On Mar 24, 6:20*pm, Dave wrote:
On Mar 24, 2:22*am, tom wrote:

On 3/23/2010 7:20 PM, Art Unwin wrote:

your whole concept is malformed. *if the 'static particles' are in
'equilibrium' (i.e. not moving) and then you add a time varying field

Equilibrium does not mean not moving.

I won't go any deeper since you have problems with things complex and go
into babble mode when confronted with them.

tom
K0TAR

oh, so you understand art's concept of 'static' and 'equilibrium'
enough to argue that side of it?? *how do you 'equilibrium' and
'static particles' unless they aren't moving? *equations please, show
your work, extra points for deriving how his magical levitating
diamagnetic neutrino fits into the equations. *please, we need someone
who can fill in the gaps that art can't seem to do.

I totally agree, Some body is needed to fill in the gaps that art is
unable to do

First, one has to explain equilibrium
Second, one has to explain the boundary laws
with respect to statics
making note that equilibrium must be
in place
Third, one has to make the field dynamic by
providing a
time varying field
Fourth, one has to add formally passive items
into the boundary
so that the entire dynamic field in
place is in a state of equilibrium.

Note: you may add radiators to the inside of
the boundary in the first
instance, but in the second instance
when you make them active
then they have to be both resonant as
well as a wavelength long
by firtue of also being a period One
can then applyMaxwells equations for radiation to the
final arbitrary boundar

Who ever manages to explain the above must
point out that the particles
that are ejected from inside the boundary are
immediately replaced fresh passive particles
that are outside the boundary looking for a diamagnetic surface to
reside upon where, in this instance, is aluminum or copper or any
other material that is diamagnetic such as the radiator

Who ever takes on this task of explaining the above to this
group so that they understand most assuredly has my respect .