Can the electron create its own barycenter?

[BradGuth]

The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.

The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."

What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?

If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?

The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.

Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?

Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

[BradGuth]

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.

[snip crap]
idiot
--
Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

Then do tell what's holding the atom electron in its fast orbit,
besides gravity?

If not an atomic trinary+ barycenter, what else besides gravity and
the electrostatic force of attraction is there?

~ BG

[BradGuth]

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

Do atoms have an atomic magnetosphere to go along with their internal
barycenter? (with all of that nucleus strong force that’s taking an
LHC to reveal, seems like they should)

~ BG

[Uncle Al]

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.

[snip crap]

idiot

[Jacko]

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.

[snip crap]
idiot
--
Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
 (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

do you think he means something like the centre of the schwartzchild
radius of the electron or some other thing? ;)

[BradGuth]

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

Since the electron represents a mass that’s orbiting a complex binary+
core of greater mass, is what’s suggesting the atomic barycenter as
another reason and method as to why such atomic orbits do not lose
their tidal radius grip.

Gravitational Constant = 6.673e-11 or 6.6743e-11 or 6.693e-11
(conditional physics, as need be modified in order to make their
gravitational force of attraction between Earth and our Selene/moon or
that of any other orbital mechanics equal to the centripetal force).
In that case, what’s the atomic gravitational constant?

It’s a little odd that so many variations of this Gravitational
Constant seem to exist, especially when such would demand far better
accuracy when dealing with the task of missions orbiting asteroids or
even the likes of our Selene/moon. No wonder India has been taking it
nice and easy with their Selene/moon mission.

CHANDRAYAAN - 1
http://www.isro.org/index.htm

The notions of an atomic barycenter seems as likely as our Selene/moon
L1 being the easiest of orbital placements for mostly rad-hard science
instruments and robotics to coexist. Even North Korea could manage to
get an orbital mission parked within the Selene/moon interactive L1.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”

[Timberwoof]

In article

Since the electron represents a mass that¹s orbiting a complex binary+
core of greater mass, is what¹s suggesting the atomic barycenter as
another reason and method as to why such atomic orbits do not lose
their tidal radius grip.

You obviously understand nothing about an electron's behavior or orbit.
The concept of little marbles orbiting a nucleus of bigger marbles is
slightly more accurate than your goofy notion of a "complex binary+
core of greater mass". It is useful in basic chemistry, but that's about
as far as it goes.

You need to do some serious research into quantum physics ... hang on,
hang on, be quiet. I know you're squealing about how it's all
counterintuitive and wrong and nonsensical, but you don't have any kind
of scientific measurements to support your wacky ideas.

The secret scientists in their secret labs funded by secret research
grants by secret branches of the government ... haven't published their
results anywhere that you can read them. But the other ones, the real
scientists working at universities and studying this stuff for real;
they have. Go to PBS.org and watch some episodes of NOVA.

[BradGuth]

Post by Timberwoof
In article

Since the electron represents a mass that¹s orbiting a complex binary+
core of greater mass, is what¹s suggesting the atomic barycenter as
another reason and method as to why such atomic orbits do not lose
their tidal radius grip.

You obviously understand nothing about an electron's behavior or orbit.
The concept of little marbles orbiting a nucleus of bigger marbles is
slightly more accurate than your goofy notion of a "complex binary+
core of greater mass". It is useful in basic chemistry, but that's about
as far as it goes.
You need to do some serious research into quantum physics ... hang on,
hang on, be quiet. I know you're squealing about how it's all
counterintuitive and wrong and nonsensical, but you don't have any kind
of scientific measurements to support your wacky ideas.

So what. There's nothing all that quantum physics about atoms,
they're just terribly small and infinitely energy efficient. A better
gamma microscope and we'd be looking in stop-action at what makes an
electron tick.

Post by Timberwoof
The secret scientists in their secret labs funded by secret research
grants by secret branches of the government ... haven't published their
results anywhere that you can read them. But the other ones, the real
scientists working at universities and studying this stuff for real;
they have. Go to PBS.org and watch some episodes of NOVA.

If it's mainstream published, it must be the one and only word of your
God, just like our DARPA / NASA having us walking upon their passive
moon that seemed exactly like a certain terrestrial guano island,
which is nothing at all like the real thing. But what the hell, even
your NOVA did major televised productions on behalf of Apollo, and
thus proving it really happened.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”

[Timberwoof]

In article

Post by BradGuth

Post by Timberwoof
In article

Since the electron represents a mass that1s orbiting a complex binary+
core of greater mass, is what1s suggesting the atomic barycenter as
another reason and method as to why such atomic orbits do not lose
their tidal radius grip.

