Re: Electo London Gravity ?


"sue jahn" <susysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:42d6e49d$0$18642$14726298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| "Significant Zero" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1121376866.5044.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| >
| > "sue jahn" <susysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:42d68125$0$18647$14726298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | "Significant Zero" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1121351448.7728.2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | >
| > | > "sue jahn" <susysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > news:42d596e9$0$18639$14726298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > |
| > | snip
| > | > | > | > | I understand your concern but is that not the same
argument
| > that
| > | > | > | > | we shoudn't express the electron mass as MeV ?
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > Yes but lets eat the first elephant first.{:-)
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | OK you take the first bite:
| > | > | > | Quantum states in the Earth's gravitational field can be
observed,
| > | > | > | when ultra-cold neutrons fall under gravity. In an experiment
at
| > the
| > | > | > | Institut Laue-Langevin in Grenoble, neutrons are reflected and
| > | > | > | trapped in a gravitational cavity above a horizontal mirror.
The
| > | > | > | population of the ground state and the lowest states follows,
step
| > | > | > | by step, the quantum mechanical prediction. An efficient
neutron
| > | > | > | absorber removes the higher, unwanted states. The quantum
states
| > | > | > | probe Newtonian gravity on the micrometer scale and we place
| > | > | > | limits for gravity-like forces in the range between 1 micron
| > | > | > | and 10 microns. >>
| > | > | > | http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0301145
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Good paper as it seems the sort of data I was looking for from
the
| > | > gravity
| > | > | > experiment I posted.
| > | > | > Still reading it but do you read it as them saying they cant
detect
| > | > grav.
| > | > | > forces at 1um-10um ?
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | Count the kinks in fig 6 and see if it doesn't look like the
| > near-field
| > | > effects we
| > | > | have been studying.
| > | >

Do you read this as quantification of the gravity field at about a
fundamental wave length of 10 um ?
but no indication that its an electric field ?

| > | > You are a better study than I, cant see the connection at the moment
it
| > | > might have been shoved out the other end of my 256 byte FIFO.
| > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | Elsewhere you mumbled: :o)
| > | > |
| > | > | << 1.4 divergence, curl, laplacian ? didnt seem to find it there
but
| > could
| > | > be
| > | > | hidden in the notation {:-) >>
| > | > |
| > | > | <<4. Conceptual and philosophical differences
| > | > | The main difference between these two formulations of
electromagnetism
| > | > lies in the mechanism
| > | > | of interaction between the charges. According to Weber's
| > electrodynamics
| > | > we have
| > | > | a direct action between each pair of charges, no matter their
distance
| > nor
| > | > their motion.
| > | > | We do not need to speak in electric nor in magnetic fields. While
| > Weber
| > | > starts with force
| > | > | between the charges directly,Maxwell's approach is interaction via
the
| > | > field. Maxwell believed
| > | > | that each charge generated electric and magnetic fields, which
would
| > move
| > | > in space
| > | > | tipically at light velocity. These fields would act on the other
| > charges.
| > | > According to him
| > | > | there would not be any direct action between two charges separated
in
| > | > space. The action
| > | > | between them would be performed by the fields. Maxwell believed in
a
| > | > material medium
| > | > | filling all space, the ether, which would be the responsible for
| > carrying
| > | > the action of one
| > | > | charge until the other and vice-versa. For instance, his last two
| > | > sentences in the Treatise
| > | > | state ([13], vol. 2, article 866, p. 493, our emphasis): 'In fact,
| > | > whenever energy is transmitted
| > | > |
http://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~assis/Pramana-J-Phys-V55-p393-404(2000).pdf
| > | > | http://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~assis/wpapers.htm
| > | >
| > | > Aha! Nitty gritty {:-) Webers fine for fundamental interactions
submicro
| > but
| > | > for macro stuff I think Maxwell is needed with his fields so Weber
| > explains
| > | > the mechanism of fields and Maxwell the behaviour of objects in
fields ?
| > |
| > | That is sort of a chess board statement. It's meaning will invert for
| > macro
| > | and mico so I won't confuse the issue by assuming a POV.
| > | The absurrbdity of the twins pardox should stand testiment to the self
| > | evident notion that you can't assign properties to nothing ( short of
H W
| > D )
| >
| > Yes agreed but if ~Weber defines the base structure with contact ED at
| > infinitely small at no delay and ~Maxwell uses this to construct fields
at
| > finite delay at electron charge level scale and then ~GR kicks in at
normal
| > scale this might with a bit of pushing and shoving fit the bill ?
|
| Existance of subatomic stuff yet to learn like FQHE? Most certainly.
| Maxwells aether is benign or some implentation of Weber? No Way :o)

