Discussion:
Can the fine structure constant be obtained from a vector of force?
chemguy
2018-11-26 02:24:12 UTC
The fine structure constant is associated with electric charge, and may be referred to as the “electric fine constant”. A force vector may also give another fine structure constant which is associated with mass (massive charge), and may be referred to as the “massive fine constant”.

If special conditions apply, can an “electric fine constant” and a “massive fine constant” be obtained from a vector of force?

Reference; http://newstuff77.weebly.com 31 The Fine Structure Vector
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
2018-12-01 12:33:17 UTC
Post by chemguy
Reference; http://newstuff77.weebly.com 31 The Fine Structure Vector
Not even wrong.

[I am using abbreviated LaTeX below to fit your formatting as best as
possible.]

| Force may be represented as a 3D vector (vec F);
| vec F = F_11 vec i + F_12 vec j + F_13 vec k

Correct.

[You should have used colon instead of semicolon; corrected below.]

| Where […] vec i, vec j, vec k are directional vectors in 3D (unit vectors)

Those are called _base_ vectors instead.

| F_11, F_12, F_13 are components of force

They are components _of the_ force _vector_, then.

| The vector has magnitude: |vec F| = F_14

One can make that definition, but it implies, *falsely*, that the magnitude
of a vector is one of its intrinsic components. The magnitude (norm) of a
vector is defined by the used metric instead.

| The components are related to the magnitude:
| (F_11)^2 + (F_12)^2 + (F_13)^2 = (F_14)^2

Only with a _Euclidean_ metric, and even then the magnitude is NOT a
component of the vector itself. That would be a recursive definition
because the magnitude of a vector is based on its components.

| A fourth component (F_10) is:
| (F_10)^2 = (F_11)^2 + (F_12)^2 = (F_14)^2 - (F_13)^2

Complete nonsense.
--
PointedEars