You obviously understand nothing about an electron's behavior or orbit.
The concept of little marbles orbiting a nucleus of bigger marbles is
slightly more accurate than your goofy notion of a "complex binary+
core of greater mass". It is useful in basic chemistry, but that's about
as far as it goes.
You need to do some serious research into quantum physics ... hang on,
hang on, be quiet. I know you're squealing about how it's all
counterintuitive and wrong and nonsensical, but you don't have any kind
of scientific measurements to support your wacky ideas.

So what. There's nothing all that quantum physics about atoms,
they're just terribly small and infinitely energy efficient. A better
gamma microscope and we'd be looking in stop-action at what makes an
electron tick.

You may know know this, but you're talking about particle accelerators.

Post by BradGuth

Post by Timberwoof
The secret scientists in their secret labs funded by secret research
grants by secret branches of the government ... haven't published their
results anywhere that you can read them. But the other ones, the real
scientists working at universities and studying this stuff for real;
they have. Go to PBS.org and watch some episodes of NOVA.

If it's mainstream published, it must be the one and only word of your
God, just like our DARPA / NASA having us walking upon their passive
moon that seemed exactly like a certain terrestrial guano island,
which is nothing at all like the real thing. But what the hell, even
your NOVA did major televised productions on behalf of Apollo, and
thus proving it really happened.

Bla bla bla, there you go again with your kook theories.

[BradGuth]

Post by Timberwoof
In article

Post by BradGuth

Post by Timberwoof
In article

Since the electron represents a mass that1s orbiting a complex binary+
core of greater mass, is what1s suggesting the atomic barycenter as
another reason and method as to why such atomic orbits do not lose
their tidal radius grip.

You obviously understand nothing about an electron's behavior or orbit.
The concept of little marbles orbiting a nucleus of bigger marbles is
slightly more accurate than your goofy notion of a "complex binary+
core of greater mass". It is useful in basic chemistry, but that's about
as far as it goes.
You need to do some serious research into quantum physics ... hang on,
hang on, be quiet. I know you're squealing about how it's all
counterintuitive and wrong and nonsensical, but you don't have any kind
of scientific measurements to support your wacky ideas.

So what. There's nothing all that quantum physics about atoms,
they're just terribly small and infinitely energy efficient. A better
gamma microscope and we'd be looking in stop-action at what makes an
electron tick.

You may know know this, but you're talking about particle accelerators.

Post by BradGuth

Post by Timberwoof
The secret scientists in their secret labs funded by secret research
grants by secret branches of the government ... haven't published their
results anywhere that you can read them. But the other ones, the real
scientists working at universities and studying this stuff for real;
they have. Go to PBS.org and watch some episodes of NOVA.

If it's mainstream published, it must be the one and only word of your
God, just like our DARPA / NASA having us walking upon their passive
moon that seemed exactly like a certain terrestrial guano island,
which is nothing at all like the real thing. But what the hell, even
your NOVA did major televised productions on behalf of Apollo, and
thus proving it really happened.

Bla bla bla, there you go again with your kook theories.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
People who can't spell get kicked out of Hogwarts.

There's no bla bla about it. You are clearly one of the bad guys that
wants to kill off the messenger, any messenger, because you already
know all there is to know as based upon whatever hype and eye-candy or
infowar brain-candy gets mainstream published by LeapFrog or NOVA
televised.

”Whoever controls the past, controls the future” / George Orwell

~ BG

[[e-mail]]

Post by Timberwoof
In article

Post by Timberwoof
In article

Since the electron represents a mass that1s orbiting a complex binary+
core of greater mass, is what1s suggesting the atomic barycenter as
another reason and method as to why such atomic orbits do not lose
their tidal radius grip.

You obviously understand nothing about an electron's behavior or orbit.
The concept of little marbles orbiting a nucleus of bigger marbles is
slightly more accurate than your goofy notion of a "complex binary+
core of greater mass". It is useful in basic chemistry, but that's about
as far as it goes.
You need to do some serious research into quantum physics ... hang on,
hang on, be quiet. I know you're squealing about how it's all
counterintuitive and wrong and nonsensical, but you don't have any kind
of scientific measurements to support your wacky ideas.

So what.  There's nothing all that quantum physics about atoms,
they're just terribly small and infinitely energy efficient.  A better
gamma microscope and we'd be looking in stop-action at what makes an
electron tick.

You may know know this, but you're talking about particle accelerators.

Post by Timberwoof
The secret scientists in their secret labs funded by secret research
grants by secret branches of the government ... haven't published their
results anywhere that you can read them. But the other ones, the real
scientists working at universities and studying this stuff for real;
they have. Go to PBS.org and watch some episodes of NOVA.

If it's mainstream published, it must be the one and only word of your
God, just like our DARPA / NASA having us walking upon their passive
moon that seemed exactly like a certain terrestrial guano island,
which is nothing at all like the real thing.  But what the hell, even
your NOVA did major televised productions on behalf of Apollo, and
thus proving it really happened.

Bla bla bla, there you go again with your kook theories.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
People who can't spell get kicked out of Hogwarts.

There's no bla bla about it.  You are clearly one of the bad guys that
wants to kill off the messenger, any messenger, because you already
know all there is to know as based upon whatever hype and eye-candy or
infowar brain-candy gets mainstream published by LeapFrog or NOVA
televised.
”Whoever controls the past, controls the future” / George Orwell
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

'momentum-wave duality is what's holding the atom electron in its fast
orbit,
besides gravity?

[BradGuth]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by Timberwoof
In article

Post by BradGuth

Post by Timberwoof
In article

Since the electron represents a mass that1s orbiting a complex binary+
core of greater mass, is what1s suggesting the atomic barycenter as
another reason and method as to why such atomic orbits do not lose
their tidal radius grip.

You obviously understand nothing about an electron's behavior or orbit.
The concept of little marbles orbiting a nucleus of bigger marbles is
slightly more accurate than your goofy notion of a "complex binary+
core of greater mass". It is useful in basic chemistry, but that's about
as far as it goes.
You need to do some serious research into quantum physics ... hang on,
hang on, be quiet. I know you're squealing about how it's all
counterintuitive and wrong and nonsensical, but you don't have any kind
of scientific measurements to support your wacky ideas.

So what. There's nothing all that quantum physics about atoms,
they're just terribly small and infinitely energy efficient. A better
gamma microscope and we'd be looking in stop-action at what makes an
electron tick.

You may know know this, but you're talking about particle accelerators.

Post by BradGuth

Post by Timberwoof
The secret scientists in their secret labs funded by secret research
grants by secret branches of the government ... haven't published their
results anywhere that you can read them. But the other ones, the real
scientists working at universities and studying this stuff for real;
they have. Go to PBS.org and watch some episodes of NOVA.

If it's mainstream published, it must be the one and only word of your
God, just like our DARPA / NASA having us walking upon their passive
moon that seemed exactly like a certain terrestrial guano island,
which is nothing at all like the real thing. But what the hell, even
your NOVA did major televised productions on behalf of Apollo, and
thus proving it really happened.

Bla bla bla, there you go again with your kook theories.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
People who can't spell get kicked out of Hogwarts.

There's no bla bla about it. You are clearly one of the bad guys that
wants to kill off the messenger, any messenger, because you already
know all there is to know as based upon whatever hype and eye-candy or
infowar brain-candy gets mainstream published by LeapFrog or NOVA
televised.
”Whoever controls the past, controls the future” / George Orwell
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

'momentum-wave duality is what's holding the atom electron in its fast
orbit, besides gravity?

Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave
duality"?

Is there any "momentum-wave duality" taking place with our moon?

~ BG

[BradGuth]

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.

I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”

[[e-mail]]

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
 "The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration;  Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality

yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave



Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

[[e-mail]]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
 "The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration;  Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Werner Heisenberg, in 1926, formulated the uncertainty principle. "In
order to predict the future position and velocity of a particle, one
has to be able to measure its present position and velocity
accurately. ... In other words, the more accurately you try to measure
the position of the particle, the less accurately you can measure its
speed, and vice versa. Heinsenberg showed that the uncertainty in the
position of the particle times the uncertainty in its velocity times
the mass of the particle can never be smaller than a certain quantity,
which is known as Planck's constant. Moreover, this limit does not
depend on the way in which one tries to measure the position or
velocity of the particle, or on the type of particle: Heisenberg's
uncertainty principle is a fundamental, inescapable property of the
world

so I say yes to the sub atomic barycenter but because of the
uncertainty priciple i'ts not possible to predict the sub orbital
paths to calculate the center of i'ts equillibrium or center of forces
in the electrons orbital

[BradGuth]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

Very interesting, as sort of a virtual barycenter effect, except that
it can never be objectively identified or much less utilized outside
of the electron realm?

How about our Selene/moon and of its supposed "momentum (energy)"?

How much of our Selene/moon orbit is assisted or modified by the same
"uncertainty principle"?

Isn't there any probability for "accurate knowledge of complementarity
pairs" associated within planetary systems, their moons and of
interstellar associations?

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”

[BradGuth]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?

~ BG

[[e-mail]]

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
 "The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration;  Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

no quanta the gravations define the barycenter
In the case of the Earth and the sun, both bodies actually revolve, or
spin, around the very center of the mass (similar to center of
gravity) between them. This point is called the "barycenter." Earth
and the sun are "connected" by the gravity pulling them together.not
wave duelaity, It's just like the light end and heavy end of the
sledge hammer. Compared to the size of the sun, Earth is about like a
flea on a cat! So the center of mass between the Earth and the sun is
almost--but not quite--the very center of the sun.

[[e-mail]]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
 "The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration;  Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

no quanta the gravations define the barycenter
In the case of the Earth and the sun, both bodies actually revolve, or
spin, around the very center of the mass (similar to center of
gravity) between them. This point is called the "barycenter." Earth
and the sun are "connected" by the gravity pulling them together.not
wave duelaity, It's just like the light end and heavy end of the
sledge hammer. Compared to the size of the sun, Earth is about like a
flea on a cat! So the center of mass between the Earth and the sun is
almost--but not quite--the very center of the sun.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

momentum wave duelalty is the strongest force aplicable in subatomic
barycenters but not the force in steller barycenters

[BradGuth]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

no quanta the gravations define the barycenter
In the case of the Earth and the sun, both bodies actually revolve, or
spin, around the very center of the mass (similar to center of
gravity) between them. This point is called the "barycenter." Earth
and the sun are "connected" by the gravity pulling them together.not
wave duelaity, It's just like the light end and heavy end of the
sledge hammer. Compared to the size of the sun, Earth is about like a
flea on a cat! So the center of mass between the Earth and the sun is
almost--but not quite--the very center of the sun.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

momentum wave duelalty is the strongest force aplicable in subatomic
barycenters but not the force in steller barycenters

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?

Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?

If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?

~ BG

[[e-mail]]

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
 "The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration;  Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

no quanta the gravations define the barycenter
In the case of the Earth and the sun, both bodies actually revolve, or
spin, around the very center of the mass (similar to center of
gravity) between them. This point is called the "barycenter." Earth
and the sun are "connected" by the gravity pulling them together.not
wave duelaity, It's just like the light end and heavy end of the
sledge hammer. Compared to the size of the sun, Earth is about like a
flea on a cat! So the center of mass between the Earth and the sun is
almost--but not quite--the very center of the sun.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

momentum wave duelalty is the strongest force aplicable in subatomic
barycenters but not the force in steller barycenters

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?

Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?


If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?


~ BG


Because once size and density reach a critical amount the gravity
finally has enough gravitational binding force of attraction to
overpower the forces of momentum
wave duality and bring larger stellar bodies into orbits, even though
those forces are still at work with in the subatomic realm, once the
over all mass reaches x amount that force is stronger , but to answer
your question I am not sure at what point that would be
but one of you math nerds could whip that out faster than me once you
know the streanth of the binding force between the electrons of a said
partical and it's nucleus

[BradGuth]

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

no quanta the gravations define the barycenter
In the case of the Earth and the sun, both bodies actually revolve, or
spin, around the very center of the mass (similar to center of
gravity) between them. This point is called the "barycenter." Earth
and the sun are "connected" by the gravity pulling them together.not
wave duelaity, It's just like the light end and heavy end of the
sledge hammer. Compared to the size of the sun, Earth is about like a
flea on a cat! So the center of mass between the Earth and the sun is
almost--but not quite--the very center of the sun.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

momentum wave duelalty is the strongest force aplicable in subatomic
barycenters but not the force in steller barycenters

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
~ BG
Because once size and density reach a critical amount the gravity
finally has enough gravitational binding force of attraction to
overpower the forces of momentum
wave duality and bring larger stellar bodies into orbits, even though
those forces are still at work with in the subatomic realm, once the
over all mass reaches x amount that force is stronger , but to answer
your question I am not sure at what point that would be
but one of you math nerds could whip that out faster than me once you
know the streanth of the binding force between the electrons of a said
partical and it's nucleus

If we gave Selene a million teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to
Earth, what would the force of attraction be?

~ BG

[[e-mail]]

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
 "The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration;  Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

no quanta the gravations define the barycenter
In the case of the Earth and the sun, both bodies actually revolve, or
spin, around the very center of the mass (similar to center of
gravity) between them. This point is called the "barycenter." Earth
and the sun are "connected" by the gravity pulling them together.not
wave duelaity, It's just like the light end and heavy end of the
sledge hammer. Compared to the size of the sun, Earth is about like a
flea on a cat! So the center of mass between the Earth and the sun is
almost--but not quite--the very center of the sun.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

momentum wave duelalty is the strongest force aplicable in subatomic
barycenters but not the force in steller barycenters

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
 ~ BG
Because once size and density reach a critical amount the gravity
finally has enough gravitational binding force of attraction to
overpower the forces of momentum
wave duality and bring  larger stellar bodies into orbits, even though
those  forces are still at work with in the subatomic realm, once the
over all mass  reaches x amount that force is stronger , but to answer
your question I am not sure at what point that would be
but one of you math nerds could whip that out faster than me once you
know the streanth of the binding force between the electrons of a said
partical and it's nucleus

If we gave Selene a million teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to
Earth, what would the force of attraction be?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

If we gave Selene a million teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to
Earth, what would the force of attraction be?


depends on what her net charge was at the time of the electrcution
with respect to earth it my not be enough to raise the hair on her
arms but I think that was a trick question when you said in respect to
the earth since net charge is dynamic depending on the atmisperic
conditions and location

[BradGuth]

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

no quanta the gravations define the barycenter
In the case of the Earth and the sun, both bodies actually revolve, or
spin, around the very center of the mass (similar to center of
gravity) between them. This point is called the "barycenter." Earth
and the sun are "connected" by the gravity pulling them together.not
wave duelaity, It's just like the light end and heavy end of the
sledge hammer. Compared to the size of the sun, Earth is about like a
flea on a cat! So the center of mass between the Earth and the sun is
almost--but not quite--the very center of the sun.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

momentum wave duelalty is the strongest force aplicable in subatomic
barycenters but not the force in steller barycenters

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
~ BG
Because once size and density reach a critical amount the gravity
finally has enough gravitational binding force of attraction to
overpower the forces of momentum
wave duality and bring larger stellar bodies into orbits, even though
those forces are still at work with in the subatomic realm, once the
over all mass reaches x amount that force is stronger , but to answer
your question I am not sure at what point that would be
but one of you math nerds could whip that out faster than me once you
know the streanth of the binding force between the electrons of a said
partical and it's nucleus

If we gave Selene a million teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to
Earth, what would the force of attraction be?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

If we gave Selene a million teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to
Earth, what would become the force of attraction?
depends on what her net charge was at the time of the electrcution
with respect to earth it my not be enough to raise the hair on her
arms but I think that was a trick question when you said in respect to
the earth since net charge is dynamic depending on the atmisperic
conditions and location

There's also the given surface area and thus multi farad capacitance
potential of each orb to consider, and of the plasma or soup of
particles existing between these two orbs (especially in the three
body alignment configuration).

~ BG

[[e-mail]]

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
 "The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration;  Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "Guth Usenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
 ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of an electron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

no quanta the gravations define the barycenter
In the case of the Earth and the sun, both bodies actually revolve, or
spin, around the very center of the mass (similar to center of
gravity) between them. This point is called the "barycenter." Earth
and the sun are "connected" by the gravity pulling them together.not
wave duelaity, It's just like the light end and heavy end of the
sledge hammer. Compared to the size of the sun, Earth is about like a
flea on a cat! So the center of mass between the Earth and the sun is
almost--but not quite--the very center of the sun.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

momentum wave duelalty is the strongest force aplicable in subatomic
barycenters but not the force in steller barycenters

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
 ~ BG
Because once size and density reach a critical amount the gravity
finally has enough gravitational binding force of attraction to
overpower the forces of momentum
wave duality and bring  larger stellar bodies into orbits, even though
those  forces are still at work with in the subatomic realm, once the
over all mass  reaches x amount that force is stronger , but to answer
your question I am not sure at what point that would be
but one of you math nerds could whip that out faster than me once you
know the streanth of the binding force between the electrons of a said
partical and it's nucleus

If we gave Selene a million teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to
Earth, what would the force of attraction be?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

If we gave Selene a million teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to
Earth, what would become the force of attraction?
depends on what her net charge was at the time of the electrcution
with respect to earth it my not be enough to raise the hair on her
arms but I think that was a trick question when you said in respect to
the earth since net charge is dynamic depending on the atmisperic
conditions and location

There's also the given surface area and thus multi farad capacitance
potential of each orb to consider, and of the plasma or soup of
particles existing between these two orbs (especially in the three
body alignment configuration).
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

center of the three body weights (head, thorax, and pelvis
does this make a significant diffrance in the amount of a million
teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to Earth on what the body feels,
I think selinas was wet and bare foot would make more diffrance than
body alignment configuration and the amount of humidity in the air at
the time.

[BradGuth]

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by ***@gmail.com

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
anelectron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electronand proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth'selectron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~BradGuthBrad_GuthBrad.GuthBradGuth BG / "GuthUsenet"

I can see that I've lost control over this lose cannon topic.
I'll have to put it into "GuthUsenet", whereas at least I can exclude/
banish those as clearly having a mental breakdown problem in addition
to all of those strictly topic/author stalking and bashing for sport.
~BradGuthBrad_GuthBrad.GuthBradGuth BG / “GuthUsenet”- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -Is there an objective strong force accounting for this "momentum-wave

duality
yes their is a force but it's measured in quanta or more than one
momenta wave
Of course, once a measurement of the particle is made, a single
momentum is observed. But, like fuzzy position, momentum before the
observation is intrinsically uncertain. This is what is know as the
uncertainty principle, that certain quantities, such as position,
energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities. In its purest
form, the uncertainty principle states that accurate knowledge of
complementarity pairs is impossible. For example, you can measure the
location of anelectron, but not its momentum (energy) at the same
time.

What's the "quanta or more than one momenta wave" that's between Earth
and Selene, as well as that existing between Sirius and our sun?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

no quanta the gravations define the barycenter
In the case of the Earth and the sun, both bodies actually revolve, or
spin, around the very center of the mass (similar to center of
gravity) between them. This point is called the "barycenter." Earth
and the sun are "connected" by the gravity pulling them together.not
wave duelaity, It's just like the light end and heavy end of the
sledge hammer. Compared to the size of the sun, Earth is about like a
flea on a cat! So the center of mass between the Earth and the sun is
almost--but not quite--the very center of the sun.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

momentum wave duelalty is the strongest force aplicable in subatomic
barycenters but not the force in steller barycenters

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Why is being much bigger than an atom of any problem for the momentum
wave duelalty?
Are you saying the regular laws of physics simply do not apply to
small stuff?
If so, at what size or mass does this transfer over?
~ BG
Because once size and density reach a critical amount the gravity
finally has enough gravitational binding force of attraction to
overpower the forces of momentum
wave duality and bring larger stellar bodies into orbits, even though
those forces are still at work with in the subatomic realm, once the
over all mass reaches x amount that force is stronger , but to answer
your question I am not sure at what point that would be
but one of you math nerds could whip that out faster than me once you
know the streanth of the binding force between the electrons of a said
partical and it's nucleus

If we gave Selene a million teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to
Earth, what would the force of attraction be?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

If we gave Selene a million teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to
Earth, what would become the force of attraction?
depends on what her net charge was at the time of the electrcution
with respect to earth it my not be enough to raise the hair on her
arms but I think that was a trick question when you said in respect to
the earth since net charge is dynamic depending on the atmisperic
conditions and location

There's also the given surface area and thus multi farad capacitance
potential of each orb to consider, and of the plasma or soup of
particles existing between these two orbs (especially in the three
body alignment configuration).
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

center of the three body weights (head, thorax, and pelvis
does this make a significant diffrance in the amount of a million
teraVolt charge (1e18 eV) in respect to Earth on what the body feels,
I think selinas was wet and bare foot would make more diffrance than
body alignment configuration and the amount of humidity in the air at
the time.

If we had that platform of science instruments at our Selene/moon L1,
we'd know.

~ BG

[BradGuth]

Besides the weak force of gravity; What's keeping those electrons?

~ BG

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which this
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton,
while the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the other forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ BradGuthBrad_GuthBrad.GuthBradGuth BG / "GuthUsenet"

[BradGuth]

"Do atoms have internal barycenters?"

If not, why not?

Post by BradGuth
Besides the weak force of gravity; What's keeping those electrons?
~ BG

Post by BradGuth
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.
The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which this
seems nearly unlimited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton,
while the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the other forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."
What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?
If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?
The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.
Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?
Of further consideration; Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?
~ BradGuthBrad_GuthBrad.GuthBradGuth BG / "GuthUsenet"

Where's all the Usenet/newsgroup love and affection?

~ BG

[Tom Roberts]

Post by BradGuth
"Do atoms have internal barycenters?"

Hmmm. The question is ill-posed. It is not possible to measure the
"barycenter" of an atom exactly, due to the nature of quantum phenomena.
But given an isolated atom, the momenta of its constituents add up to
zero in some frame, and relative to that frame the EXPECTATION VALUE of
the atom's position does not move.

But this is subtle: if one prepares a large number of such atoms
one-at-a-time and measures their positions one-at-a-time, one obtains a
distribution, not a definite value, no matter how carefully the
preparation is performed. Moreover, while the mean of those measurements
remains constant, their variance increases with time when one delays the
measurement after the preparation.


Tom Roberts

[BradGuth]

Post by Tom Roberts

Post by BradGuth
"Do atoms have internal barycenters?"

Hmmm. The question is ill-posed. It is not possible to measure the
"barycenter" of an atom exactly, due to the nature of quantum phenomena.
But given an isolated atom, the momenta of its constituents add up to
zero in some frame, and relative to that frame the EXPECTATION VALUE of
the atom's position does not move.
But this is subtle: if one prepares a large number of such atoms
one-at-a-time and measures their positions one-at-a-time, one obtains a
distribution, not a definite value, no matter how carefully the
preparation is performed. Moreover, while the mean of those measurements
remains constant, their variance increases with time when one delays the
measurement after the preparation.
Tom Roberts

But electrons and all other components of the atom do have mass, and
since nothing is standing still and their ongoing orbital and/or
interactive nature would have to agree that barycenters (just like
with moons, planets, stars, black holes and galaxies) should exist on
the atomic level.

~ BG

[Tom Roberts]

Post by BradGuth
But electrons and all other components of the atom do have mass, and
since nothing is standing still and their ongoing orbital and/or
interactive nature would have to agree that barycenters (just like
with moons, planets, stars, black holes and galaxies) should exist on
the atomic level.

