Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- From: Dono <sa_ge@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:49:09 -0800 (PST)
On Nov 16, 9:28 am, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 16, 7:42 am, Dono <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 15, 11:25 pm, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 15, 10:15 pm, Dono <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 15, 7:46 pm, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 15, 9:41 pm, Dono <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 15, 7:37 pm, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Still don't see it Dono. We need the forces as measured in both K and
in K'.
Imbecile, Richard Perry
Frame K and K' are equivalent, they measure the SAME force.
You really need to learn the science (relativity) that you are trying
to disprove before making the lame attempts at disproving it.
Here you said "The force between 1 and 2 is a Coulomb force equal to:
kQ^2/2 "
In K, yes. But what is the force between 1 and 2 in K' ?
The SAME, old fart, Richard Perry. The SAME.
So all of the literature on special realtivity and the lorentz force
is incorrect? Then we agree. Thanks.
According you your scenario, old fart, K' is moving with speed v wrt
K,K".
Therefore, the force between wires 1 and 2, located in frames K" and K
is a LORENTZ force
kQ^2/2 sqrt(1-(v/c)^2)
The SAME value is measured by BOTH frames K" and K.
Now, frame K' is at rest wrt K", so, it will measure the SAME exat
value for the force as K", i.e.
kQ^2/2 sqrt(1-(v/c)^2)
Got it, old fart, Richard Perry
The force between 2 and 3 is
(2kqq'/d) gamma
Good, you are learning
F = mu_o q q' (c^2)(1+ (1/2)(v/c)^2) / 2 pi d
...which is wrong, old fart , Richard Perry.
I explained in your other thread all your errors.
I also gave you the correct method to calculate the force:
http://www.savefile.com/files/1885306
mu_o q q' (s^2 + v^2)/ 4 pi d
Which is the equation that I provided earlier for you, that you
didn't
seem to like.
...because it is wrong, old fart , Richard Perry
Again you avoid the question. For identical very long closely spaced
parallel lines of charge at rest wrt each other, and whose centers
laterally coincide, is the force between them invariant wrt
transformations from their rest frame to a moving frame K', or does it
change through a transformation from K to K'? Simple question. Are you
afraid to commit? This is about the tenth time you've you've ignored
the request.
Stubborn imbecile, Richard Perry
I gave you all the answers in the previous post, you just have to
read, old fart.
The force is NOT frame invariant in SR, old imbecile. Neither is
momentum, total energy, kinetic energy. All these quantities are frame
dependent.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- From: Dono
- Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- From: RP
- Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- From: Dono
- Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- From: RP
- Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- From: Dono
- Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- From: RP
- Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- Prev by Date: Re: Proof that Time Dilation does not exist.
- Next by Date: Re: A guide for students of physics in the art of spin Part 2
- Previous by thread: Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- Next by thread: Re: May sound silly, but then it isn't my theory.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
