Many thanks again, I agree about the typo in Eq. (30). The graphical results are most interesting as usual. The assumption gamma = 1 means that dm(r1) / dr1 is zero, because gamma = 1 means m(r1) = 1, and v goes to zero. This choice also introduces a singularity. So it may be better to integrate the unapproximated Eq. (30) numerically at some future stage, although it is a difficult equation. I will have a look at Eq. (30) to see if I can find another approximation that does not introduce a singularity.

Section 3 of UFT 425

I tried a solution for m(r1) in section 3. There are some

inconsistencies, indicating that further work has to be done on this.

BTW, there is a typo in eq.(30) of the paper, the plus and minus sign

should be interchanged in the rhs parenthesis.

Horst

paper425-3.pdf

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

This entry was posted on January 11, 2019 at 6:30 am and is filed under asott2. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.