sci.physics.particle

On Mar 5, 9:45=A0pm, "hanson" wrote:
> "Selwyn-Lloyd McPherson" wrote in message
>
> news:47ce7f36$0$25124$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
> If you take the inverse square law (a =3D 1/b^2) to 0 (b --> 0)
> then a seems to go to infinity.
>
> Sam Wormley said:
> b can't really go to zero.... that's a physical limitation for most
> systems.
>
> "Insipid Halogen Name" =A0 said:
> b is the distance between _centers_ (of mass, of charge) of two different
> bodies so it is just about impossible to get them extremely close.
>
> hanson wrote:
>
> in Newton's F =3D G*m*M/r^2, of course, "r" can't go to zero, because
> any "m" requires a positive "r"... There were very recently a bunch
> of threads that dealt with the =A0r-min conditions, including whether "G"
> is really constant, since only the product of "G*m" can be measured
> to great exactness, but NOT so the value of "G" alone. =A0GR tried to
> improve the situation, but as long as it uses Newton's "G" in all of its
> solutions, this Einstein crock n'crap is not any better than Newton's.
>
> It is equally funny to muse over F =3D G*m*M/r^2 with "r" going to infinit=
y
> where according to the equation F only becomes zero at infinity...
> However currently accepted speculation says that this is wrong
> because F is already zero when "r" reaches the distance to the light
> wall, "R", the radius the observable universe, from beyond which we
> cannot "feel" any force any more, F(R) =3D 0 .... ahahaha...
>
> One can make the same spiel with the EM charge 1/r^2 law... and
> show that the EM reach is not infinite, because it turns out that at a
> separation distance of the cosmic "R" between 2 elementary electrical
> charges they will neither attract nor repel each other any more, since
> (amongst other reasons) the time required to "feel" each other will
> exceed the time "t" that the observable universe allegedly has existed.
> And to make matter seven more hilarious throw in the HUP, ~E=3Dh*t,
> and estimate the remaining energy & fore between 2 charges under
> these theoretically but not practically observable conditions... ahahaha..=
.
>
> Enjoy all these mental bullsherations, dudes, but always remember
> that only $4 with or without such knowledge will buy you a cup of coffee..=
.
> Thanks for the laughs.... ahahaha... ahahahanson

-----------
right !!

amthematiciance that call themselves physicists
donot know that
each physical mathematicalformula
HAS ITS LIMITS OF VALIDATION !!
iow
there is not all over overlap between the
mathematical formula and physical reality
2
i can explain what you saied about
a force becoming zero even before infinit distance:

just think about all attraction agents
*as not moving in straight lines*
*but moving **naturally** in a curved line!!!
pleae not that 'naturally' - no one is forcing it
to do it- it is just as it was 'born' to behave

once the force line is curved
it cant reach to infinity !!

iow it ends its action even much before infinity
because the curved line causes it to go back
(as sort of a fountain) muchj more before infinity

now just think about the
CIRCLON .... (:-)
as a force agent !!
ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------