I have on several occasions wondered about the nature of "mass" myself. Surely if we can proceed as far as we have in the study of "charge", developing practical applications in electricity, electronics, and field theory, then we should be able to do the same with "mass" for gravitonics.
Jr writes> My work suggests that gravitation is electromagnetism that acts on all atoms rather than just on the special case atoms possessing optimally arranged atomic internal structures, which when externally optimally arranged pick up and transfer (amplify) the electromagnetism (light is the slang term) generated into the field by planet and sun internal dynamos, and direct star radiation. IOW the electromagnetism that we harness is a special case of electromagnetism we define as gravity. It appears to me that all I have to show is that mass is a convenient representation of the cumulative resistance of atoms which makes the planet attraction a uniform attraction on atoms which makes gravity a manifestation of electromagnetism.. I once approached a processional mathematician expert in electronics field theory and casually mentioned that there should be a comparable set of field equations and applications of mass as for charge. His reply was withering and condescending at once, as he stated that they were in no way alike simply because both were inverse square fields. Jr writes> This makes them alike in the sense that both are merely least action consistent representations that we have successfully defined using the least action consistent mathematics in terms of the units we can measure like mass and charge, both being least action consistent quantities as well. Besides, he claimed, with gravity so small in its effect, there would be no practical applications. If he had been polite, I would have pointed out that much of electronics is based upon time variant fields rather than electrostatic charge. There is no reason why time variant mass fields should be useless.. Jr writes> This is using the convention we have utilized to define atomic structure. Once we recognize that mass is the cumulative resistance of atoms and that our notion of gravitational force is the force we apply in response to the equal and opposite resistance we encounter and define… it is a small step to consider that electromagnetism generates matter rather than matter generating electromagnetic fields. You could produce a time variant mass field through manipulation of electric fields for charged particles, and we do it all of the time, with no remarkable effects, except possibly synchrotron radiation. Getting a grip upon neutral charge particles could be done by encapsulating them in charged particle sandwiches or buckyballs, or whatever may be appropriate. Once again, that is done all the time with neutrons bound into atomic nuclei being manipulated by using the proton charges or the atomic charge to move atoms about, nothing surprising occurs. The only thing which I am prepared to suggest which has NOT been tried (so far as I know) is the construction of millimeter sized accelerators powered by micron sized lasers run at Terahertz frequencies. Any takers? The synchrotron radiation from such a device might be interesting to observe... Jr writes> Not to mention the construction itself. Have a good time johnreed Lonnie Courtney Clay On Dec 18, 9:01 pm, LCC <claylon...@comcast.net> wrote: > I have on several occasions wondered about the nature of "mass" > myself. Surely if we can proceed as far as we have in the study of > "charge", developing practical applications in electricity, > electronics, and field theory, then we should be able to do the same > with "mass" for gravitonics. I once approached a processional > mathematician expert in electronics field theory and casually > mentioned that there should be a comparable set of field equations and > applications of mass as for charge. His reply was withering and > condescending at once, as he stated that they were in no way alike > simply because both were inverse square fields. Besides, he claimed, > with gravity so small in its effect, there would be no practical > applications. If he had been polite, I would have pointed out that > much of electronics is based upon time variant fields rather than > electrostatic charge. There is no reason why time variant mass fields > should be useless.. > > You could produce a time variant mass field through manipulation of > electric fields for charged particles, and we do it all of the time, > with no remarkable effects, except possibly synchrotron radiation. > Getting a grip upon neutral charge particles could be done by > encapsulating them in charged particle sandwiches or buckyballs, or > whatever may be appropriate. Once again, that is done all the time > with neutrons bound into atomic nuclei being manipulated by using the > proton charges or the atomic charge to move atoms about, nothing > surprising occurs. > > The only thing which I am prepared to suggest which has NOT been tried > (so far as I know) is the construction of millimeter sized > accelerators powered by micron sized lasers run at Terahertz > frequencies. Any takers? The synchrotron radiation from such a device > might be interesting to observe... > > Lonnie Courtney Clay -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemol...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
