Re: empirical evidence for gravitational field of EM radiation
hanson
"charge" and "action at a distance" is, all we do is
whistle Dixie, which of course is easier & more fun.
---------- AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ---------
>
"Ken S. Tucker" <dyna...@vianet.on.ca> wrote in message
news:f7fbbfee-0d26-4894...@a18g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3e3cd95e4a6a838a?hl=en
>>
Dennis aka Sue... <suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
Gravity/Inertia can be explained by electrodynamics.
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2005-12/articlesu25....
>>
carlip-nos...@physics.ucdavis.edu wrote:
There is *nothing* in the paper you cite that claims "Gravity/Inertia
can be explained by electrodynamics."
>> >
Dennis aka Sue... <suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
One of the more fascinating approaches to ???quantum gravity???
is the suggestion, typically attributed to Sakharov
that gravity itself may not be ???fundamental physics???. Indeed
gravity spacetime and spacetime geometry might be no more
???fundamental??? than is fluid dynamics.... because there
is an underlying microphysics, ---> molecular dynamics, <--
Indeed the very concepts of density and velocity field make no
sense at the microphysical level and emerge only as one
averages over timescales and distance-scales larger than the
mean free time and mean free path.
>>
Steve Carlip carlip-nos...@physics.ucdavis.edu wrote:
there is a "strong minority opinion" among physicists that
gravity might emerge from some more fundamental
underlying theory, in analogy to the way that fluid mechanics
emerges from molecular dynamics. [But] to claim that this
means that "Gravity/Inertia can be explained by
electrodynamics" is to be deliberately obtuse.
>
Ken S. Tucker
We're happy with an electrodynamic solution to
gravity, see Eq.(4) in this brief,
http://physics.trak4.com/GR_Charge_Couple.pdf
Steve, all you need to do is solve Guv=Tuv for a
simple "charge couple", have you tried it?
>
hanson wrote:
You can begin with an even simpler set of premises and
propositions and see numerically sufficiently accurate
results that gravity and EM are intertwined,(but which
comes first is another question, altogether) You can
make the following speculations and start with
>
::1:: d^2(1/rho)/dt^2 = G (peak, const. Newton, and
>
::2:: dE/dt = rho*G*hbar (max energy flux or power)
>
wherein rho is the ordinary mass-energy content in ordinary
3 D real world space, cosmic or molecular, homogenous
or dispersed. With normal calculus machinations of that
you can turn out the following masses:
For the proton, 1.67E-24 gr:
>
::3:: m_p = [c^2/2G]*[sqrt(hG/(2pi*c^3)]*[I_H/(f_L*F)]*(3*pi^2)*sqrt(2a)
>
IOW, m_p = Schw.radius * Plank length * Ionisation parameters.
>
In other words still, it says:
The Hydrogen nucleus (m_p) is a black hole with [***]
--- the classical Schwartzschild limit or event horizon of (c^2/2G) at
--- a radius of 1 Planck length sqrt(hG/2pi*c^3) and is shrouded in
--- a substance-characteristic Coulomb mantle, being the product of,
--- the H-Ionisation potential multiplier of 13.5
.... [I_H=4pi^4*sqrt(a)/sqrt(6)],
--- the Lyman series frequency limit (f_L), and
--- the Faraday Constant (F, the charge transfer handler),
.... and is further governed by
--- toroidal geometry demands of (3*pi^2) and
--- EM/QM fine structure conditions set by [sqrt(2*a)].
>
[***] Consider the distance between this event horizon and the larger,
classically measured H-radius as the "nuclear accretion zone" analog.
>
In case of leptons, here the electron, m_e, the e-shell Ionization-potential
considerations do fall away and the situation changes to:
For the electron, m_e = 9.09E-28 gr:
>
::4:: m_e = [c^2/G] * [sqrt(hG/(2pi*c^3)] * [1/(f_L*F)] * a*pi*sqrt(3)/3
>
IOW, m_e = Kerr.radius * Plank length * Coulomb/charge shroud.
>
There are no ionization considerations and the electron's geometry
is spherical instead of toroidal (pi vs pi^2) & the electron may
be a rotating Kerr black hole type character with the Kerr- [c^2/G]
(instead of the Schwartzschild [c^2/2G]) event horizon.
>
More pontificatoons about ::3:: and ::4::
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/b3d9acda1d607584?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/53371ffd43fe32b9
>
Naturally, these equations can be explained in very
many different ways, in as many ways as you can
skin a cat, but as long as we do not know what and
why there is "Action at a Distance" we will go no further
than Newton went, no matter how badly the Einstein
Dingleberries try to wrap space & time together into
matter warped space-time, and similarly we will not
understand anything deeper no matter how badly we
curl up with Maxwell if we do not understand what and
why there is "charge".
>
All these mental masturbations are of course great
fun and entertianment, but let us not forget that these
stories/tales/theories will not buy you as single cup of
coffee, unless you are a fortunate teacher, like Carlip,
whose job it is to convey heuristic / current knowledge
to the next generation... ahaha...
Thanks for the laughs, guys.... ahahaha... ahahanson
Ian Parker
> All these mental masturbations are of course great
> fun and entertianment, but let us not forget that these
> stories/tales/theories will not buy you as single cup of
> coffee, unless you are a fortunate teacher, like Carlip,
> whose job it is to convey heuristic / current knowledge
> to the next generation... ahaha...
