Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site topaz.RUTGERS.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!topaz!Alan%DCT.AC.UK%DUNDEE.AC.UK
From: Alan%DCT.AC.UK%DUNDEE.AC.UK@ucl-cs.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Fantastic Voyage (Flaky Assumptions)
Message-ID: <3386@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Thu, 22-Aug-85 12:37:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: topaz.3386
Posted: Thu Aug 22 12:37:01 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 17:19:51 EDT
Sender: daemon@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 30

From: Alan Greig 

> From: Keith Dale 

>  1. The miniaturization process begins with setting up an
>     homogeneous field around the object(s) to be mini'ed.
>     What kind of field?  Well, a field that reacts in equal
>     force or amount to all points within it.  So, Flaky
>     Assumption #1 is: this field does not behave according
>     to the inverse square rule.

Hang on. Without even going any further than your first 'Flaky
Assumption', what's wrong with homogeneous fields ? F(x,y,z,t)=(6,6,6)
ok to me as a nice three dimensional time independent vector field.
As a practical example air resistance is the same in any direction
you care to move in being dependent on the gas density. What about the
electric field between 2 charged plate conductors (ok in theory they
should be infinite for perfection). Then don't forget the electric
field due to a dipole which falls off as inverse cube. What about Gauss ?
What about billions of other examples. Or have I missed something entirely ?

			Alan Greig
			Computer Centre
			Dundee College of Technology
			Dundee
			Scotland

Janet:	Alan%DCT@DDXA
Arpa:	Alan%DCT@UCL-CS.ARPA
-------