SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION

Science > Physics > SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 1 of 3

Topic:	Science > Physics
User:	"John Schoenfeld"
Date:	13 May 2004 12:49:39 AM
Object:	SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION

SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION:

Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2

where
G = gravitational constant
y = gamma for body 1 = 1/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
Y = gamma for body 2 = 1/sqrt(1 - V^2/c^2)
m0 = rest mass of body 1
M0 = rest mass of body 2
r = displacement between body 1 and body 2
c = light speed
PROOF:
Consider the SCHOENFELD-EINSTEIN FORCE:
F = (ypa)/ (bc)
= (y E a) / c^2
Deriving Newtons law of gravitation from SCHOENFELD'S 2ND LAW (F=(m+ v
dm/dv)a) gives:
Fg = G [ (m1 + v1 dm1/dv1) (m2 + v2 dm2/dv2) ] / r^2 -- Eq 1
Since,
F = (m + v dm/dv)a = (yEa)/c^2
then
(m + v dm/dv) = yE/c^2 --- Eq 2
Substituting Eq 2 into Eq 1 gives
Fg = G (y1 E1 y2 E2) / (c^4 r^2)
= G (y1^2 m0 y2^2 M0) / r^2
QED (there are other easier proofs as well).
.

User: "Bill Hobba"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	13 May 2004 02:39:23 AM

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405122149.16eecedb@posting.google.com...

SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION:

Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2

where
G = gravitational constant
y = gamma for body 1 = 1/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
Y = gamma for body 2 = 1/sqrt(1 - V^2/c^2)
m0 = rest mass of body 1
M0 = rest mass of body 2
r = displacement between body 1 and body 2
c = light speed

PROOF:
Consider the SCHOENFELD-EINSTEIN FORCE:
F = (ypa)/ (bc)
= (y E a) / c^2

Deriving Newtons law of gravitation from SCHOENFELD'S 2ND LAW (F=(m+ v
dm/dv)a) gives:

Fg = G [ (m1 + v1 dm1/dv1) (m2 + v2 dm2/dv2) ] / r^2 -- Eq 1

Since,
F = (m + v dm/dv)a = (yEa)/c^2
then
(m + v dm/dv) = yE/c^2 --- Eq 2

Substituting Eq 2 into Eq 1 gives

Fg = G (y1 E1 y2 E2) / (c^4 r^2)
= G (y1^2 m0 y2^2 M0) / r^2

QED (there are other easier proofs as well).

Let us suppose the position of one body changes then the force between the
bodies changes instantaneously. Does not look as though much is achieved.
Thanks
Bill
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	13 May 2004 11:09:49 AM

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<LCFoc.35786$TT.32069@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405122149.16eecedb@posting.google.com...

SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION:

Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2

where
G = gravitational constant
y = gamma for body 1 = 1/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
Y = gamma for body 2 = 1/sqrt(1 - V^2/c^2)
m0 = rest mass of body 1
M0 = rest mass of body 2
r = displacement between body 1 and body 2
c = light speed

PROOF:
Consider the SCHOENFELD-EINSTEIN FORCE:
F = (ypa)/ (bc)
= (y E a) / c^2

Deriving Newtons law of gravitation from SCHOENFELD'S 2ND LAW (F=(m+ v
dm/dv)a) gives:

Fg = G [ (m1 + v1 dm1/dv1) (m2 + v2 dm2/dv2) ] / r^2 -- Eq 1

Since,
F = (m + v dm/dv)a = (yEa)/c^2
then
(m + v dm/dv) = yE/c^2 --- Eq 2

Substituting Eq 2 into Eq 1 gives

Fg = G (y1 E1 y2 E2) / (c^4 r^2)
= G (y1^2 m0 y2^2 M0) / r^2

QED (there are other easier proofs as well).

Let us suppose the position of one body changes then the force between the
bodies changes instantaneously. Does not look as though much is achieved.

Which would violate observation or theory?
More importantly, 'r' is frame-dependent, and thus an observable
change in 'r' is constrained by c and so there is no problem.

Thanks
Bill

User: "Bill Hobba"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	13 May 2004 05:03:21 PM

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405130809.23d34ccc@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:<LCFoc.35786$TT.32069@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405122149.16eecedb@posting.google.com...

SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION:

Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2

where
G = gravitational constant
y = gamma for body 1 = 1/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
Y = gamma for body 2 = 1/sqrt(1 - V^2/c^2)
m0 = rest mass of body 1
M0 = rest mass of body 2
r = displacement between body 1 and body 2
c = light speed

PROOF:
Consider the SCHOENFELD-EINSTEIN FORCE:
F = (ypa)/ (bc)
= (y E a) / c^2

Deriving Newtons law of gravitation from SCHOENFELD'S 2ND LAW (F=(m+ v
dm/dv)a) gives:

Fg = G [ (m1 + v1 dm1/dv1) (m2 + v2 dm2/dv2) ] / r^2 -- Eq 1

Since,
F = (m + v dm/dv)a = (yEa)/c^2
then
(m + v dm/dv) = yE/c^2 --- Eq 2

Substituting Eq 2 into Eq 1 gives

Fg = G (y1 E1 y2 E2) / (c^4 r^2)
= G (y1^2 m0 y2^2 M0) / r^2

QED (there are other easier proofs as well).

