Tramp and Electron

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
2,978
631
On the dance floor, baby!
neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
This semi-tramp come here to tell you a good news: that dragon said again in the Lounge that he likes bunny...

Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
Be careful. It's fishy. I told you a bad news: that dragon posted a link here, but it doesn't work. He said "...there is a lot more going on than what X4 can handle."
I ask you a question: can affine geometry handle everything? such as QM?

neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
I can give you the best answer: I don't know.
The link should have worked. It works for me, anyway. Here's the address: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projective_geometry.

Can affine geometry handle everything? Of course not. Much of what I've seen of Differential Geometry (the Mathematics of both SR and GR) often deals with many different geometries. If you take a look at the (admittedly horrible) Mathematical stucture of these theories, especially applied to QM, you can easily see that affine geometry is not always used.

I suppose I need to ask you a question (which will determine any comments on my part in dealing with this): Do you know what affine geometry is? I posted the link about projective geometry but I never asked you how much you know about the affine stuff.

-Dan
 
Mar 2019
777
41
cosmos
not much

"...Do you know what affine geometry is? I posted the link about projective geometry but I never asked you how much you know about the affine stuff."
.....................
Again this semi-tramp has to say that that dragon is a ...
Seems that dragon at last understands what this semi-tramp is: not a professional researcher/scholar but just a guy who is curious in physics/astronomy.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
2,978
631
On the dance floor, baby!
Seems that dragon at last understands what this semi-tramp is: not a professional researcher/scholar but just a guy who is curious in physics/astronomy.
I've been aware of that for some time. However you are very insistent that X4 has at least a large set of "the answers" to the point that you have disagreed rather loudly when I bring up something contrary to what X4 would say.

Please understand that I'm not actually against you in any way, but if you keep writing this stuff I have to say something about it. I've ended up p!ssing off a bunch of people due to this policy but I have to keep some level of theoretical and experimental continuity for the other members as well.

-Dan
 
Mar 2019
777
41
cosmos
theory vs experiment

neila9876@rabbit htam9876:
That dragon said:"...theoretical and experimental continuity..."
Good topic.
It's time to research your case 2. Is there any experiment to verify that no electromagnetic radiation generated? It seems that what you said last year was a bit based on the traditional theory?
 
Last edited:

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
2,978
631
On the dance floor, baby!
neila9876@rabbit htam9876:
That dragon said:"...theoretical and experimental continuity..."
Good topic.
It's time to research your case 2. It there any experiment to verify that no electromagnetic radiation generated? It seems that what you said last year was a bit based on the traditional theory?
I presume you mean this?
Case 2: He make the electron move in constant speed along a radial direction of the proton.
I don't actually know how the QM version deals with this. Without going into the details, in Classical Electrodynamics we can say photons are emitted because as charged particles (usually electrons) move in an arc the electric field develops a "kink" in the field lines. This kink is the photon.

-Dan
 
Mar 2019
777
41
cosmos
theory vs experiment

Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
It's very tough struggling between tradition and innovation...

Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
Yes, I know that...
Yesterday, I intended to go to Shapu village to take a look. Again, I suspended the trip. Now this semi-tramp becomes a serious researcher. haha...
I have been thinking about designing an experiment to verify if electromagnetic radiation happens in your case 2, but I feel it's very hard to do that...

Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
You can try an alternative shceme: replace the charges with two charged balls. Fix one ball on the ground and move the other ball...

Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
Yes, I have thought about it too.
But the electric force is changing when the charged balls moves relatively, it's very hard to adjust the force exerted on the moving ball synchronously and presicely...
..............................
Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
It's strange that when you talk experiment, that dragon talks theory, fairy classical theory...And more strange is did I say the electron moves in arc in case 2?
Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
I can tell you the best answer: I don't know.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Mar 2019
777
41
cosmos
theory vs experiment

Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
You can do an easier experiment for case 4 first:
Ask a bunch of rabbits to bounce forward and backward in front of a charged ball fixed over the ground and detect if electromagnetic radiation happens...
Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
You must come and watch, please.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Mar 2019
777
41
cosmos
theory vs experiment

Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
I heard you said that "...Which method is more appropriate?... " ahead. Do you want experiment to direct the tendance of theory?
Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
Yes, sometimes we need to. You are clever and deserve a piece of grass.
Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
I know that you love in "interaction". I love in myself. That's enough for me. You stupid pig?
Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
You stupid pig!
Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
**
Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
**
Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
****
Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
****
Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
Poopoo...
Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
Poopoo...
 

Attachments

Mar 2019
777
41
cosmos
Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:
I remember that you talked about something interesting in the thread "Charged circular disc...". I think it is something relevant. So I move it here.
.................................................................................
Electrostatic Thought Experiment

Fix a plastic ball over the ground and brush it with a piece of cloth or leather, which one is appropriate. (charge by friction) Put a compass beside the ball. Put the cloth or leather on a table nearby. Walk to ball and watch if the compass turns. A partner is welcome too, walk to the ball in the opposite side and watch the compass.

(Assume the ball, the cloth and the compass are relatively stationary)

………………………………………………………………..

Woody’s reply is as below:

Exactly the same as they would see if the ball and the cloth were not present.

...........................................................................

Analysis:

Illusion 1. The guy and his partner will see the compass turn in opposite directions. That’s obvious contradiction in logic. The reason might be that the cloth is ignored.

Illusion 2. Take the cloth into consideration too. The guy might get two opposite directional currents generating magnetisms and the magnetisms superposition. So will his partner. But the situation of superposition will be opposite. Then they two will see the compass turn in opposite directions. That’s obvious contradiction in logic.

………………………………………………

Resort to the rabbit hole current concept (charge moves relative to charge), it can prove Woody is correct. Because no charge moves relative to charge, no current and no magnetism generate.

This thought experiment demonstrates that 3D space is not sufficient enough to represent motion in nature. There must be something special between charges.

………………………………………………

Resort to the 4D space method of analysis in one post ahead, we also can get no current and no magnetism generate.
.............................................................................................................................................
neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:
Poopoo...
 

Attachments

Mar 2019
777
41
cosmos
Rabbit htam9876 @ neila9876:


The OP in your “charged circular disc…” thread is interesting and somewhat relevant too. So, I also move it here.


“A circular dish is charged with an iron rod in the center. When the dish rotates, someone on the ground considers that there is current and generates magnetism and the iron rod becomes a magnet; while someone else standing on the dish considers that there is no current and no magnetism generated and the iron rod does not become a magnet...
Is the iron rod a magnet or not?”


Also resort to the rabbit hole current concept “charge move relative to charge”, the answer is “yes, the iron rod becomes a magnet”, because the same amount of opposite charge must exist somewhere (e.g. the cloth) in cosmos due to charge conservation. When the disc rotates, there is charge moving relative to charge, then, there will be current happen no matter the guy stands on the ground or the disc. No contradiction.


One method, why not good? woo…………


By the way, you should use the word “disc” rather than “dish”. If you don’t know English exactly, please go to the Foreign Language Bar of Cosmos in the lounge.


……………………………………………………………………………………………………………


Neila9876 @ rabbit htam9876:


Poopoo…
 

Attachments