Nature does not "have to" follow the dictates of your wishes and dreams.

One major lesson of quantum mechanics is: don't attempt to discuss
things you cannot measure. You cannot MEASURE the barycenter which you
assume is present; see my previous post far what you can measure.

For instance, the electron in a ground-state hydrogen atom at rest is
NOT moving, in the sense that the expectation value of its velocity is
zero (this is true of all S electrons). That is relative to the rest
frame of the atom, which in practice cannot be determined precisely --
see my previous post. The theory can be used to compute spectroscopic
properties (energy differences between states), and experiments can
measure them quite accurately; things like electron velocity are in
practice not measurable (or at least it's not useful to measure them).


Tom Roberts

[BradGuth]

Post by Tom Roberts

Post by BradGuth
But electrons and all other components of the atom do have mass, and
since nothing is standing still and their ongoing orbital and/or
interactive nature would have to agree that barycenters (just like
with moons, planets, stars, black holes and galaxies) should exist on
the atomic level.

Nature does not "have to" follow the dictates of your wishes and dreams.
One major lesson of quantum mechanics is: don't attempt to discuss
things you cannot measure. You cannot MEASURE the barycenter which you
assume is present; see my previous post far what you can measure.
For instance, the electron in a ground-state hydrogen atom at rest is
NOT moving, in the sense that the expectation value of its velocity is
zero (this is true of all S electrons). That is relative to the rest
frame of the atom, which in practice cannot be determined precisely --
see my previous post. The theory can be used to compute spectroscopic
properties (energy differences between states), and experiments can
measure them quite accurately; things like electron velocity are in
practice not measurable (or at least it's not useful to measure them).
Tom Roberts

So, "S electrons" can be and/or become kinda rogue or surplus elements
of an atom?

~ BG

[[e-mail]]

Post by BradGuth

Post by Tom Roberts

Post by BradGuth
But electrons and all other components of the atom do have mass, and
since nothing is standing still and their ongoing orbital and/or
interactive nature would have to agree that barycenters (just like
with moons, planets, stars, black holes and galaxies) should exist on
the atomic level.

Nature does not "have to" follow the dictates of your wishes and dreams.
One major lesson of quantum mechanics is: don't attempt to discuss
things you cannot measure. You cannot MEASURE the barycenter which you
assume is present; see my previous post far what you can measure.
For instance, the electron in a ground-state hydrogen atom at rest is
NOT moving, in the sense that the expectation value of its velocity is
zero (this is true of all S electrons). That is relative to the rest
frame of the atom, which in practice cannot be determined precisely --
see my previous post. The theory can be used to compute spectroscopic
properties (energy differences between states), and experiments can
measure them quite accurately; things like electron velocity are in
practice not measurable (or at least it's not useful to measure them).
Tom Roberts

So, "S electrons" can be and/or become kinda rogue or surplus elements
of an atom?
 ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

"Do atoms have internal barycenters?"

If not, why not?


yes if you replace the way you were thought about barycenters and
gravity and substitute other binding forces like charge and
electrostatic witch are much stronger on a sub atomic level than
gravity is yes their are sub atomic barycenters even with gravity but
that’s not the binding force with respect to what holds the particle
together but even a sludge hammer has a barycenters it's just the
point were forces are at a point of equilibrium

[BradGuth]

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by Tom Roberts

Post by BradGuth
But electrons and all other components of the atom do have mass, and
since nothing is standing still and their ongoing orbital and/or
interactive nature would have to agree that barycenters (just like
with moons, planets, stars, black holes and galaxies) should exist on
the atomic level.

Nature does not "have to" follow the dictates of your wishes and dreams.
One major lesson of quantum mechanics is: don't attempt to discuss
things you cannot measure. You cannot MEASURE the barycenter which you
assume is present; see my previous post far what you can measure.
For instance, the electron in a ground-state hydrogen atom at rest is
NOT moving, in the sense that the expectation value of its velocity is
zero (this is true of all S electrons). That is relative to the rest
frame of the atom, which in practice cannot be determined precisely --
see my previous post. The theory can be used to compute spectroscopic
properties (energy differences between states), and experiments can
measure them quite accurately; things like electron velocity are in
practice not measurable (or at least it's not useful to measure them).
Tom Roberts

So, "S electrons" can be and/or become kinda rogue or surplus elements
of an atom?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

"Do atoms have internal barycenters?"
If not, why not?
yes if you replace the way you were thought about barycenters and
gravity and substitute other binding forces like charge and
electrostatic witch are much stronger on a sub atomic level than
gravity is yes their are sub atomic barycenters even with gravity but
that’s not the binding force with respect to what holds the particle
together but even a sludge hammer has a barycenters it's just the
point were forces are at a point of equilibrium

I agree, and I’ll suggest that perhaps even outside of the atomic
level there are sufficiently worthy forces other than gravity,
especially obvious of the electrostatic binding force that's downright
impressive as long as there's sufficient eV differential.

What is the eV of extreme cosmic gamma? Such as what gamma is
unavoidably interacting with our Selene/moon. (<1e21 eV)

~ BG

[Kodos friend of Kang]

On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:36:13 -0800 (PST), BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by Tom Roberts

Post by BradGuth
But electrons and all other components of the atom do have mass, and
since nothing is standing still and their ongoing orbital and/or
interactive nature would have to agree that barycenters (just like
with moons, planets, stars, black holes and galaxies) should exist on
the atomic level.

Nature does not "have to" follow the dictates of your wishes and dreams.
One major lesson of quantum mechanics is: don't attempt to discuss
things you cannot measure. You cannot MEASURE the barycenter which you
assume is present; see my previous post far what you can measure.
For instance, the electron in a ground-state hydrogen atom at rest is
NOT moving, in the sense that the expectation value of its velocity is
zero (this is true of all S electrons). That is relative to the rest
frame of the atom, which in practice cannot be determined precisely --
see my previous post. The theory can be used to compute spectroscopic
properties (energy differences between states), and experiments can
measure them quite accurately; things like electron velocity are in
practice not measurable (or at least it's not useful to measure them).
Tom Roberts

So, "S electrons" can be and/or become kinda rogue or surplus elements
of an atom?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

"Do atoms have internal barycenters?"
If not, why not?
yes if you replace the way you were thought about barycenters and
gravity and substitute other binding forces like charge and
electrostatic witch are much stronger on a sub atomic level than
gravity is yes their are sub atomic barycenters even with gravity but
that’s not the binding force with respect to what holds the particle
together but even a sludge hammer has a barycenters it's just the
point were forces are at a point of equilibrium

I agree, and I’ll suggest that perhaps even outside of the atomic
level there are sufficiently worthy forces other than gravity,
especially obvious of the electrostatic binding force that's downright
impressive as long as there's sufficient eV differential.
What is the eV of extreme cosmic gamma? Such as what gamma is
unavoidably interacting with our Selene/moon. (<1e21 eV)
~ BG

May I ask, why you always say "Selene/moon"? Most people just say moon
or even Luna. Why is it that the moon gets this archaic Roman
reference and not other things?

[BradGuth]

Post by Kodos friend of Kang
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:36:13 -0800 (PST), BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by BradGuth

Post by Tom Roberts

Post by BradGuth
But electrons and all other components of the atom do have mass, and
since nothing is standing still and their ongoing orbital and/or
interactive nature would have to agree that barycenters (just like
with moons, planets, stars, black holes and galaxies) should exist on
the atomic level.

Nature does not "have to" follow the dictates of your wishes and dreams.
One major lesson of quantum mechanics is: don't attempt to discuss
things you cannot measure. You cannot MEASURE the barycenter which you
assume is present; see my previous post far what you can measure.
For instance, the electron in a ground-state hydrogen atom at rest is
NOT moving, in the sense that the expectation value of its velocity is
zero (this is true of all S electrons). That is relative to the rest
frame of the atom, which in practice cannot be determined precisely --
see my previous post. The theory can be used to compute spectroscopic
properties (energy differences between states), and experiments can
measure them quite accurately; things like electron velocity are in
practice not measurable (or at least it's not useful to measure them).
Tom Roberts

So, "S electrons" can be and/or become kinda rogue or surplus elements
of an atom?
~ BG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

"Do atoms have internal barycenters?"
If not, why not?
yes if you replace the way you were thought about barycenters and
gravity and substitute other binding forces like charge and
electrostatic witch are much stronger on a sub atomic level than
gravity is yes their are sub atomic barycenters even with gravity but
that’s not the binding force with respect to what holds the particle
together but even a sludge hammer has a barycenters it's just the
point were forces are at a point of equilibrium

I agree, and I’ll suggest that perhaps even outside of the atomic
level there are sufficiently worthy forces other than gravity,
especially obvious of the electrostatic binding force that's downright
impressive as long as there's sufficient eV differential.
What is the eV of extreme cosmic gamma? Such as what gamma is
unavoidably interacting with our Selene/moon. (<1e21 eV)
~ BG

May I ask, why you always say "Selene/moon"? Most people just say moon
or even Luna. Why is it that the moon gets this archaic Roman
reference and not other things?

It's because I like using Selene/moon instead of just moon which
doesn't specifically address any given moon.

btw, I do not "alway say "Selene/moon"", as sometimes I've said moon
or Selene. Go figure, I must be crazy.

If the average gamma were 1e15 eV, what's the electrostatic charge of
our Selene/moon?

~ BG