Re: Einstein's Mistakes

On Thu, RP <no_mail_no_spam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Make that zero *net* force rather than no force, and throw in an order
>of fries please. Zero macroscopic force doesn't imply zero microscopic
>force. Each and every charge within the mass is being forced
>continuously, though the average of all of the forces may vector sum to
>zero.

Ok.

>The forces on these charges are in turn due to electromagnetic
>interactions with absolutely every other charge in the universe that
>fall within their light cones.

Nonsense, although "the electrodynamics of
moving bodies" pays tribute to Euclidean space,
those who know relativity understand fully that
"space" has no attributes.

> Distant matter not only influences the
>motions of charges, but it is the only influence on the motion of
>charges. The word distant is also a relative term. All particles are
>distant wrt any given charge, the only difference being the actual
>magnitude of their separation. If distant galaxies have no effect on the
>motion of local charges, then neither do near charges, because wrt any
>charge whatsoever, all of the others are distant. Empirically we observe
>that light (which is just em radiation, which is in turn just an
>electromagnetic interaction between charges) does in fact extend
>completely across the known universe. QED.

So now light is also the carrier of inertia and gravity?

The concept of spacetime is exactly the opposite
of what the novice may think. Instead of a controlling
"medium", it is a stretchable maginary map, showing that
space has _NO_ attributes, and that there are no "forces"
acting at a distance.
This may be difficult for Newtonians because Euclidean
space is essential for Newtonian mechanics.

I am sorry that I cannot agree that light or any other
electromagnetic "charge" could be responsible for gravity
and inertia, because that would be an easy explanation,
but a more complicating -- wrong -- explanation.

Joe Fischer

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Since k varies but not G suggests an Eather
    ... Ok, the dipole moment then aint zero, P = Qd and it's Q aint zero. ... What "constant known velocity of charges in space"? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Since k varies but not G suggests an Eather
    ... Ok, the dipole moment then aint zero, P = Qd and it's Q aint zero. ... residual force of dipole charges is 1/r^3 ... since it isn't a velocity. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Einsteins Mistakes
    ... Zero macroscopic force doesn't imply zero microscopic force. ... motions of charges, but it is the only influence on the motion of charges. ... "medium", it is a stretchable maginary map, showing that space has _NO_ attributes, and that there are no "forces" acting at a distance. ... the accelerometer reads zero; in the second experiment it does not read zero. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Einsteins Mistakes
    ... Zero macroscopic force doesn't imply zero microscopic ... >>>The forces on these charges are in turn due to electromagnetic ... The word distant is also a relative term. ... do equate to interactions between charges with distance ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: New impoved facts part 1v02
    ... state of relative neutrality or zero. ... that were time and distance cross is a state of zero distance and time just ... The overall distance occupied by these two opposite charges ... The motion introduces the change/charge and as ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)