Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A common rule for all forces

  1. Jul 17, 2003 #1
    After completion of current project I shall amend my Single Force web pages to accommodate the following rule.

    The force acting on the centre of any force field is equal to the total force acting on the field surface.

    This rule allows an explanation of the observed galaxy gravity anomaly along the lines expressed on my Gravity page with the addition that it is now possible to see where the force originates.

    Those forums dealing with the Casimir force, singularities and renormalisation will observe that the Single force model no longer has any infinities and therefore no need of renormalisation.

    This also means that the inverse square law as applied in gravity and physics, is not universal but a local phenomonym; As measurement of the galactic gravity force clearly shows it is the relationship between mass, distance and elasticity that determines the nature of the field.

    The error arises from Newton's assumption that the force at the field centre is zero. As far as I am aware, this assumption has been continued in all subsequent theories. It is the existence of potential force at the zero point that makes creation possible.

    Sakharov proposed that every possible point in infinity is a zero force point, but if that were so then there is no force to start creation going and there is no vacuum force (or any other force). But once it is accepted that each zero point has a force potential then creation is explainable. It is the Zero point vacuum force potential that makes everything possible.

    My diagram showing how the bonding field can be used to illustrate atomic fields also shows how the vacuum force builds towards the centre. Simply look at the bonding force as a measurement of the vacuum force.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 17, 2003
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 17, 2003 #2

    Hurkyl

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What is the center and surface of a force field?
     
  4. Jul 17, 2003 #3
    Newton describe his graph as "a graph of the force of a gravity field without a central mass".
    A bar magnet has a centre of magnetic force.
    An atomic bonding field has a centre of effort.
    Some theories consider all particles to be energy fields, these presumbly have a centre.
    Those who feel that the universe is "corpuscular in nature" sometimes consider a quantum to be corpuscular force field with a cental zero point (the field effect is of course detectable outside the body).
    My own proposal is that existence consist of vacuum fields with zero point centres, the vacuum force being carried by a force carrier. The manner in which vacuum is responsible for the creation of mass is explained in diagrams on my web pages and is one of the items that will not require changing on the next upgrade.
    I cannot find anything that cannot be explained in single (i.e.vacuum)force terms and please note that this does not require any change in the mathematics of Quantum theory, but it does offer the oppurtunity to explain gravity as it is observed, and link it into quantum theory.
    I note that the Casimir force between two spheres is repulsive and attribute this to a reduction in the vacuum force between two speres allowing the external vacuum force to pull the spheres apart. This action is exactly the same action that causes super-cooled liquids to flow in their peculiar manner; vacuum carries the corpuscular fields towards the point of maximum vacuum.
    If the new force had just been discovered we would be foced with two choices-
    a) give it a new name like magnetism or
    b) call it vacuum
    (b) has the advantages of being explainable.
    The Single force model allows an explaination of particle contents (mass, charge etc). The five force Standard model does not allow any such explaination.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 18, 2003
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?