I think E = M * Permeability better than E =Mc^2



 Science > Physics > I think E = M * Permeability better than E =Mc^2

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1
Topic: Science > Physics
User: ""
Date: 20 Mar 2005 01:07:27 PM
Object: I think E = M * Permeability better than E =Mc^2
Abbreviation #1: Uo = Permeability and Eo = Permittivity
Abbreviation #2:
The NEW Uo (same as: g instead of GM/r^2 and M instead of gamma(m) )
(#1) Permeability (Uo_new) should include a constant.
(#2) As well, LANGUAGE wise the meaning of permeability is inversed.
Uo_new = Permiability_new = 1 /permeability * constand = k * constant
Explanation:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
#1) Uo_new = Uo + constant
a) Why the c^2 (even in gamma)....because c^2 = 1/(Uo+Eo)
b) "THEY" say Eo maintains the same ratio with Uo for different mediums
(such as air, water) when computation is in terms of light propagation
through these mediums. (Eo_air/Eo_space = Uo_air /Uo_space)
thus Eo_air = Uo_air * (Eo_space/Uo_space)
thus Eo_air = Uo_air * constant
thus for different mediums: Eo = Uo * constant
thus c^2 = 1/ (Uo^2 * constant)
thus c = 1 / Uo_new (includes the constant =
sqrt(Uo_space/Eo_space))
---------------------------------------------------------------------
#2) Language Wise, the LOGIC for inversing Uo (Uo_new = 1/Uo = k):
Impermeable(the umbrella is impermeable to rain) means non-permeable
means 0% permeable.
Therefore 100% vacuum = 100% permeable (space is say 95% permeable)
But presently c ~ 1/ Uo
so for space c ~ 1/ (95% Uo) is slower than 1/ (5% Uo)
Therefore the inverse is nescessary c ~ Uo (and not 1/Uo)
Therefore Uo_new = 1/Uo
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Combining #1 and #2 above therefore:
c = Uo_new ( = 1/Uo_old * constant)
*******thus c = Permeability = Uo = k (for those familiar with k)
*******and E = M * Permeability
(better than E = Mc^2 since c varies with the permeability of the
medium)
(******* and gamma should use Uo instead of c^2 since a cesium clock's
dilation in air/atmosphere should be different than in space)
.


  Page 1 of 1


Related Articles
Please respond with reasonable answers or I'll keep pestering youall!!!!! -- Is neutron-neutron fusion easier to facilitate than proton-protonfusion? I think.
Listen Up -- Old papers may be more important than you think
Here we go again: Stars may be older than we think
I'm getting impatiient!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please respond with reasonableanswers or I'll keep pestering you all!!!!! -- Is neutron-neutron fusioneasier to facilitate than proton-proton fusion? I think.
Is neutron-neutron fusion easier to facilitate than proton-protonfusion? I think.
stars are closer than we think
I Honestly Think Relativity is More Interesting than Quantum Mechanics
Einstein was more right than people think
Fewer than four fundamental phrases for modern physicists (from a fightfully EPT filosofizer :->)
More than 6,000 Kg of thrust by pnn
do sound frequency more than 20000Hz hurt us?
Earth is more than 10 billion years old & evidence from TV show ORIGINS
Re: old dead wood from a tree stronger than any other wood from that
Negative Gravity Less Than One Earth-G? Or Less Than Zero-G?
Waves Larger Than the Universe?
 

NEWER

pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER