Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 23, 6:34*pm, Dave wrote:
Joe, I wanted a debate as to why adding a time varying field to a boundary enclosed static particles in equilibrium is illegal. your whole concept is malformed. *if the 'static particles' are in 'equilibrium' (i.e. not moving) and then you add a time varying field the particles are going to start moving and won't be in equilibrium any more... assuming of course the particles are charged or have a magnetic moment. This is in opposition to what the books say. which books. *quote titles and paragraphs and what you think you oppose in them. *i have given you my quotes as to why it is not necessary to add a time parameter to gauss's law and you ignore it. My whole theory lives or dies on how this is resolved. Nobody will provide technical details as to why this is illegal. then you better start hunting for a new theory. *i have provided you formulas in the past and you have ignored them... personally i don't think you even understand the concepts and have probably ignored me on purpose just so you can continue to blather on to get more attention. As i said before, if you do not accept the laws of physics then we cannot debate physics Probably the best thing to happen for both of us! You can take a horse to the water trough but you can't make it drink. Especially when it puts his arse to the front and lets loose with hot air.Your last statement shows all who you are and what you are. Free speech can have its price. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Polarized radiation | Antenna | |||
Skin Thickness, RF penetration into conductors. | Shortwave | |||
UHF penetration & path loss Q: | Antenna | |||
Electromagnetic radiation | Shortwave | |||
TWTHED'S SPHINCTER POPS FROM STRESS OF GAY PENETRATION | CB |