Hi The Madelung constant is vital for our existence. At least some crystalline matter can not exist if it is divergent. The Madelung constants, there are different ones for different crystals, have by experiment and common experience a finite value. This means that our reality is cubic and not spherical. Any mention of physics being coordinate invariant is thus falsified. Coordinate invariance is just an assumption that some physicists have made based on ideals instead of real experiences.
The math behind this is not hard to grasp. Imagine having to divergent series. One is diverging towards positive infinity and the other towards negative infinity. If you add those two together they can become convergent depending on in which order the additions are being made. On the other hand it is imaginable that spherical mass distributions have divergent Madelung constants meaning that their atoms have a diverging electric potential, and that cubic distributions have finite electric potentials for their atoms. I think it would be very interesting to have a convergent Madelung constant for a crystal and then change something so that it becomes divergent. Extreme potentials would then appear in the matter and maybe progress above what is needed for fusion or fission. One thing that strikes me is that Plutonium has a lot of different possible crystalline states. Maybe this is connected with it being radioactive? I ask for an investigation regarding a connection between nuclear activity and Madelung divergence. Why have we been told that electric potentials in matter are too weak to cause nuclear reactions when the Madelung series summation can give a totally different result? I have seen reports being mentioned where it says that the shape of an object can affect the rate at which a radioactive material is decaying. One could assume that spherical mass distributions radiate more than cubic masses. On the other hand I haven't examined at what rate the Madelung constant diverges. If it is diverging at sizes of a black hole then truly it is describing reality. Could someone investigate this further? I just need an argument against anything that is referring to coordinate invariance. I do think alternatives to coordinate invariant theories should and even must be examined. Solvability of equations is sometimes also dependent on coordinate choice. The advance of physical science is said to have originated from changing to an origo at the Sun instead of Earth, and currently there is a problem of having it in a galactic centre. At a more philosophical level there is also support for that the way of viewing gives different experiences. David David Jonsson, Sweden, phone callto:+46703000370 On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Xavier Luminous < [email protected]> wrote: > One's choice of coordinate systems is entirely arbitrary... It's a > mathematical tool you choose to suit the problem at hand, not linked > to nature in any physical way. > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 7:44 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm only pointing out a practical consideration that is central to > science. > > If you can't communicate you relinquish reproducibility. > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 10:03 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> I imagine that Newton's laws would be difficult to understand in certain > >> coordinate systems but that does not suggest that they fail to function. > >> Are you implying that the laws of physics work or not depending upon the > >> view point? I contend that the real world does not care what coordinate > >> system we select to observe it as our choice is merely for our > convenience. > >> Maybe we are not discussing the same issue. > >> > >> Dave > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: James Bowery <[email protected]> > >> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Fri, Mar 2, 2012 3:45 am > >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Physice depends on choice of coordinates > >> > >> Newton's laws in spherical coordinates.... > >> > >> Sure... why not? > >> > >> Give it a try and report back. > >> > >> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:26 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> I do not agree that the choice of coordinate systems changes the > physics > >>> of any experiment. I only see the coordinate system chosen as a way to > >>> locate the position and other position derivatives of a body. > >>> > >>> Could you explain how the Madelung constant would relate to real world > >>> effects? > >>> > >>> Dave > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: David Jonsson <[email protected]> > >>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > >>> Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 6:42 pm > >>> Subject: [Vo]:Physice depends on choice of coordinates > >>> > >>> Hi > >>> > >>> The wish and desire of having physics independent of coordinate system > >>> can not be met nor fulfilled. The Madelung constant is proof of this. > It > >>> becomes divergent in spherical coordinates and convergent in cubic > >>> coordinate. Covariance can thus be forgotten. > >>> > >>> Check > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madelung_constant > >>> > >>> Are there any other examples of this effect where choice of coordinate > >>> system gives different values? > >>> > >>> David > >>> > >>> > >>> David Jonsson, Sweden, phone callto:+46703000370 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > >
