Agreed, this is a good summary by Horst of the new and ubiquitous, or all pervading, m force of physics.
You are right, the m force is a geometrical force appearing additionally to conventional forces. For each particle the force is determined by the distance to its own origin, insofar it is a one-body force. Adding up two forces of two particles would mean using two distinct radial coordinates, but since these coordinates both describe the distance, their value is the same for both particles, therefore addition is justified.
Am 22.02.2019 um 07:50 schrieb Myron Evans:
These are interesting remarks. The m force was introduced in UFT417, as you know, in the context of gravitation from the Euler Lagrange system of dynamics. With respect to Eq. (11) of UFT417 the total force is expressed in the (r1, phi) frame on the right hand side of this equation as the sum of the two body force -mMG / r1 squared e sub r and the m force, which is a ONE body force because it contains only m. Therefore as discussed in immediately preceding papers any particle of mass m is accompanied by an ubiquitous attractive force F = – (1/2) m c squared gamma dm(r1) / dr1. This is the first term on the right hand side of Eq. (11) of UFT417. The m force as you know is the result of the geometry of space itself, and this is a radically new concept in physics that has already led to many new results in UFT415 to UFT431. A lot of these were your own inferences. There is already a lot of interest in these results as the feedback shows. In UFT427 the m force was rederived using the Hamilton system of dynamics, and the result is Eq. (1) of Note 432(2). It is seen that the m force is not due to the interaction between two masses, it is a new type of force that results from the geometry of space. Each particle m generates its own m force, which is a vector quantity. So the net force is the vector sum of the force generated by m1 and the force generated by m2. In general, the net force in physics is the vector SUM of force F1 and force F2. So in this note I consider the net m force of a proton and a Ni(64) nucleus and the net force inside the nucleus. The net m force inside the nucleus is in general the vector sum of all the m forces of the proton and neutrons inside the nucleus. This leads to a new nuclear physics developed in terms of m(r) and dm(r) / dr for each neutron and proton. Concerning the question about units, I agree that there should be 4 pi eps0 in the denominator. The repulsive force inside the nucleus was first used in Eq. (29) of UFT229. This was taken uncritically from a wikipedia article. The wikipedia article uses reduced units, a bad habit of the standard model, and the Wikipedia article omitted 4 p eps0. You are right to point out that S. I. units need 4 pi eps0 in the denominator. So one should google around to find the net repulsive force inside the nucleus in S. I. units. Great care is needed in using wikipedia. Every time I consult it there is an error. It is a propagandist outlet for standard physics and is completely intolerant of any really new ideas. It is riddled with errors.
A question: where did you find the formulla (17) for the potential energy of a sphere? I did not find it in Jackson. Is there a factor 1/4 pi eps0 missing?
Am 20.02.2019 um 14:30 schrieb Myron Evans: