If no neutral charge, all forces can be explained
in [Physics]
|
Prev: No neutral charge
Next: some backtracking in deriving speed of light from purely math considerations ; speed of light Chapt 19 #194; ATOM TOTALITY
From: Unified_Perspective on 24 Jun 2010 11:03 .... > explained, and the foundation for the Unified Field Theory. > Obviously the strongest force would be the primary, the lesser forces > it's derivative.! > Gravity by the sum of all repulsive forces with all the attractive > forces between both atoms. Where as the nucleus positive force is > always constant, and the negative forces momentary (excluding torque) > in relation to both their orbitals and wave like periods. I would just like to point out that field theory is an alternative or competitive theory to force theory. Newton, et. al. = Force Einstein, Maxwell, et. al. = Field If you want to do engineering calculating forces is the way to go. If you want to do physics field theory has distinct advantages!
From: BURT on 24 Jun 2010 14:43 On Jun 24, 8:03 am, Unified_Perspective <agall...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > ... > > > explained, and the foundation for the Unified Field Theory. > > Obviously the strongest force would be the primary, the lesser forces > > it's derivative.! > > Gravity by the sum of all repulsive forces with all the attractive > > forces between both atoms. Where as the nucleus positive force is > > always constant, and the negative forces momentary (excluding torque) > > in relation to both their orbitals and wave like periods. > > I would just like to point out that field theory is an alternative or > competitive theory to force theory. I say there are force fields. Mitch Raemsch > > Newton, et. al. = Force > > Einstein, Maxwell, et. al. = Field > > If you want to do engineering calculating forces is the way to go. > > If you want to do physics field theory has distinct advantages!
From: guskz on 25 Jun 2010 02:09
On Jun 23, 6:04 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 2:01 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > If as in the prior post, the electron & proton do not truly form a > > neutral charge that the answer for ALL the forces can be EASILY > > explained, and the foundation for the Unified Field Theory. > > > The best simple model is two identical atoms with a single proton > > nucleus and single electron orbital to determine all the forces. > > > Obviously the strongest force would be the primary, the lesser forces > > it's derivative. > > > The electrical force #1. > > The magnetic force the math from the torque moment caused by the > > electron's orbital with the opposite atoms nucleus. > > Gravity by the sum of all repulsive forces with all the attractive > > forces between both atoms. Where as the nucleus positive force is > > always constant, and the negative forces momentary (excluding torque) > > in relation to both their orbitals and wave like periods. > > > 2010: Before Einstein and Earthquakes, GUSKZ. > > Congratulations. You just discovered Van der Waals forces. Give this > man a cookie. > > At this rate, you'll be capable of understanding most modern topics in > physics within the next couple of years. HOW many times has the count told you not to touch the electric pods, IGOR? der Walls *proves* how one force can produce more than one type of force, hence der Walls. Pay close attention here IGOR, there is a REASON why der Waals forces are USUALLY anisotropic, and dipole moments. As for IGOR's short-minded reply, what part of "USUALLY" does IGOR not understand. For this reason there is nothing to contradict there would be an OTHER derivative force (previous post explains the derivative) for the entire group of molecules or atoms not related to anisotropic moments. Now go call Frank_einstein we need to switch your brains again. |