Let us suppose the position of one body changes then the force between

the

bodies changes instantaneously. Does not look as though much is

achieved.

Which would violate observation or theory?

Both.

More importantly, 'r' is frame-dependent, and thus an observable
change in 'r' is constrained by c and so there is no problem.

Your logic is incorrect. In any frame if r changed then the force would
immediately change.
Thanks
Bill
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	14 May 2004 07:37:36 AM

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<JgSoc.37109$TT.33995@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405130809.23d34ccc@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:<LCFoc.35786$TT.32069@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405122149.16eecedb@posting.google.com...

SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION:

Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2

where
G = gravitational constant
y = gamma for body 1 = 1/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
Y = gamma for body 2 = 1/sqrt(1 - V^2/c^2)
m0 = rest mass of body 1
M0 = rest mass of body 2
r = displacement between body 1 and body 2
c = light speed

PROOF:
Consider the SCHOENFELD-EINSTEIN FORCE:
F = (ypa)/ (bc)
= (y E a) / c^2

Deriving Newtons law of gravitation from SCHOENFELD'S 2ND LAW (F=(m+ v
dm/dv)a) gives:

Fg = G [ (m1 + v1 dm1/dv1) (m2 + v2 dm2/dv2) ] / r^2 -- Eq 1

Since,
F = (m + v dm/dv)a = (yEa)/c^2
then
(m + v dm/dv) = yE/c^2 --- Eq 2

Substituting Eq 2 into Eq 1 gives

Fg = G (y1 E1 y2 E2) / (c^4 r^2)
= G (y1^2 m0 y2^2 M0) / r^2

QED (there are other easier proofs as well).

Let us suppose the position of one body changes then the force between

the

bodies changes instantaneously. Does not look as though much is

achieved.

Which would violate observation or theory?

Both.

Wrong.

More importantly, 'r' is frame-dependent, and thus an observable
change in 'r' is constrained by c and so there is no problem.

Your logic is incorrect. In any frame if r changed then the force would
immediately change.

If a frame observes a change in r then the relative gravitational
force would indeed change, but this does not imply that all other
frames observed a change in r and transitively a change in
gravitational force, does it? Like I said before, there is no problem.

Thanks
Bill

User: "Bill Hobba"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	14 May 2004 05:30:23 PM

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405140437.7d48af89@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:<JgSoc.37109$TT.33995@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405130809.23d34ccc@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:<LCFoc.35786$TT.32069@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405122149.16eecedb@posting.google.com...

(F=(m+ v

dm/dv)a) gives:

Fg = G [ (m1 + v1 dm1/dv1) (m2 + v2 dm2/dv2) ] / r^2 -- Eq 1

Since,
F = (m + v dm/dv)a = (yEa)/c^2
then
(m + v dm/dv) = yE/c^2 --- Eq 2

Substituting Eq 2 into Eq 1 gives

Fg = G (y1 E1 y2 E2) / (c^4 r^2)
= G (y1^2 m0 y2^2 M0) / r^2

QED (there are other easier proofs as well).

Let us suppose the position of one body changes then the force

between

the

bodies changes instantaneously. Does not look as though much is

achieved.

Which would violate observation or theory?

Both.

Wrong.

More importantly, 'r' is frame-dependent, and thus an observable
change in 'r' is constrained by c and so there is no problem.

Your logic is incorrect. In any frame if r changed then the force would
immediately change.

In am claiming, since the force depends on r2, that in any frame the speed
of interaction will be infinite, in violation of relativity which says
plainly and simply only one speed can be the same - the speed of light.
According to relativity if the distance between two objects changes it will
change in all other frames. If you see a particle 'wiggle' in one frame it
'wiggles' in all frames thus the interaction will be transmitted
instantaneously in all frames.
Thanks
Bill
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	14 May 2004 10:15:40 PM

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote:

Your logic is incorrect. In any frame if r changed then the force would
immediately change.

Not instantaneously, but delayed by d/c where d is the distance
between the frame and the object which moved.
Imagine the sun and the earth both stationary in earth and suns frame
and both measure a distance r that separates them. Earth then
displaces and determines a distance between earth and the sun as r1.
Since the sun has not observed this displacement yet (because it is
delayed by r1/c) only in earth's frame can detect a force change, the
Sun determines no change.
.

User: "Bill Hobba"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	14 May 2004 11:41:30 PM

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405141915.1367ae4@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote:

Your logic is incorrect. In any frame if r changed then the force

would

immediately change.

