|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Inverse Square Law ?????
Newton came up with it,and trhat tells us its been around for a long
time. Why does the force depend on the square of the distance between two objects? Why not double? Curving of space could be the answer for gravity,but not good for magnetic force. Then we have the diameter of a conducting wire that obeys the law.They all have to relate since its the law. Strong force can't go with this law. What it the quantum realm of particles use a different law. I can'tr see it working in a planck length. Who could test it in the submicroscopic realm? Inverse square law tricky stuff. TreBert |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Inverse Square Law ?????
On Apr 11, 2:22*pm, herbert glazier wrote:
Newton came up with it,and trhat tells us its been around for a long time. *Why does the force depend on the square of the distance between two objects? Why not double? Curving of space could be the answer for gravity,but not good for magnetic force. *Then we have the diameter of a conducting wire that obeys the law.They all have to relate since its the law. Strong force can't go with this law. What it the quantum realm of particles use a different law. I can'tr see it working in a planck length. *Who could test it in the submicroscopic realm? Inverse square law tricky stuff. *TreBert At a planck length, atoms would have to be merging with one another. So perhaps there's no telling what sort of weird gravity and repulsion forces exist at that extremely minimal distance. http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Inverse Square Law ?????
On Apr 12, 1:06*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Apr 11, 2:22*pm, herbert glazier wrote: Newton came up with it,and trhat tells us its been around for a long time. *Why does the force depend on the square of the distance between two objects? Why not double? Curving of space could be the answer for gravity,but not good for magnetic force. *Then we have the diameter of a conducting wire that obeys the law.They all have to relate since its the law. Strong force can't go with this law. What it the quantum realm of particles use a different law. I can'tr see it working in a planck length. *Who could test it in the submicroscopic realm? Inverse square law tricky stuff. *TreBert At a planck length, atoms would have to be merging with one another. So perhaps there's no telling what sort of weird gravity and repulsion forces exist at that extremely minimal distance. *http://translate.google.com/# *Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” It has always help me to think about this law by knowing"90w light bulb has the output of 30w bulb at a distance of 3 feet. Reality is my fastest picture ever taken (stopping light inch and a half from its source) shows is ray of light obeying the law. TreBert |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Inverse Square Law ?????
On 4/12/2011 8:27 AM, herbert glazier wrote:
It has always help me to think about this law by knowing"90w light bulb has the output of 30w bulb at a distance of 3 feet. Reality is my fastest picture ever taken (stopping light inch and a half from its source) shows is ray of light obeying the law. TreBert LOL -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Life and the Inverse square! C and C please | Jonathan | Policy | 15 | January 25th 10 01:48 PM |
Neutrinos,Obey Inverse Square Law??? | [email protected] | Misc | 13 | March 26th 08 10:23 PM |
inverse-square law through geometry | Brian Tung | Amateur Astronomy | 13 | November 10th 04 04:21 PM |
The inverse square law,and life on Earth | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 14 | March 30th 04 02:29 PM |
Inverse Square Law | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 4 | January 4th 04 01:03 PM |