Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/CommonHTML/jax.js

Monday, May 30, 2016

Pound To Rescue Permittivity

From the post "Wrong, Wrong, Wrong" dated 25 May 2015,

F=Fρdx

where  Fρ=i2mc2G.tanh(G2mc2(xxz))

F=2mc2.ln(cosh(G2mc2(xxz))

within the boundary of ψ where 0xaψ.  For, xaψ, we use Gaussian flux,

F=FG14πr2

at r=aψ

FG14πa2ψ=q4πεoa2ψ=2mc2.ln(cosh(π))

for a point mass xz=0 (in retrospect xz was not necessary, xz was to prevent the function Fρ from blowing up at x=0).

FG=8mc2πa2ψ.ln(cosh(π))

where ln(cosh(π))=2.4503.

Also,

qεo=4πa2ψm.2c2ln(cosh(π))

where m is a point mass/inertia in the respective field.  Which suggests,

εo=12c2ln(cosh(π))=122997924582ln(cosh(π))

εo=2.2704e18

when

q=4πa2ψm

That q is the distribution of m on the surface of a sphere of radius aψ.  Which seems to solve the problem of extending a point mass of mass density m to a mass of finite extent aψ.

But, the quoted value of εo is 8.8542e12 from the definition,

εo=1μoc2

where μo=4π×107

we have 4π12.5664 vs 2ln(cosh(π))4.9006 and a scaling factor of 107.

The derived εo and defined value do not match.