In am claiming, since the force depends on r2, that in any frame the

speed

of interaction will be infinite, in violation of relativity which says
plainly and simply only one speed can be the same - the speed of light.
According to relativity if the distance between two objects changes it

will

change in all other frames. If you see a particle 'wiggle' in one frame

'wiggles' in all frames thus the interaction will be transmitted
instantaneously in all frames.

Not instantaneously, but delayed by d/c where d is the distance
between the frame and the object which moved.

The frame is consdered to extend through all space and ocntains the objects
there is a distance between. There is no distance between hte object and it
frame - the concept is meningless.

Imagine the sun and the earth both stationary in earth and suns frame
and both measure a distance r that separates them. Earth then
displaces and determines a distance between earth and the sun as r1.
Since the sun has not observed this displacement yet (because it is
delayed by r1/c) only in earth's frame can detect a force change, the
Sun determines no change.

According to your equation it depends on distance only - see that r2 you
have in the denominator - it instantly changes the moment the distance
changes - that r is the distance in the frame - it does not matter if the
thing at the other end of a distance measurement has seen it or not - the
distance changes. In an inertial frame it does not matte how far two points
are separated their distance immodestly changes the moment one point moves.
This is what shows your equation is incorrect - we know that influences do
not travel faster than light but your equation predicts it does.
Your equation is Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2.
Imagine two particles at rest in an inerital frame. Thus your equation
reduces to G M0 m0/r2. Wiggle one particle - the distances changes straight
away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it - your equation
predicts it.
Thanks
Bill
.

User: "Lee Pugh"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	17 May 2004 02:27:43 AM

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_bhpc.38950$TT.5112@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

- we know that influences do

not travel faster than light but your equation predicts it does.

Your equation is Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2.

Imagine two particles at rest in an inerital frame. Thus your equation
reduces to G M0 m0/r2. Wiggle one particle - the distances changes

straight

away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it - your

equation

predicts it.

Thanks
Bill

Gravitation is presented by a effect whose cause is "re-direction of
enertia" caused by dynamic electrical fields.
Unlike cyclic light, those dynamic electrical fields are of a dc form and
are in constraint, and they are causing instant responses
on both source and target bodies without regard to frames. The dedicated
force field we call gravitation is an wysiwyg engineering cloak built by
wysiwyg physics. It is purely, in the simplest form an illusion as a
dedicated force field.
When a body is painted with a dynamic electrical field, it is of course
painted with a variety of fields from multiple sources,
and they are all placing the body into a field topology which is the
aggregate of all the fields, instantly, the body is affected by all the
fields from inumerable frames. It also develops an instant change in its own
dynamic electrical field which paints all those other host bodies and they
instantly have their own inertia re-directed. Its a mutual admiration
society of rock and roll!
This is in my opinion.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh
.

User: "Bill Hobba"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	17 May 2004 05:47:01 AM

"Lee Pugh" <miltonpugh@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:PPZpc.9241$B_7.656@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_bhpc.38950$TT.5112@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

- we know that influences do

straight

away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it - your

equation

predicts it.

Thanks
Bill

Gravitation is presented by a effect whose cause is "re-direction of
enertia" caused by dynamic electrical fields.

EM is described by a 4 vector, gravity is described by a tensor. They are
mutually incompatible at out normal level of experience. They can be
unfired by invoking a 5th dimension such as Kaluza-Klein.

Unlike cyclic light, those dynamic electrical fields are of a dc form and
are in constraint, and they are causing instant responses
on both source and target bodies without regard to frames. The dedicated
force field we call gravitation is an wysiwyg engineering cloak built by
wysiwyg physics. It is purely, in the simplest form an illusion as a
dedicated force field.

When a body is painted with a dynamic electrical field, it is of course
painted with a variety of fields from multiple sources,
and they are all placing the body into a field topology which is the
aggregate of all the fields, instantly, the body is affected by all the
fields from inumerable frames. It also develops an instant change in its

own

dynamic electrical field which paints all those other host bodies and they
instantly have their own inertia re-directed. Its a mutual admiration
society of rock and roll!
This is in my opinion.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh

And the experimental evidence for your opinion is?
Thanks
Bill
.

User: "Lee Pugh"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	17 May 2004 08:17:27 AM

Experimental evidence for re-direction of inertia:
1. Set up a crt with a cross hatch.
2. With a bar magnet in your hand, near the crt,observe how the dynamic
electrical field, which is tangential to the bar, clockwise as you view the
southseeking pole, cause the path of the electrons in flight in the crt to
be manipulated by the dynamic electrical field.
Dynamic electrical fields were first demonstrated by Ampere. Ampere
described the clockwise or counter clockwise electrical field.
3. Come to understand that the electrical field is non cyclic and is
supported by the magnet's aligned atoms in its magnetic domains.
4. Come to understand that in avalanch propagation, light is a cyclic
electrical field and at each electrical reversal of phase, the propagation
stops, reverses, and restored to radial propagation at each other reversal.
(actually approaching peak levels of electrial charge density, not at point
of polarity shift)
5.Come to understand that dedicated fields are purely illusionary force
fields although they are accomodated by a wonderful wysiwyg mathmatical
cloak, and they require no medium as such.
6 Come to understand the only thing necessary to facillitate action at a
distance is avalanch propagation of dynamic electrical fields, whose varied
topology is cause of such effects as our percieved magnetic fields, and
gravitational fields.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh Have you read my 50kb hypothesis? Its free for the
asking. No Math!
"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:FK0qc.43365$TT.19330@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

"Lee Pugh" <miltonpugh@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:PPZpc.9241$B_7.656@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_bhpc.38950$TT.5112@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

- we know that influences do

not travel faster than light but your equation predicts it does.

Your equation is Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2.

Imagine two particles at rest in an inerital frame. Thus your

equation

reduces to G M0 m0/r2. Wiggle one particle - the distances changes

straight

away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it - your

equation

predicts it.

Thanks
Bill

Gravitation is presented by a effect whose cause is "re-direction of
enertia" caused by dynamic electrical fields.

Unlike cyclic light, those dynamic electrical fields are of a dc form

and

are in constraint, and they are causing instant responses
on both source and target bodies without regard to frames. The dedicated
force field we call gravitation is an wysiwyg engineering cloak built by
wysiwyg physics. It is purely, in the simplest form an illusion as a
dedicated force field.

When a body is painted with a dynamic electrical field, it is of course
painted with a variety of fields from multiple sources,
and they are all placing the body into a field topology which is the
aggregate of all the fields, instantly, the body is affected by all the
fields from inumerable frames. It also develops an instant change in its

own

dynamic electrical field which paints all those other host bodies and

they

instantly have their own inertia re-directed. Its a mutual admiration
society of rock and roll!
This is in my opinion.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh

And the experimental evidence for your opinion is?

Thanks
Bill

User: "Bill Hobba"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	17 May 2004 07:14:37 PM

"Lee Pugh" <miltonpugh@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:HX2qc.9264$_m1.3188@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...

the

southseeking pole, cause the path of the electrons in flight in the crt

be manipulated by the dynamic electrical field.
Dynamic electrical fields were first demonstrated by Ampere. Ampere
described the clockwise or counter clockwise electrical field.
3. Come to understand that the electrical field is non cyclic and is
supported by the magnet's aligned atoms in its magnetic domains.
4. Come to understand that in avalanch propagation, light is a cyclic
electrical field and at each electrical reversal of phase, the propagation
stops, reverses, and restored to radial propagation at each other

reversal.

(actually approaching peak levels of electrial charge density, not at

point

of polarity shift)
5.Come to understand that dedicated fields are purely illusionary force
fields although they are accomodated by a wonderful wysiwyg mathmatical
cloak, and they require no medium as such.
6 Come to understand the only thing necessary to facillitate action at a
distance is avalanch propagation of dynamic electrical fields, whose

varied

topology is cause of such effects as our percieved magnetic fields, and
gravitational fields.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh Have you read my 50kb hypothesis? Its free for the
asking. No Math!

And the evidence that electric fields can affect neutral particles as
gravity does is?
Thanks
Bill

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:FK0qc.43365$TT.19330@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

"Lee Pugh" <miltonpugh@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:PPZpc.9241$B_7.656@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_bhpc.38950$TT.5112@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

- we know that influences do

not travel faster than light but your equation predicts it does.

Your equation is Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2.

Imagine two particles at rest in an inerital frame. Thus your

equation

reduces to G M0 m0/r2. Wiggle one particle - the distances changes

straight

away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it - your

equation

predicts it.

Thanks
Bill

Gravitation is presented by a effect whose cause is "re-direction of
enertia" caused by dynamic electrical fields.

EM is described by a 4 vector, gravity is described by a tensor. They

are

mutually incompatible at out normal level of experience. They can be
unfired by invoking a 5th dimension such as Kaluza-Klein.

Unlike cyclic light, those dynamic electrical fields are of a dc form

and

are in constraint, and they are causing instant responses
on both source and target bodies without regard to frames. The

dedicated

force field we call gravitation is an wysiwyg engineering cloak built

wysiwyg physics. It is purely, in the simplest form an illusion as a
dedicated force field.

When a body is painted with a dynamic electrical field, it is of

course

painted with a variety of fields from multiple sources,
and they are all placing the body into a field topology which is the
aggregate of all the fields, instantly, the body is affected by all

the

fields from inumerable frames. It also develops an instant change in

its

own

dynamic electrical field which paints all those other host bodies and

they

instantly have their own inertia re-directed. Its a mutual admiration
society of rock and roll!
This is in my opinion.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh

And the experimental evidence for your opinion is?

Thanks
Bill

User: "Lee Pugh"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	17 May 2004 09:15:27 PM

Dynamic electrical fields have toplogies which can be catalogued and their
attributes related to different functional effects.
The attributes include direction of electrical field, direction of
propagation of the attributes of the field, strength of spatial charge
densities, gradient of strength in direction of propagation and others.
The effects of magnetism causes a dynamic electrical field having a curved
electrical field. That curvature in the field (electrical field) will cause
ferromagnetic partical to respond magnetically.
Even if a material has no magnetic attributes, a gradient of strength
between planes of spatial charge densities allow for a plot of planar
spatial charge densities of equal potential having a gradient between the
planes along the direction of propagation. This is a cause for the effect
of gravitation.
There will be a direction of electrical field allowed, but if it is not
curved, only a force toward the stronger spatial charge densities
(orthogonal to the electrical field direction) is observed as a redirection
of inertia of the charged partical in motion.
It is in my opinion that the partical in motion can be electrically neutral
and still experience a redirection of inertia. But it has to have some
aspect of motion because it is only its own inertia that becomes
re-directed. The dynamic electrical field has no taxable energies and is not
carrying a charge away from its host. Dynamic electrical fields carry with
them only the attributes of topology of their host's dynamic electrical
fields. The algorythem of the hosted field, if you like.
I really like to read what you have to say about gravitation, I just wanted
you to know that some of us think that unlike light,
there are fields that support ftl propagation and gravitation and permanent
magnets are in that group. They are dc type fields, non cyclic, and are
instantly inflated and in constraint.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh
"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Nzcqc.44159$TT.9999@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

"Lee Pugh" <miltonpugh@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:HX2qc.9264$_m1.3188@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...

the

southseeking pole, cause the path of the electrons in flight in the crt

propagation

stops, reverses, and restored to radial propagation at each other

reversal.

(actually approaching peak levels of electrial charge density, not at

point

varied

topology is cause of such effects as our percieved magnetic fields, and
gravitational fields.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh Have you read my 50kb hypothesis? Its free for

the

asking. No Math!

And the evidence that electric fields can affect neutral particles as
gravity does is?

Thanks
Bill

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:FK0qc.43365$TT.19330@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

"Lee Pugh" <miltonpugh@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:PPZpc.9241$B_7.656@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_bhpc.38950$TT.5112@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

- we know that influences do

not travel faster than light but your equation predicts it does.

Your equation is Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2.

Imagine two particles at rest in an inerital frame. Thus your

equation

reduces to G M0 m0/r2. Wiggle one particle - the distances

changes

straight

away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it - your

equation

predicts it.

Thanks
Bill

Gravitation is presented by a effect whose cause is "re-direction of
enertia" caused by dynamic electrical fields.

EM is described by a 4 vector, gravity is described by a tensor. They

are

mutually incompatible at out normal level of experience. They can be
unfired by invoking a 5th dimension such as Kaluza-Klein.

Unlike cyclic light, those dynamic electrical fields are of a dc

form

and

are in constraint, and they are causing instant responses
on both source and target bodies without regard to frames. The

dedicated

force field we call gravitation is an wysiwyg engineering cloak

built

wysiwyg physics. It is purely, in the simplest form an illusion as a
dedicated force field.

When a body is painted with a dynamic electrical field, it is of

course

painted with a variety of fields from multiple sources,
and they are all placing the body into a field topology which is the
aggregate of all the fields, instantly, the body is affected by all

the

fields from inumerable frames. It also develops an instant change in

its

own

dynamic electrical field which paints all those other host bodies

and

they

instantly have their own inertia re-directed. Its a mutual

admiration

society of rock and roll!
This is in my opinion.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh

And the experimental evidence for your opinion is?

Thanks
Bill

User: "Bill Hobba"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	19 May 2004 12:34:59 AM

"Lee Pugh" <miltonpugh@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3leqc.9559$Jk6.9326@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...

cause

ferromagnetic partical to respond magnetically.

Even if a material has no magnetic attributes, a gradient of strength
between planes of spatial charge densities allow for a plot of planar
spatial charge densities of equal potential having a gradient between the
planes along the direction of propagation. This is a cause for the effect
of gravitation.

You still have no answered the question - how do electric fields affect
neutral particles. Gravity affects all particles - not just charged ones.
Thanks
Bill

There will be a direction of electrical field allowed, but if it is not
curved, only a force toward the stronger spatial charge densities
(orthogonal to the electrical field direction) is observed as a

redirection

of inertia of the charged partical in motion.
It is in my opinion that the partical in motion can be electrically

neutral

and still experience a redirection of inertia. But it has to have some
aspect of motion because it is only its own inertia that becomes
re-directed. The dynamic electrical field has no taxable energies and is

not

carrying a charge away from its host. Dynamic electrical fields carry with
them only the attributes of topology of their host's dynamic electrical
fields. The algorythem of the hosted field, if you like.

I really like to read what you have to say about gravitation, I just

wanted

you to know that some of us think that unlike light,
there are fields that support ftl propagation and gravitation and

permanent

magnets are in that group. They are dc type fields, non cyclic, and are
instantly inflated and in constraint.

Kind regards, Lee Pugh

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Nzcqc.44159$TT.9999@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

"Lee Pugh" <miltonpugh@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:HX2qc.9264$_m1.3188@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...

Experimental evidence for re-direction of inertia:
1. Set up a crt with a cross hatch.
2. With a bar magnet in your hand, near the crt,observe how the

dynamic

electrical field, which is tangential to the bar, clockwise as you

view

the

southseeking pole, cause the path of the electrons in flight in the

crt

propagation

stops, reverses, and restored to radial propagation at each other

reversal.

(actually approaching peak levels of electrial charge density, not at

point

of polarity shift)
5.Come to understand that dedicated fields are purely illusionary

force

fields although they are accomodated by a wonderful wysiwyg

mathmatical

cloak, and they require no medium as such.
6 Come to understand the only thing necessary to facillitate action at

distance is avalanch propagation of dynamic electrical fields, whose

varied

topology is cause of such effects as our percieved magnetic fields,

and

gravitational fields.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh Have you read my 50kb hypothesis? Its free for

the

asking. No Math!

And the evidence that electric fields can affect neutral particles as
gravity does is?

Thanks
Bill

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:FK0qc.43365$TT.19330@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

"Lee Pugh" <miltonpugh@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:PPZpc.9241$B_7.656@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_bhpc.38950$TT.5112@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

- we know that influences do

not travel faster than light but your equation predicts it does.

Your equation is Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2.

Imagine two particles at rest in an inerital frame. Thus your

equation

reduces to G M0 m0/r2. Wiggle one particle - the distances

changes

straight

away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it -

your

equation

predicts it.

Thanks
Bill

Gravitation is presented by a effect whose cause is "re-direction

enertia" caused by dynamic electrical fields.

EM is described by a 4 vector, gravity is described by a tensor.

They

are

mutually incompatible at out normal level of experience. They can

unfired by invoking a 5th dimension such as Kaluza-Klein.

Unlike cyclic light, those dynamic electrical fields are of a dc

form

and

are in constraint, and they are causing instant responses
on both source and target bodies without regard to frames. The

dedicated

force field we call gravitation is an wysiwyg engineering cloak

built

wysiwyg physics. It is purely, in the simplest form an illusion as

dedicated force field.

When a body is painted with a dynamic electrical field, it is of

course

painted with a variety of fields from multiple sources,
and they are all placing the body into a field topology which is

the

aggregate of all the fields, instantly, the body is affected by

all

the

fields from inumerable frames. It also develops an instant change

its

own

dynamic electrical field which paints all those other host bodies

and

they

instantly have their own inertia re-directed. Its a mutual

admiration

society of rock and roll!
This is in my opinion.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh

And the experimental evidence for your opinion is?

Thanks
Bill

User: "Lee Pugh"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	19 May 2004 04:13:39 AM

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7mCqc.47048$TT.22667@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

You still have no answered the question - how do electric fields affect
neutral particles. Gravity affects all particles - not just charged ones.

Thanks
Bill

Neutral perticles are neutral only to their own body.
If a neutral partical experienced a neutral dynamic electrical field, there
would be no re-direction of enertia.
Any dynamic electrical field is not neutral however (and there could be no
avalanch propagation}and the neutral partical would experience a electrical
potential difference to
to any spatial charge presented to it by a dynamic electrical field in real
time. If the neutral charge is in motion, it would have inertia which would
be re-directed. ie, experience the effect of gravitation.
Kind regards, Lee Pugh
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	15 May 2004 07:44:57 AM

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<_bhpc.38950$TT.5112@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405141915.1367ae4@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote:

Your logic is incorrect. In any frame if r changed then the force

would

immediately change.

In am claiming, since the force depends on r2, that in any frame the

speed

will

change in all other frames. If you see a particle 'wiggle' in one frame

'wiggles' in all frames thus the interaction will be transmitted
instantaneously in all frames.

Not instantaneously, but delayed by d/c where d is the distance
between the frame and the object which moved.

The frame is consdered to extend through all space and ocntains the objects
there is a distance between. There is no distance between hte object and it
frame - the concept is meningless.

'r' is the distance between the two bodies, measured in some frame. It
is not the distance between a body and the frame. The frame only
detects a change in Fg if it detects a change in r. I suppose the
concept is a "relative action-at-a-distance".

I disagree. In Earths frame, Earth knows that is has observed the
change in distance between sun and mercury before pluto does.
Consequently, Earth also knows that the gravitational force it
calculates between mercury and sun is not the same as the one pluto
calculates at that instant in earth time, albeit both calculated
forces being equally valid since force is frame-dependent.

Your equation is Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2.

Imagine two particles at rest in an inerital frame. Thus your equation
reduces to G M0 m0/r2.

In that frame, yes.

Wiggle one particle - the distances changes straight
away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it - your equation
predicts it.

Relativistic "action-at-a-distance".

Thanks
Bill

User: "Bill Hobba"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	15 May 2004 09:07:56 PM

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405150444.6cce2de9@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:<_bhpc.38950$TT.5112@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405141915.1367ae4@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote:

Your logic is incorrect. In any frame if r changed then the

force

would

immediately change.

problem.

In am claiming, since the force depends on r2, that in any frame the

speed

of interaction will be infinite, in violation of relativity which

says

plainly and simply only one speed can be the same - the speed of

light.

According to relativity if the distance between two objects changes

will

change in all other frames. If you see a particle 'wiggle' in one

frame

'wiggles' in all frames thus the interaction will be transmitted
instantaneously in all frames.

Not instantaneously, but delayed by d/c where d is the distance
between the frame and the object which moved.

The frame is consdered to extend through all space and ocntains the

objects

there is a distance between. There is no distance between hte object

and it

frame - the concept is meningless.

the

thing at the other end of a distance measurement has seen it or not -

the

distance changes. In an inertial frame it does not matte how far two

points

are separated their distance immodestly changes the moment one point

moves.

This is what shows your equation is incorrect - we know that influences

not travel faster than light but your equation predicts it does.

Your equation is Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2.

Imagine two particles at rest in an inerital frame. Thus your equation
reduces to G M0 m0/r2.

In that frame, yes.

Wiggle one particle - the distances changes straight
away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it - your

equation

predicts it.

Relativistic "action-at-a-distance".

There is no such thing - relativity predicts influences that can be used to
send information (an the situation I described above certainly can do that)
can not occur faster then the speed of light. Your equation predicts that
is possible so is not an improvement on Newton's law not a competitor of GR
Thanks
Bill
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	05 Jun 2004 02:19:38 PM

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<02Apc.40759$TT.1802@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405150444.6cce2de9@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:<_bhpc.38950$TT.5112@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405141915.1367ae4@posting.google.com...

"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@hotmail.com> wrote:

Your logic is incorrect. In any frame if r changed then the

force
would

immediately change.

problem.

In am claiming, since the force depends on r2, that in any frame the

speed

of interaction will be infinite, in violation of relativity which

says

plainly and simply only one speed can be the same - the speed of

light.

According to relativity if the distance between two objects changes

it
will

change in all other frames. If you see a particle 'wiggle' in one

frame
it

'wiggles' in all frames thus the interaction will be transmitted
instantaneously in all frames.

Not instantaneously, but delayed by d/c where d is the distance
between the frame and the object which moved.

The frame is consdered to extend through all space and ocntains the

objects

there is a distance between. There is no distance between hte object

and it

frame - the concept is meningless.

the

thing at the other end of a distance measurement has seen it or not -

the

distance changes. In an inertial frame it does not matte how far two

points

are separated their distance immodestly changes the moment one point

moves.

This is what shows your equation is incorrect - we know that influences

not travel faster than light but your equation predicts it does.

Your equation is Fg = G (y^2 m0 Y^2 M0) / r^2.

Imagine two particles at rest in an inerital frame. Thus your equation
reduces to G M0 m0/r2.

In that frame, yes.

Wiggle one particle - the distances changes straight
away thus the force change instantaneously. No escaping it - your

equation

predicts it.

Relativistic "action-at-a-distance".

I explained to you already that changes in 'r' are frame-dependent and
constrained by c. If you displace earth 1 meter outwards and then 1
meter inwards over the period of one second, only earth's frame
detects variation in the gravitational field, sun's frame does not.

Thanks
Bill

User: ""
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	15 May 2004 06:59:25 AM

In article <a98beaaa.0405150444.6cce2de9@posting.google.com>,

(John Schoenfeld) wrote:
<snip>
You do realize that "frame" just means which size of grid paper you
use and that changing frames means the formula applied to move
from one grid-size of graph paper to another grid-size of graph
paper?
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
.

User: "Franz Heymann"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	15 May 2004 11:28:45 AM

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405141915.1367ae4@posting.google.com...
[snip]

Not instantaneously, but delayed by d/c where d is the distance
between the frame and the object which moved.

The laws of physics are independent of the choice of the origin of
coordinates
[snip]
Franz
.

User: "Mike"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	13 May 2004 10:00:16 AM

(John Schoenfeld) wrote in message news:<a98beaaa.0405122149.16eecedb@posting.google.com>...

[snip]
Let v approach c. Then y approaches infinity. Thus, Fg approaches
infinity.
According to your equation, if just a single particle achieves speed
near c, the whole universe will turn into a black hole due to the
infinite gravity force exerted by that particle at a distance,
irrespectively of its mass m0.
Thankfully, the young Deity Who created this world and then run away
in shame, was not as mistaken as you seem to be. At leat He understood
high school physics.
Mike
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	13 May 2004 10:56:38 PM

(Mike) wrote in message news:<9c1b39be.0405130700.6c032cdf@posting.google.com>...

j.schoenfeld@programmer.net (John Schoenfeld) wrote in message news:<a98beaaa.0405122149.16eecedb@posting.google.com>...

Of course. What happens to the energy of your particle as it's
velocity approaches c?
Hint:
Fg = (y e Y E)/(c^2r^2)
where e = mass-energy of body 1
E = mass-energy of body 2

Thankfully, the young Deity Who created this world and then run away
in shame, was not as mistaken as you seem to be. At leat He understood
high school physics.

Try again.

Mike

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	14 May 2004 08:41:21 AM

Hint:
Fg = (y e Y E)/(c^2r^2)

Typo: that should be c^4, not c^2.
.

User: "Michael Varney"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	14 May 2004 08:47:16 AM

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405140541.4a5af40e@posting.google.com...

Hint:
Fg = (y e Y E)/(c^2r^2)

Typo: that should be c^4, not c^2.

Hint: You are an idiot, Schoenfeld.
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	14 May 2004 07:50:23 PM

"Michael Varney" <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> wrote in message news:<L54pc.16$eg4.18671@news.uswest.net>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405140541.4a5af40e@posting.google.com...

Hint:
Fg = (y e Y E)/(c^2r^2)

Typo: that should be c^4, not c^2.

Hint: You are an idiot, Schoenfeld.

The original post has _NO_ error, that's why you and the rest of the
mench can't fault it.
.

User: "Sam Wormley"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	14 May 2004 08:23:37 PM

John Schoenfeld wrote:

"Michael Varney" <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> wrote in message news:<L54pc.16$eg4.18671@news.uswest.net>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405140541.4a5af40e@posting.google.com...

Hint:
Fg = (y e Y E)/(c^2r^2)

Typo: that should be c^4, not c^2.

Hint: You are an idiot, Schoenfeld.

The original post has _NO_ error, that's why you and the rest of the
mench can't fault it.

Nobody will ever try to use your crap.
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	15 May 2004 03:22:04 AM

Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:<40A57111.5E9158F6@mchsi.com>...

John Schoenfeld wrote:

"Michael Varney" <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> wrote in message news:<L54pc.16$eg4.18671@news.uswest.net>...

"John Schoenfeld" <j.schoenfeld@programmer.net> wrote in message
news:a98beaaa.0405140541.4a5af40e@posting.google.com...

Hint:
Fg = (y e Y E)/(c^2r^2)

Typo: that should be c^4, not c^2.

Hint: You are an idiot, Schoenfeld.

The original post has _NO_ error, that's why you and the rest of the
mench can't fault it.

Nobody will ever try to use your crap.

Wormley fails to come through with the math. Where's the error?
.

User: "Sam Wormley"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	15 May 2004 07:56:08 AM

Non Relativistic Force
F = ma
Relativistic Force for velocity vector parallel to the x-axis
F_x = m_o gamma^3 a_x
F_y = m_o gamma a_y
F_z = m_o gamma a_z
Some References
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NewtonsSecondLaw.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Force.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/GravitationalForce.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/RelativisticGamma.html
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	07 Jun 2004 05:46:35 PM

Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:<40A6135D.8C6C87B0@mchsi.com>...

Non Relativistic Force
F = ma

Relativistic Force for velocity vector parallel to the x-axis

F_x = m_o gamma^3 a_x
F_y = m_o gamma a_y
F_z = m_o gamma a_z

Some References
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NewtonsSecondLaw.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Force.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/GravitationalForce.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/RelativisticGamma.html

You didn't show the error, wormley. Where is the error?
.

User: "Sam Wormley"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	07 Jun 2004 06:49:44 PM

John Schoenfeld wrote:

Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:<40A6135D.8C6C87B0@mchsi.com>...

Non Relativistic Force
F = ma

Relativistic Force for velocity vector parallel to the x-axis

F_x = m_o gamma^3 a_x
F_y = m_o gamma a_y
F_z = m_o gamma a_z

Some References
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NewtonsSecondLaw.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Force.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/GravitationalForce.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/RelativisticGamma.html

You didn't show the error, wormley. Where is the error?

Three weeks was too long a wait to turn on your homework, Schoenfeld.
.

User: "John Schoenfeld"
Title: Re: SCHOENFELD'S LAW OF GRAVITATION	08 Jun 2004 11:23:44 AM

Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:<40C4FF1A.BFAA21BD@mchsi.com>...

John Schoenfeld wrote:

Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:<40A6135D.8C6C87B0@mchsi.com>...

Non Relativistic Force
F = ma

Relativistic Force for velocity vector parallel to the x-axis

F_x = m_o gamma^3 a_x
F_y = m_o gamma a_y
F_z = m_o gamma a_z

Some References
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NewtonsSecondLaw.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Force.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/GravitationalForce.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/RelativisticGamma.html

You didn't show the error, wormley. Where is the error?

Three weeks was too long a wait to turn on your homework, Schoenfeld.

You didn't show the error, wormley. Where is the error?
.