You need to be a member of Ashtar Command - Spiritual Community to add comments!
Hi, I am BenArion and i created ashtarcommandcrew.net in 2006...I just wanted to share a "story" with you all, that i read a few years ago …
Copyright Policy: Always Include 30-50% of the source material and a link to the original article. You may not post, modify, distribute, or reproduce in any way any copyrighted material, trademarks, or other proprietary information belonging to others without obtaining the prior written consent of the owner of such proprietary rights. If you believe that someone's work has been copied and posted on Ashtar Command in a way that constitutes copyright infringement, please Contact Us and include the links to these pages and relevant info.
Comments
MOTIVATION
Given that an electrically charged particle such as an electron have size, what does it keep its various parts from ripelling each other? Think about this considering that similar charges ripell each other. The model is that an electron is a pack of infinitely many infinitesmall electrically charged subparticles (or subtrons) unless a strong force keep them together, the subtrons will endlessly repell each other, approaching nothingness. This repulsion releases the stored energy. So how much is this energy?
The best force that can hold the electron against its own electrostatic self repulsion (hence destruction) is MAGNETISM. To do that, electron must spin. Spinning charge can be seen as an electric current. This give rise to z-pinch, holding the particle together in a toroidal shape. The z-pinch force is given by:
F=l^2/2pu
F=force,
I=electric current (due to spinning)
p=pie
u=magnetic permeability
These parts also repell each other via columb's force given by:
F=q^2/4per^2
q=electric charge
e=electric permitivity
Now current, I=dq/dt (dq is amount of charge passing by during small change it time, dt). If the spinning is steady, then dq/dt=q/t. So I^2=(q/t)^2 the z pinching force, F=ma, now becomes
ma=(q/t)^2/2pu
but r=(at^2)/2 i.e if the charge acelerates till it touch eact other, let it to have take time t. Put this together and we have
m=q^2/4pru
But to ballance things up, the collumb force must quicly take back the charg to where it was some distance r away. To do that it must thus store energy of E=Fr=q^2/4pre (from columb's force). Then use mass for q^2/4pru and you get E=m/ue. From Maxwell's theory, we know that 1/ue=c^2
The reasoning is that if length is contracted as seen from one frame, then things appears to accelerate slowlier as though they were heavier. Einstein says this mean mass is bigger in that frame. But this is wrong! Doing so makes the equation f=ma true by DEFINITION. Specifically, Einstein is defining mass as m=f/a, a definition for INERTIA. Rather mass as QUANTITY OF MATTER isn't expressible via an equation.
First I must teach you simple calculus. Consider the equation:
E=m'c^2{1-(v/c)^2}^(1/2) that is to say m'c^2 multiplied by the squar root of the value {1-(v/c)^2}
then {E/m'c^2}^2=1-(v/c)^2
now if velocity, v changes by tiny amount, write it dv, energy changes by some tiny amount, write it dE, so we have
{(E dE)/m'c^2}^2=1-{(v dv)/c}^2
expand things to get:
(E^2 2EdE dE^2)/(m'c^2)^2=1-(v2 2vdv dv^2)/c^2
since dE is soo small, dE^2 is even far smaller that we can neglect it. Same applies to dv^2. So we remain with:
(E/m'c^2)^2 2EdE/(m'c^2)^2=1-(v/c)^2 2vdv/c^2
but (E/m'c^2)^2=1-(v/c)^2 so this cancels themselves out and we remain with
EdE=(m'c^2)^2vdv/c^2=(m'c)^2vdv
But E=m'c^2{1-(v/c)^2}^(1/2)
so dE=m'vdv/{1-(v/c)^2}^(1/2)
but we can understand change in energy, dE as a constant force f times small change in distance. That is
dE =fdx
but f=ma=mdv/dt (newton's second law of motion) so
dE=mdxdv/dt=mvdv (dx/dt=v)
subtitute this in the above equation and we simply get
m=m'/{1-(v/c)^2}^(1/2)
which is the lorentz transform for mass. So reasoning backwards, we say that given the Lorentz transform for mass, it follows logically that
E=m'c^2{1-(v/c)^2}
This is indead the correct form of E'=m'c^2 as energy too have its own Lorentz transform as
E=E'{1-(v/c)2}^(1/2)
My derivation appears very long sinse I did not assume that you know INTEGRAL CALCULUS.