At 10:12 am 20/08/2005 -0400, Terry wrote:
>> From: Grimer
>
>> Interestingly enough the other night I was watching a
>> programme on Michael Faraday (whose house I pass by
>> every Sunday morning).
> How inspiring that must be!
>> It will be interesting to find out if anyone else can
>> see what I have seen.
> Bien sûr! But, do you distinguish among the terms:
>
> Beta atm
> Aether
> Dirac Sea
> ZPF
Good question.
You could have added Casimir pressure for good measure. 8-)
My preferred term is Beta-atmosphere since I find the analogy
with atmospheric pressure useful - and it arises naturally if
one starts one's analysis with sands and clays which are held
together by Alpha-atmospheric pressure in the case of coarse
sands (pF < 15 psi) and Beta-atmospheric pressure in the case
of clays, say. (pF > 15 psi).
Also, the Beta-atmosphere harks back to our foundation
paper of 1969....
==================================================
GRIMER, F.J. and R.E.HEWITT. The form of the
stress-strain curve of concrete interpreted
with a di-phase concept of material behaviour.
Structure, Solid Mechanics and Engineering Design.
Proceedings of the Southampton 1969 Civil
Engineering Conference. (M.Te'eni, Ed.),
Wiley Interscience, pp 681 - 691, 1972.
==================================================
....so I'm rather fond of it for sentimental reasons. <g>
I use the term Beta-aether when I want to stress that it
is one component of a hierarchy of aether pressures
(cf. the hierarchy of Alpha atmospheric partial pressures
of the various gasses).
The trouble with the terms Dirac Sea and ZPF is these
don't convey the same degree of tangibility as the Beta-
names. As far as I know, no one else has suggested that
attractive forces, like bonds, etc., are simply negations
of real external pressures which hold materials together.
Even the treatment of Casimir pressure (an external force
if ever there was one) is very ambivalent.
Frank
