceleration against an energy state change (surface) equals force?
The above graph is correct as you have been looking at uniformed bodies and
the acceleration is down not up.
snip
| A point ? Ouch again!
Just a mathematical point as no real physical points exist except
subjectively {:-).
snip
| Decode the holy grail first.
|
| (1-(1/(1/3))^2)/(1 + (1/(1/3))^2) = - 0.08 = FTL ? -p<+p or
| > (m*-v)<(m*+v) or (m*-c^2)<(m*+c^2) =g?
The first bit is the product of the reaction of an accelerating mass and by
recursion equalling FTL? and the second is the asymmetric response to a
symmetric effect ?.
snip
| > | Who would have tho't someone would be a national leader of the
| > | English speaking people that doen't even speak the languge?
| > |
| >
| > Who are you referring to ?
| http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=dubya+english&btnG=Google+Search
|
Some of his twit is mind blowing" It's clearly a budget - it's got lots of
numbers in it." G.W. Bush that's the sort of guy we need running another
country not the S.H types who never make jokes and just tear your toenails
off, give me GWB every time over SH, GWB a hoot with a boot and a man after
my own bum. I expect if you are a Cubanio then you might have some
historical issue with the US P. but then every body has their cross to bear
and I hope for your sake you can get over it, codolences to go with the
fishing.
snip
| > --
| > Significant Zero E-field = Electric field, M-field =Magnetic field,
two
| > unbound field effects
| > http://home.freeuk.com/paulps/
| > Maybe updates. (1-(1/(1/3))^2)/(1 + (1/(1/3))^2) = - 0.08 = FTL ? -p<+p
or
| > (m*-v)<(m*+v) or (m*-c^2)<(m*+c^2) =g?
| >
| >
| >
|
|
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- References:
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: Significant Zero
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: Significant Zero
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: Significant Zero
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: Significant Zero
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: Significant Zero
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: Significant Zero
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: Significant Zero
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- From: sue jahn
- Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- Prev by Date: Re: Question about light clock and derivation of time dilation
- Next by Date: Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- Previous by thread: Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- Next by thread: Re: Electo London Gravity ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading