🚀 go-pugleaf

Dear Mr. CORLEY,                           11-15-92

  I (alexander Abian) wrote to Indra:

   Indra, please go to the nearest University, go to the Physics Department
find the most "prominent" physicist there and ask him/her:

    " WHY , say, TWO NEGATIVE ELECTRICAL CHARGES  REPEL "

My guess is that his/her answer will be  "It is a principle , we do not ask
why,  we use Coulomb's law to quantify the repelling force"

   Indra, my answer is  "According to (A1), the space tends to maintain
the status quo of its electrical neutrality and opposes a further concentr-
ation of negative charges, and repels them.  However, if we overpower the 
space we may crush  spaces' opposition", and a new Status Quo is created.
   
   Then Mr. Corley  you wrote to Indra:

>Indra, the real answer is that this is caused by the electromagnetic
>force which has been understood for literally centuries.  This
>may sound like mere posturing, (I can even hear Mr. Abian now,
>"you don't understand it so you call it electromagnetism"),

  Mr. Corley,   you are right, the above is mere posturing.  In fact
 
 THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCES ARE CREATED BY COSMOS PRECISELY TO REPEL
 THE LIKE ELECTRIC CHARGES TO COOPERATE WITH THE SPACE IN SPACE'S
 TENDENCY OF MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO OF ITS ELECTRICAL NEUTRALITY !!!
  (brilliant explanation - don't you agree !)
  
 Mr. Corley, I am glad  that you gave me an opportunity to explain and
demonstrate the depth of the insight of my (A1)!  Thank you.

  Then, you continue and you say:


>Let me put that another way.  Gravity (relativistically speaking)
>is a distortion of the space-time continuum.  If you extend that
>continuum to 5 dimensions, you get electromagnetism, which
>causes the two negative charges to repel.  


  Mr. Corley, 
    I do not think that there is a committee of saints who has
devised the extension of space-time continuum to the 5 dimensions
just to repel two like charges.  As I explained above,  the reason
of repelling forces is the TENDENCY OF MAINTAINING SPACES' ELECTRICAL
NEUTRALITY.

    Then you continue:

>There is no need to resort to these Status Quos and Provokers and Provokees 
>which are unclear, undefined, un-backed-up by mathematics, unpredictive,
>unscientific, and (I must admit) rapidly becoming more and more
>uninteresting.
     
  Mr. Corley,

     Any scientist after reading your explanation and my explanation will
definitely agree with me that THERE IS A NEED OF STRESSING THE FACT OF THE
EXISTENCE OF TENDENCIES OF MAINTAINING  THE STATUS  QUO .... , i.e.  (A1).

    Don't you see how strongly and overwhelmingly you and  the others are
clinging desperately to MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO's OF YOUR SCIENTIFIC
INDOCTRINATIONS ....

    You say TIME HAS INERTIA is becoming more and more uninteresting .
You agree that this is a put-down statement.  Why don't you just ignore the
Subject: TIME HAS INERTIA ! Why !  Because you feel that there is a
tremendous content there, a profound and revolutionary idea which
will pretty soon dominate and open a new phase in Physics!
  
    With best wishes and regards,
                                                Alexander Abian

                                   
-- 
   The tendency of maintaining the status-quo, Reaction to provocation and
                The tendency of maintaining again a status-quo.  
    TIME HAS INERTIA  and some energy is lost to move Time forward  
  E = mcc  (Einstein)    must be replaced by    E = m(0) exp(-At) (Abian)