I'm thinking can Weber be used as a mediator for Maxwell ?

| From picometer to kilometer, near field and far, the real world requires
| corrections. You know what you get when you put lipstick on a pig.
|

No, is it one female bitching about another?{:-)


| >
| > |
| > | > What about Maxwell do you think needs fixing if you consider most
| > effects as
| > | > happening in a local vacuum state and/or dilectric.
| > |
| > | I think the shortcommings need better understanding and they need to
be
| > taught.
| > | Of course, fewer people would study physics if you expose the tricks.
;-)
| > | > Surly you don't think that over a finite distance change in action
is
| > | > instantaneous ?
| > |
| > | Both are useful because Maxwell lets you quantify some experiments
| > | that will be the same in all FoR. For gravity and a complete light
| > | description is seems possible you must work in the Coulomb gauge,
| > | or use Weber's equations.
| >
| > Nicely not answered {:-)
|
| I am practicing for a run for public office. :-)
| On double secret background and if you swear on a stack of MTW's
| not to tell a soul I'll tell ya the honest truth:
|
| Maxwell's demon is still within him, possessing his every evil stroke of
| the pen and blotter. 9/11, the tsunami, storms, floods, quakes and
| famine... Yep you guessed... Maxwell's demon. :o)
|
|
| > but I have not yet found the delay function in
| > Weber as contact theory must presumably have some means of delaying
| > interactions ?
|
| The inertia of interacting charges seems to work fine.
| Compton effect.

This seems to avoid the question of what is the photon traversing in-between
identifiable particles and suggests an independence by the photon from that
area of traverse

|
| The mass and tension of a wire determines the speed a wave
| moves along a piano string.

Fine so there must be a medium in which the mediating photons travel, so is
a photon a modulation of the medium or not ?

|
| >
| > |
| > | "If no mass or energy is moved there is nothing whatsoever to violate
the
| > | conservation principle". But then think twice about that statement.
Are
| > | we describing an "action"? No... only in Maxwell's ether where he
thought
| > | there was a action involved modifiying a substance so included terms
for
| > | "retarded potential".
| >
| > Varying phase relationships seems a necessary function of existence from
my
| > pov whether they be retarded or advanced seem to a large extent
dependant on
| > you pov as far as measurment goes anyway.
|
| Well... putting delays where there is no need or mechanism hardly seems
| necessary. (politics excepted )

The medium provides the delay in which the fields\objects move ?

|
| >
| > |
| > | In Weber's "fields" the inertia of the charges explains the
propagation
| > | delay so no further delay needs be included which you would have to
| > | term "a delay intrinsic to nothing" That is absurb sounding whether
| > | Maxwell or Weber says it.
| >
| > Thanks that explains Webers delay
|
| Every ant has the same elephant to study. :o)

Yes I do see that you can concoct a mechanism in which things independent of
the medium move and have inertia as an intrinsic property and then they can
emit and absorb energy packets that may or may not be independent of the
medium and this process mediates force. If this describes Webers position I
will debate its validity with you if you wish?

|
| > but it may still be difficult to explain
| > delay other than by something like. The existence of time and distance
are
| > all
| > that are needed to demonstrate and prove existence. Time and distance
| > introduce a delay that defines energy and the propagation of the energy
| > effect in time and distance introduce a delay or somesutch..
|
| If you want to prove you existence, just go ask "The Missus" if
| she might be putting on a little weight. How much longer you exist
| is debatable but you will know for sure that you do.

We don't have that sort of violent relationship and lack of understanding of
each others states. Why do you think I fight with you.{:-)

| http://www.users.qwest.net/~efotheringham/Media/internet%20dominatrix.jpg
|
| Sue...
|
| >
| > |
| > | Sue...
| > |
| > |
| > | > |
| > | > | Sue...
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
| >
|
|



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Electo London Gravity ?
    ... |> | of interaction between the charges. ... Maxwell believed in a ... |> for macro stuff I think Maxwell is needed with his fields so Weber ... finite delay at electron charge level scale and then ~GR kicks in at normal ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Electo London Gravity ?
    ... > |> for macro stuff I think Maxwell is needed with his fields so Weber ... > finite delay at electron charge level scale and then ~GR kicks in at normal ... The existence of time and distance are ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Electo London Gravity ?
    ... > | Maxwells aether is benign or some implentation of Weber? ... > This seems to avoid the question of what is the photon traversing in-between ... > Fine so there must be a medium in which the mediating photons travel, ... > The medium provides the delay in which the fields\objects move? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast