"kenneth p Collins" <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<ROhEb.3508$wL6.1160 at newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>...
>> Coulomb's Law.
>> If Coulomb's Law is to be sustained,
> then the field must be infinitely-divisible
> and, therefore, continuous.
>
That is, if space-time is continuous. (ie continuum hypothesis is not
just a mathematical hypothesis, it's also a physical law!)
> With respect to 'particles', the problem
> is analogous to that of Zeno's 'paradox' -
> pick a 'particle' size, and, by Coulomb's
> Law, one can always 'go halfway' with
> respect to the selected 'particle's param-
> eters.
Well, Zeno's paradox is a non-paradox technically, but let's leave
this aside for a moment :) [There was some Australian idiot who
recenty published a paper about "Zeno's paradox" claiming a
"solution"]
> It's not a big deal. There are other ex-
> amples of accepted continuity. My 'fav-
> orite' is the black body power spectrum.
Agreed.
> That assertions of continuity are commonly
> questioned comes down to artificial 'parcel-
> ization' that was imposed upon theory while
> experiment had none of the modern tools
> that are now commonplace.
That is probably a valid psychological speculation.
> Practitioners became familiar with the 'parcel-
> ized' approach to calculation, and, thereafter,
> required Students to calculate in accord with
> it.
Or discretization was necessary for other reasons! Is not that a more
plausible explanation?
> It's a case of handed-down presumptions
> dictating what can be 'observed'.
>> And anyone who disagrees just gets thrown-
> out into the cold :-]
More or less true with any set of postulates.
> I sense the possibility of a long, and useful,
> discussion. If so, fire away.
I was just asking a technical point. From which source can you be so
sure that the universe is not discrete? I can't.
I read some part of your book, and it turns out to be pretty
interesting. I don't think I agree with all of your claims but it's
definitely one of the most eccentric written works one may find on the
internet. I feel lucky :)
Now, could you please tell me what kind of a field is this 4-D
energydynamics field? I would like to hear, if possible, a precise
mathematical description.
I hope that is challenging enough for you.
Regards,
--
Eray Ozkural