Post by twetch#4355

1HZHJ7…RTs7 Key · twetch

they're actually a very clumbsy set of equations to work with,and the reason is because they're expressing relationships that would apply if we had an aether

What the chain says
Block
657 779
Time
2020-10-21T03:10:48Z
Signer
1HZHJ7eMz61tgxnYx6mdoVJuM9n8VwRTs7
App
twetch
Type
post
Content type
text/plain
Name in tx
twetch#4355

Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.

Signed by 1HZHJ7eMz61tgxnYx6mdoVJuM9n8VwRTs7 Verified

Replies (6)

1HZHJ7…RTs7 Key · twetch
Replying to@1HZHJ7…RTs7

so if one thinks instead about one electron interacting w/ another electron — massive numbers of them interacting — then you would start where that started, and the simplist thing to start w/ is this thing called a superconductor

1HZHJ7…RTs7 Key · twetch
Replying to@1HZHJ7…RTs7

the reason as why that's the simplist is that it doesn't have any of the complications of losses — there's no thermodynamics in it ONCE it's a superconductor

1HZHJ7…RTs7 Key · twetch
Replying to@1HZHJ7…RTs7

there's thermodynamics in it to GET there, but once you have the superconductor it's an extremely simple to understand object and the relationships that you get from it are extremely simple

1HZHJ7…RTs7 Key · twetch
Replying to@1HZHJ7…RTs7

but ONCE you have a superconductor , you don't need maxwell's equations, you're just treating the electron as a wave — the electrons in the superconductor all lock into phase — that's why it's superconducting.

Continue thread →