He is certainly not the first person to formulate a velocity dependent version of Coulomb's law, but I think his formulation is the first to make use of a distinction between the velocity of approach and the velocity of recession. (If I have understood him correctly, it would mean if one was only interested in the force on an electron orbiting a proton in a perfectly circular orbit, the force would be described by the standard Coulomb's law since there would be no velocity of approach or recession.)
He tries to explain gravity using his theory but he concedes that there still may be a significant portion of gravity which is not explained by his theory. http://www.alternativephysics.org/book/Gravity.htm Harry On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 11:40 PM, John Berry <berry.joh...@gmail.com> wrote: > It would make sense, a Doppler like effect is very reasonable with > electric fields. > > Now if this is so, it is very possible that gravity could be explained > this way. > > > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 7:09 PM, H Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> James Bowery and other vortex members, >> >> Today I learned about the the work of Bernard Burchell. >> He argues for a velocity dependent version of coulomb's law* >> >> In his model the coloumb force between two like charges increases when >> the charges are moving together and decreases when they are moving apart. >> The reverse is true for opposite charges. >> >> The revised law: >> >> F = {K(q1)(q2)/r^2} {1 + [(q1)(q2)(v1- v2)]/c}^3 >> >> He goes into more detail here: >> http://www.alternativephysics.org/book/RelativisticMass.htm >> >> This is just a small fraction of his work. He has many bold and wonderful >> ideas in his free on-line book. >> >> http://www.alternativephysics.org/ >> >> ----------------- >> * I made a similar proposal on vortex sometime ago although it was >> nothing more than an intuition and I only considered like charges: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg45063.html >> >> Harry >> > >
