At 10:58 PM 12/8/4, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
The basic formula for A at a particular point, from Rindler, 2nd
edition, p. 111, or Griffiths, 3rd edition, p. 423 is just
A = (1/4pi)integral([J]dV/r)
where the integral is taken over all space, [J] is the retarded value of
the 4-current
Stephen A. Lawrence writes
Horace Heffner wrote: There are various concepts in which
charge might not be conserved.
[snip]
Since the ring is uniform, the 4-current density is not
varying in time,
and we can forget about the retarded part. The motion
of the ring
affects the spacelike parts
At 10:00 AM 12/8/4, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I had three comments on this analysis (which I snipped -- hope that's OK).
Not only OK, but such snipping is mandated (or at least strongly
encouraged) by the vortex rules. IMHO, the list could use more good
snippers like you! 8^)
First, watch
Horace Heffner wrote:
At 10:00 AM 12/8/4, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I had three comments on this analysis...
First, watch out for Shadowitz -- I've seen an instance where he messed
up an analysis by using the motion of the EM field relative to a
particle, which has no role in relativistic EM.
At 10:58 PM 12/8/4, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Horace Heffner wrote:
[snip stuff for a bit]
I showed that if pancaking is valid for an individual particle, then the
sum of such individual pancaking effects does not cancel at all points.
But again, the formula you started with was for a point
Harry Veeder wrote:
Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum,
perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not
conserved in all contexts.
Note: This is different from the concept of 'charge shielding'.
Furthermore, consider the fusion
Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum,
perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not
conserved in all contexts.
Note: This is different from the concept of 'charge shielding'.
Harry Veeder
At 3:05 AM 12/4/4, Harry Veeder wrote:
Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum,
perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not
conserved in all contexts.
Note: This is different from the concept of 'charge shielding'.
There are various
At 3:05 AM 12/4/4, Harry Veeder wrote:
Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum,
perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not
conserved in all contexts.
Here are some additional old posts you might find of interest on this
subject, though more
At 3:05 AM 12/4/4, Harry Veeder wrote:
Since it is acceptable to question conservation laws on this forum,
perhaps CF is possible because the charge on subatomic particles is not
conserved in all contexts.
Irreverance here, especially amateur irreverence, also sometimes extends to
Speaking of obtaining energy from the Zero Point Field (ZPF), the Atomic
Expansion Hypothesis (AEH) might be applied to obtain free energy from the
vaccum by doing electrolysis using a metal coated piezo-kinetic SLVN
(described in prior post in this thread) for a cathode. I will post the
Atomic
11 matches
Mail list logo
