Butch

Thank you for putting up with me... and thank goodness for Desmos! I am not a mathematician (although if I hang around this forum much longer...) Anyway can you check my math for me? Greatly appreciated! https://www.desmos.com/calculator/f607tsq5ux

Sorry, folks... tired brain, will work more on question than solution.

I am only looking for a vector statement to show that the gravitational influence of the 2 point system on the single point reduces as the distance between the 2 constituents of the 2 point system increases... I understand the vector math, but lost on the proper formula syntax. I could draw it and deduce it, but a singular mathematical statement eludes me. It would do to consider the 2 point system to be static except for them receding from one another tangent to the single point. BTW Thank you Swan. I am using that relationship, however showing that the 2 point system influence diminishes with the distance between the 2 is what is eluding me... I suppose I need to reference the point equidistant from the 2 and apply the 1/x^2 there. Sorry people, probably making this more complex than need be. And thank you mathematic. Perhaps I can restate... The resultant of 2 vectors with a common origin decreases as theta increases. I need a simple proof. That is not exactly correct.

Given 2 gravitational points in a close oscillatory relationship and a 3rd at a relativly greater distance, how would I demonstrate mathematically that the influence of the first 2 upon the 3rd decreases as the distance between the first 2 increases? Assume the oscillatory relationship to be circular, or an average.

By abstract I mean apart from the math or physical laws... Not in disagreement with them certainly. Abstract thought leads to math and physical laws that have not been revealed. As an example, Einstein had first to consider how light would appear (with existing theory) if he were traveling at c and thus he produced new physical laws and the math for them. Abstract thought is often the pathway to discovery.

Not joking... Have you never seen accepted science overturned? We forge ahead with what we think we know and go into the unknown with expectations of what we will find... often we are quite suprised. As far as we know it is... Euclid was rock solid until Einstein came along and got him all out of shape.

You have a wonderfully abstract mind! Many do not have that attribute to work with, many can only see such things as math or physical laws... If your mind can draw pictures of these abstract ideas, do not take it for granted, you are certainly blessed.

We do not think in terms of velocity of an electron, but realistically even if an electron magically never occupies any space between two points but occupies one point after another point isn't that apparently velocity?

Would that not involve a span of time? Aren't you saying that the average center of charge is at the nucleus? Perhaps I should have said instantaneous position?

There are no facts, only logical belief... our beliefs are imperfect, some it would seem more imperfect than others. Well, it seems the alternative is to be a Pelosi supporter...

No "facts" are absolutely complete, "Everything is relative".

Can an electron have the property of position via center of charge and/or center of mass?

Good information as usual... From all of you.

You are a thinker Strange, even more so than a learner... a question for you: quantum physics I have seen described as seeking the smallest of the small, the quanta... isn't it more correct today to describe it as seeking the threshold between existence and nonexistence?

Sorry, EM.

Just a matter of amplitude and peridocity, the earth's gravitational field is not static. Gravitational waves are a phenom in the gravitational field... You get the point. What is the nature of the effect, not the amplitude of the effect. Good link! Comes very close to unifying am and g does it not? Again what is the nature of the effect, not the amplitude... Perhaps I should not have stated such a relationship.

Replace "fact" with "logical belief". You could say that for flat earth believers, that their science is lacking in evidence. Columbus speculated that the earth was round because of his observations, there could have been alternative explanations... However he had the interest and intellect to pursue evidence to further the logical belief.

"weakly" is subjective, ask some one who falls off a ladder how weakly they hit the floor... The question is not how much matter is affected, but rather ion what way? The Ghz range wave would have a much different effect than earth's gravitational field did on the man falling off the ladder. It is good enough because of the size of the system, a system generating gravitational waves in the Ghz range would be incredibly small and these calculations are no longer good enough... But like I said, let us leave this discussion for later. True and we can discuss this later. The magnitude of the effect would depend on amplitude, not the nature of the effect. Come on Swan, your mind can do better than "No idea". Indeed! Do we know of any other forces that have such an effect on matter?

Yes, a very simple calculation? No... at this quantum level time is subjective. It can be said that t =1/g. But before we get into that discussion... Let me simplify the question... What effect would a gravitational wave with a frequency in the Ghz range (unreasonable as it may be) have on matter.

First off, there is no truth... Nothing can be proven, that is the nature of science, there is only logical belief. Those that are limited in understanding, for whatever reason, be it intellect, interest, or religious belief... whatever, cannot or will not pursue the logic, they build a framework that works via trial and error. If believing the world is flat works for you, go with it. Indeed you do!

Ahh, I agree! What if the orbiting system was smaller than a light wave?

Okay, I know... No such thing, but just for the sake of discussion, let's entertain the idea that there was such an entity and it was oscillating in the range of say 50Ghz and that the affected entity had a mass of say 10 million times that of the average apparent mass of the affecting entity. What would the affectation be?

If a region of space had an oscillating gravitational field, how would this affect a massive body in it's proximity?

A field is something, even a "flat" field has propertie(s), granted the field must be affected for evidence of those properties. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Before we are born a myriad of variables are manipulating the basic design presented by DNA, indeed even the DNA of the gametes is undergoing some modification prior to conception.