It's been a difficult day. I didn't mean to short-change you. My boss
has learned he has "senile aortic calcification" and must get a valve
job. I never even heard of the disease. He's been briefing me on my
new responsibilities for the next two months. All the responsibilities
but no rise in pay.
What I was *trying* to say is that the electric tension from a
motionless point charge is time invariant. I am intentionally avoiding
the word "field". I am also trying to say that that tension does not
propagate -- at least not like an electromagnetic wave -- maybe 10^12 x
c or faster.
I was trying to relate to Fred's assertion by using the ionizaton of
atomic hydrogen as being an immediate regaging of the electric field.
I see the pure electric tension as a direct relation to Shipov's
torsion field propagation. Here's a brief on Shipov:
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_6_1_6.html
At the same time, I'm trying to understand this crazy Brit (sorry,
that's redundant) who is saying that Jozef's law is off by eight orders
of magnitude. I'm confused because we did an experiment in Fizziks 102
in school using Stefan's law to calculate the area of a wolfram
filiment. We were only off by 75%. <g>
I'm not bored!
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen A. Lawrence
I'm not following you. The permeability of space, which is arguably an
artifict of the units chosen (since it pretty much disappears in cgs
units), shows up in Maxwell's equations but isn't interesting unless
the fields are changing. But I don't see how that relates to the
electric field viewed as a scalar field?
___________________________________________________
Try the New Netscape Mail Today!
Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List
http://mail.netscape.com
