Mark, You are welcome, it is actually fun. Hopefully I don't say too silly things. My field is gravitational waves so I'm rusty in atomic, nuclear physics but this is an opportunity to review/learn interesting physics. But away WL theory sound pretty sound to me so far. Anybody knows of any serious criticism of this? Giovanni
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint < [email protected]> wrote: > Giovanni/Daniel:**** > > I just want to thank you both for taking time to analyze carefully the W-L > paper…**** > > We could use more theoretical types in the ‘Collective’…**** > > -Mark**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Giovanni Santostasi [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:06 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:W&L**** > > ** ** > > Ok,**** > > Daniel you are right.**** > > The order of magnitude of a field at the Bohr radius from a proton is > 10^11 V/m. It seems also that the interpretation of the paper describes > this situation where the electron sphere is the size of an average atom. I > misunderstood what the paper was discussing.**** > > ** ** > > Gigi, did you use cgs units to do your calculation? Otherwise if you want > to use mks you have to add the coulomb constant to the Coulomb equation in > the Srivastava paper. I think this where you error was. **** > > Giovanni**** > > ** ** >
