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 -------