<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Equation of Motion of Small Bodies in Relativity · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/gr-qc_0309074/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/gr-qc_0309074/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Equation of Motion of Small Bodies in Relativity — mentioned by Certhas</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18846523</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:gr-qc_0309074:18846523</guid><pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2019 16:26:07 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Then stop playing with words and say what you mean. Point charges make sense without qualification in EM, that much is true. But that doesn&amp;#x27;t mean that there is something strange or fishy going on here. You can formulate Lorentz forces using mass distributions and you&amp;#x27;re fine (it&amp;#x27;s right there in the next subsection of the wiki). The pathologies don&amp;#x27;t appear. Of course the resulting equations are non-linear, and that is the origin of the failure of point sources to make sense. If you then try to recover point sources by taking a limit, the details of the assumptions you make matter a great…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/gr-qc_0309074/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>gr-qc</category></item></channel></rss>
