Attractive forces in 3-d space

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter morg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forces Space
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the complexities of explaining attractive forces in three-dimensional space without resorting to the controversial concept of negative time. The original poster expresses frustration over existing explanations, including those found in external texts such as the FAQ from John Baez and the article on MathPages, which they believe do not adequately address the topic. The conversation highlights the need for a clearer understanding of the fundamental processes behind attraction and repulsion, questioning whether these forces can be simplified or if they are inherently complex.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical physics concepts, particularly forces and fields.
  • Familiarity with three-dimensional coordinate systems.
  • Knowledge of fundamental forces, including gravitational and electromagnetic interactions.
  • Basic comprehension of philosophical implications in physics, such as the nature of time.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mathematical representation of forces in three-dimensional space.
  • Explore the implications of negative time in theoretical physics.
  • Study the origins and definitions of fundamental forces, focusing on attraction and repulsion.
  • Investigate alternative theories of force interactions beyond classical mechanics.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physicists, students of physics, and anyone interested in the foundational principles of force interactions in three-dimensional space.

morg
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I'd appreciate your help about this: Is someone capable of explaining how attractive forces work in three dimensional space, without invoking a negative time trick?

I know this is not the first time when someone is asking about this subject. I've already read almost all posts about it, and many external texts, including this link
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...particles.html

But this FAQ above seems to be kind of "artificial solution" in one dimensional space and, in general raises more questions than answers.

There is also another text about the process:
http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath535/kmath535.htm

This, on the other hand invokes negative time trick, which is questioned by some folks on the forum.

Maybe I am asking a wrong question? Is an origin of attract-repulsion process something like an origin of charge? I mean it's dogma, and it's fundamental process, no further dwelling allowed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Must we do this all over again? Well it has been almost a whole week.
 
Bill_K
Yes, would be great

why again.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
8K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K