sci.physics.particle

On Apr 1, 6:42=A0am, Kumar wrote:
> On Mar 31, 10:07=A0am, "Y.Porat" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 30, 10:04=A0am, Kumar wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 30, 11:58=A0am, Kumar wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 30, 11:37=A0am, "Y.Porat" wrote:> On Ma=
r 30, 6:54=A0am, Kumar wrote:
>
> > > > > > On > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > Instead, can GF be combined of two forces, one push force by its=
motion
>
> > > > > how =A0can =A0motion =A0cause push according to your guesses ??
>
> > > > Somewhat =A0tornado or whirilpool type inward push.
>
> > > > > > and other by earths magnetic force along with inersteller forces=

>
> > > > > i think you mingel =A0 too many factors
> > > > > the magnwetic force is many orders of magnitude
> > > > > stronger than Gravity
> > > > > and OTHA =A0(note carefully)
> > > > > **the range** of magnatic force is uncomparably
> > > > > **shorter* than the Gravitaion force
> > > > > another differnce between them is
> > > > > that gravity cannot be screened
> > > > > while magnetism can be screened
> > > > > so it is very different 'birds' that i cant see
> > > > > how they can cooperate
> > > > > besides
>
> > > > Yes, but I was unable to express atractive force of gravity along wi=
th
> > > > inward push force because attractive force can also be an magnetic a=
nd
> > > > inward push due to revolutions.> even masses that has no megnetism a=
ttract each other
> > > > > by gravity
> > > > > so ...........????!!!
>
> > > > It can be common result from all masses in earth. Non-magnetic
> > > > substances can still have some forces.
>
> > > > > ATB
> > > > > Y.Porat
> > > > > --------------------
> > > > > s
>
> > > > > > opreting on earth?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > ------------------------------ Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > To add;
> > > "whirlpool =A0(hw=FBrl-)
>
> > > =A0A rapidly rotating current of water; a vortex.
>
> > > Turmoil; whirl.
> > > A magnetic, impelling force into which one may be pulled.http://www.an=
swers.com/topic/whirlpool?cat=3Dtechnology"- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > ------------------
> > there is a principal differene between a 'vortex'
> > and my Circlon idea:
>
> > a vortex is done by =A0alot of material
> > =A0around it
>
> > the circlon can act even if it is *a single tiny lonely* particle
> > it moves in a circle because 'that is how it was born'
> > it is its initial property
> > it does not need anything external to it
> > to move in a circle
> > is that principle understood ??
> > (it is a parallel /replacing =A0the 'curved space- time idea .....)
>
> > TIA
> > Y.Porat
> > --------------- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Thanks. But can't gravity be a combination of vortex & Circlon?- Hide quot=
ed text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

----------------------
i dont know much about vortex
but if i undestand correctly
vortex is keeping in mind a swirrle of water
or alike
ie
it is involved with a lot of matter taking part
in order to do it

the Circlon OTHA does not need anything except itself
in order of moving i a circle
2
yes indeed in order of making gravitation it needsd as well
at least two masses
but the only 'swirling things there
are the 'Circlons'
btw
those circlons in case of thyem to make atraction
are not movingjust in a circle
but in acurved lines **back and forth *
i hope you get my idea
back anc forth hitind the rare sides of the involved masses
more than on theirfron sides
because at the front they camcel each others action ]

2
the circlon according to me is a particle builder as well !!
not only a force maker
it builds the links of the' chain of orbitals'
so no wonder that those chains are 'loosing' in many cases
some of their 'circlon property '
but that loss doe s not get lost to the endless universe
because of their circular movement
they keep on staying somewere neer by their 'mother '

ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------