Sorry, if the integration is done with higher precision it turns out to be
the traditional one.
But it is still useful for determining the gravity from other geometries. I
think it is bad that bodies are approximated with point sources in their
center of gravity.
David
From David Johnson
Sorry, if the integration is done with higher precision
it turns out to be the traditional one.
But it is still useful for determining the gravity from other
geometries. I think it is bad that bodies are approximated with
point sources in their center of gravity.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
Are you saying that gravity behaves in the traditional (Newtonian) way
inside solid bodies? Do you have links or papers to experiments that
support this? As I said, there are reported anomalies inside boreholes.
How do you or others explain them?
Take into
In reply to Mauro Lacy's message of Sat, 27 Nov 2010 15:39:30 -0300:
Hi,
[snip]
Take into account that although gravity can be related to mass and
density, that is, it can have a dependency on mass and density, that
does not mean mass and density are the causes of gravity. Indeed, it
makes a lot
On 11/27/2010 04:53 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Mauro Lacy's message of Sat, 27 Nov 2010 15:39:30 -0300:
Hi,
[snip]
Take into account that although gravity can be related to mass and
density, that is, it can have a dependency on mass and density, that
does not mean mass and
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 26 Nov 2010 14:43:01 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
Well, again - he detects lots of copper as a transmutation product
Well at least he detects SIMS peaks from 63-65 (BTW the 64 could as easily have
been Ni-64).
, and my
comment is that, like Mills, radioactivity
6 matches
Mail list logo
