I'll start with this and the so what . A mono-pole point charge distributed over a volume of space with a ? measure, will cause the density of the charge to decrease to a point of no negligible existence , popped into and out of existence .
Try to understand this bit first please , can you...
Maybe !
You say I can use hf to represent a point charge ?
What would you use for an unspecified volume of space ?
Please help me .
If S = xyzE
Then hf / S seems correct?
How about
hf / V^n where V is volume and n is unspecified ?
Did you even read what I wrote ?
Obviously not !
My formula explains the process in a form different than words . I describe the physics involved in the process using the appropriate symbols .
Try a question .
Please describe in math a point energy distributing to surrounding points ?
It's only gibberish to you because like I don't understand some of your maths because I've not learn't it , the same applies to you .
Can we start fresh ?
My formula explains the process in a form different than words . I describe the physics involved in the process using the appropriate...
I've heard of kE obviously , however that is also a invalid argument . Speed is not required for energy , have you ever heard of zero point energy ?
E = A + B / t
Which is stating E= m/t no c required
mE³ / R^n = delta t
Words and word use are subjective , I believe the word ****** has a past . Where does the word come from ?
Could it be slang for a person who originated from Nigeria ?
A Brit is from Britain
A Yank is from America
A rusky is from Russia ....
A Paki is from Pakistan
A ****** could well...
Actually the arrogance is of science ! For over a decade I've been pointing out errors they ignore . Mistakes I have corrected for them .
P.s My diagrams are spot on .....my notions are spot on ...
I've asked for math help and people had no idea , they said they can do maths but they can't really .
I created my own that works for my theory , what is the problem with that ?
1 / >1 = <1
It works doesn't it ?
I'll be taken more seriously if I ignore all the errors of present science , stop trying to present advanced science and just learn to repeat present information like some parrot ?
What a curious and strange world !
Have you not considered it is you that just simply doesn't understand my...
No mc² is not energy because mass * speed is momentum , you already told me and c is a speed , so mass times speed squared makes no sense what so ever .
E = (-Q) + (+Q) / t no speed required or needed . The energy is proportional to its mass xyzE
I was saving some of this stuff for book two , my special theory ''stuff'' .
An object will remain in motion because of the force pulling on it .
Remember my spaceship design ?
Your spaceship designers are rather hopeless when considering space travel .....
Mass objects curves field mass
N><N = N<>N
Thats just a G thing .....
F<E = P where P is momentum
Newton stuff.....advanced...
1E³ is centripetal pull ......hint it curves space-time energy inwards...
Einstein advanced
Think about my theory wrote so far ....
Newton - absolute space...
People are so clueless !
How big is one ?
It can be infinitesimally small or any value to infinite .......
1 / >1 = 0
think
I can't put 1 / ∞ = 0
1E³ says 1 times energy cubed , can't you read math ?
How about if I wrote it mE³
would you understand that ?
Because mc² is pointless...