Re: What is a photon

On Sun, 15 Jun 2025 18:33:24 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
>

>
"The cause of gravity":
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/mmigkl3yZYc/m/8Rs16NCXAAAJ
>
Quote of the first few statements:
  "The formula for universal gravitation is well known to be,
   as the force F acting between two masses m and M, parted by
   a distance r from their centres of mass, as F=GmM/r^2, where G
   is the gravitational constant found by experiment. Recently
   the author has updated this formula to F=BnN/r^2 where B is
   a constant, and n and N are the number of protons or electrons
   in the masses m and M. It is obvious that as n and N are proportional
   to m and M, this is essentially the same formula with the difference
   that instead of masses, the new formula involves charges. Thus the
   gravitational force is expressed electrostatically, as a manifestation
   of electrostatic force. In other words, there is no difference between
   electrostatic force and gravitational force."
>
Do you, Bertitaylor, like Arindam, claim that the Sun is exerting
the electrostatic force 3.6e22 N on the Earth?

Den 17.06.2025 01:35, skrev Bertitaylor:

>
Ridiculous question seeing that there is gravitational attraction which
is really electrostatic.

On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 20:41:41 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:

>
Maybe you should read it again?
>
The Newtonian formula is F=GmM/r²   (1)
Arindam's formula is:    F=BnN/r²   (2)
Where:
  B = G
  n = number of protons and electrons in the mass m
  N = number of protons and electrons in the mass M
>
That means:
   m = n⋅mₑ + n⋅mₚ     (3)
   M = N⋅mₑ + N⋅mₚ     (4)
  where mₑ is the mass of an electron and mₚ is the mass of a proton.
>
Inserting (3) and (4) in (2) yields:
  F=BnN/r² ≡ BnN/r²
>
So the two equations are identical!
>
Since the number of protons and electrons in is the same,
there is no net electric charge in m. Same with M.
>
Do you really not understand that there is no electrostatic
force between the two neutral masses m and M ?
>
Do you still claim:
"there is gravitational attraction which is really electrostatic"?

Den 18.06.2025 00:28, skrev Bertitaylor:

No, one assumes masses attract naturally being masses as per Newton.
Arindam shows they attract because of the atomic configuration causing
mild electrostatic attraction.
 Arindam thus shows that gravity is a consequence of electrostatic
attraction being  slightly larger than electrostatic repulsion between
two atoms.

Let's have a closer look at this.
Let's consider hydrogen gas in a balloon.
Two and two atoms will combine to molecules in covalent binding.
This means that a molecule consists of two protons with two
electrons moving around them.
If the temperature is above zero, the heat energy in the gas
will mainly be kinetic energy of the molecules. They will move and
bounce off each other which will make pressure in the gas.
The higher temperature, the faster molecules and the higher pressure.
Why are the molecules bouncing off each other?
Because the negative electrons in the two molecules repel each other!
Two molecules at some distance don't affect each other much,
even if there is an extremely small gravitational attraction.
But when the molecules come very close to each, they repel each other!
Strongly!
There is an electrostatic repulsion between atoms,
strongly depending on the distance between them.
But there is never an electrostatic attraction between
neutral atoms.
Arindam's claim:
"electrostatic attraction is slightly larger than electrostatic
  repulsion between two atoms"
Is thus utter nonsense.
If it was true, the atoms in the air around you would attract each other
and they would be clumped together on the ground, and there would be no air pressure.
I breathe, ergo Arindam is wrong.
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/