🚀 go-pugleaf

On May 2, 11:29 pm, RP <no_mail_no_s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 2, 9:34 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 2, 10:07 pm, RP <no_mail_no_s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> > ==========
>
> >  In my estimation precisely
>
> > > this same error is committed in the case of the gravitational
> > > interactions that we observe. If a complexity of electromagnetic
> > > interactions can cause neutral objects to repel each other (ordinary
> > > collisions), then it must also be possible for a similar complexity of
> > > electromagnetic interactions to cause neutral masses to attract one
> > > another. And indeed, in the case of oppositely charged masses, they do
> > > attract, not just the charges of opposite sign, but the entire neutral
> > > mass to which these charges are bound.
>
> > Welcome to the horse's ass club. The view and the smell
> > isn't so great but we are confident you can get there
> > quicker by letting the horse get there first.  ;-)
>
> > Sue...

>
> I left of the clincher.  Go back to Einstein's famous thought
> experiment of the observer in an elevator.  In this case Einstein
> argues that such an observer cannot distinguish his inertial
> acceleration from a gravitational field. From this argument he argues
> in favor of the equivalence principle, stating that gravitational
> forces are exactly the same as inertial forces because they are
> completely indistinguishable. From this is derived the equivalence of
> inertial and gravitational mass.
>
> Well there is no mystery here when it is accepted that gravitational
 forces are electro-magnetic in origin.

I prefer the term "electro-dynamic"   'till I see
Maxwell's equations model a London force.
There are some assumptions about an axis of
symmetry and Lorentz invariance at scales
of 10^(-32) times the Coulomb force that  I can't
dismiss out of hand, although the distinction
may indeed be insignificant.

Maxwell on steroids for molecular dynamics:
http://www.research.ibm.com/grape/grape_ewald.htm


> ...In the case of the observer on
> the elevator, as already explained, the forces are exclusively
> electromagnetic. It is actually electromagnetic repulsion accelerating
> the observer. So here Einstein is equating gravity, an attractive
> force, to a repulsive electromagnetic force.  I'm certain that had he
> percieved his blunder here, he would have immediately recanted all
> of his papers on GR, and immediately set out to correct that error.
> What's ironic here is that he did indeed notice an error in his logic,
> and spent about 30 years in the attempt to unify electromagnetism and
> gravity.  

> He did not however have the correct electromagnetic theory
> at his disposal, namely the direct particle interaction theory that
> conforms to the metrical approach.  

> This theory wasn't relativised
> until Feynman, and so it simply wasn't available to Einstein during
> those 30 years.


So says  Wal Thornhill:
<< Einstein published his theory of gravitation, or
general theory of relativity, in 1916. And so a new
paradigm, or set of beliefs, was established. It was
not until 1930 that Fritz London explained the weak,
attractive dipolar electric bonding force (known as
Van der Waals’ dispersion force or the “London force”)
that causes gas molecules to condense and form liquids
and solids. Like gravity, the London force is always
attractive and operates between electrically neutral
molecules. And that precise property has been the most
puzzling distinction between gravity and the powerful
electromagnetic forces, which may repel as well as attract.>>
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=r4k29syp


I suppose a cart and horse are "unified"  regardless of
their orientation but this suggestion makes his design
for a blouse look like a good idea.

<<   A second problem which at present is the subject of
lively interest is the identity between the gravitational
field and the electromagnetic field. The mind striving after
unification of the theory cannot be satisfied that two fields
should exist which, by their nature, are quite independent.
A mathematically unified field theory is sought in which the
gravitational field and the electromagnetic field are interpreted
only as different components or manifestations of the same
uniform field, the field equations where possible no longer
consisting of logically mutually independent summands.
The gravitational theory, considered in terms of mathematical
formalism, i.e. Riemannian geometry, should be generalized
so that it includes the laws of the electromagnetic field. >>
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1921/einstein-lecture.html

Blouse patent:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=zRpsAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=albert+einstein#PPA1,M1

It his difficult to conceive a mind that could see so much
more than his contemporaries yet miss so much that
we take for granted.  But whatever will we do with
our  20/20 hindsight if we don't use it to play tricks on
ourselves.

Sue...