> Thanks for the laughs, guys.... ahahaha... ahahanson
Hanson. As I have said only Jesse Owens can provide luminous sources
of VUV/soft X rays through synchrotron radiation. There is the free
electron laser that works by quantum inversions produced inside a
synchrotron.
As has been said many times you need GTR for GPS. Also GTR is needed
to determine any orbit with high prescision. This is of great
importance in terms of Earth crossers. Blowing them up with nuclear
bombs is NOT a good idea. Far better to determine orbits accurately
and give them a "nudge" of mm/s
- Ian Parker
Y.Porat
-------------------
orbits are not done by curvature of space
it is done as all the attrarction forces
by
FORCE MESSENGERS !!
or else there was no need for all those 'Graviton' theories
it is not accidental the Einstein and even his followers
never succeeded by their great efforts
to unify all forces **including the curvature of space *
because that is not what it is in nature
it was only a wrong (though ingenious ) guess of Einstein
unlike SR that is right !!
space i s nothing
and that nothing cannot have any properties except
hosting matter
the fact that 'curvature of mass occurs only by
THE PRESENCE OF MASS
is a clear indication that the main hero of gravitation is
MASS and not empty space !!
ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------------
hanson
<ianpa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:641b94a0-3f4a-430c...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On 1 Sep, 05:58, "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
>> All these mental masturbations are of course great
>> fun and entertianment, but let us not forget that these
>> stories/tales/theories will not buy you as single cup of
>> coffee, unless you are a fortunate teacher, like Carlip,
>> whose job it is to convey heuristic / current knowledge
>> to the next generation... ahaha...
>> Thanks for the laughs, guys.... ahahaha... ahahanson
>
> Hanson. As I have said only Jesse Owens can provide luminous
> sources of VUV/soft X rays through synchrotron radiation.
> There is the free electron laser that works by quantum inversions
> produced inside a synchrotron.
> As has been said many times you need GTR for GPS. Also GTR is
> needed to determine any orbit with high prescision. This is of great
> importance in terms of Earth crossers. Blowing them up with nuclear
> bombs is NOT a good idea. Far better to determine orbits accurately
> and give them a "nudge" of mm/s
> - Ian Parker
>
Ian Parkers long and sordid wrapsheet:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.skeptic/msg/8f9e58768eb77fad?hl=en
>
ahahaha...So, Ian listen, apparently wichsen is extremely
important to you, from the fact that all what interested you
was the paragraph that contained the word masturbation.
... ahahaha...
Ian, listen, what substances are you constantly abusing
that you are so loaded, that the answers do come to you
even before the questions arise?
Ian, listen, what are you always so drugged up on so badly
that your mentation is so demented that you race chaotically
from Buzzword to Buzzword like a dog that barks in the night
at a distant noise that he knows nothing about... ahahahaha....
Thanks for the laughs though but, should you ever experience
the wonder of being sober and rational, Ian, here is what is
germane to the issue:
--------------------------------
Ian Parker
you get from time is a equation of the form
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_waves
where Quad = - d^2/dt + Del represents the flat-space d'Alembertian
operator, and τ(αβ) represents the stress-energy tensor plus quadratic
terms involving h(αβ) . This is just a wave equation for the field
with a source, despite the fact that the source involves terms
quadratic in the field itself. That is, it can be shown that solutions
to this equation are waves traveling with velocity 1 in these
coordinates. (We have put c = 1).
To get gravitational waves we need to throw masses around at an
apreciable fraction of c. It is, as I said quadrupolar.
- Ian Parker
We have a stress tensor not an electric or magnetic field
Y.Porat
> terms involving h(áâ) . This is just a wave equation for the field
> with a source, despite the fact that the source involves terms
> quadratic in the field itself. That is, it can be shown that solutions
> to this equation are waves traveling with velocity 1 in these
> coordinates. (We have put c = 1).
>
> To get gravitational waves we need to throw masses around at an
> apreciable fraction of c. It is, as I said quadrupolar.
>
> - Ian Parker
>
> We have a stress tensor not an electric or magnetic field
-----------------------
i said FORCE MESSENGERS
i ddint say electric or magnetic field
now that is that fucken tensor stress
do you think that the physical reality
can be smeared on your mathematics paper and thats all ??
what is your fucken tensor stands for PHYSICALLY ??
does it include mass or not ??
how does it creates gravity ??
is it force messengers ??
and if messengers - do they move in straight lines or not ??
or is it curved space ??
reality is much more specific than abstract formulas
keep well
Y.Porat
--------------------------
Ian Parker
gravity GRADIENTS rather than gravity that is being operated on. This
is what makes the waves quadrupolar (or spin 2 as EP physicists would
say).
- Ian Parker
Y.y.Porat
but what is the **physical entity** that makes that field
physics is not just mathematics
to say a 'field' is too abstarct for real physical understanding
and even worse
for physics advance !!
Y.Porat
-------------------
> say).
>
> - Ian Parker
Ian Parker
that if we have mirrors suspended on glass fibers in a long evacuted
tube (LIGO) or mirrors in space (LISA) the two mirrors will experience
different gravitational pulls. Very small difference if we are
thousands of light years away from the original event but detectable
(hopefully) differences. The fact that the Tensor is differential in
itself means QUADRUPOLAR. It means that GEs obey a fourth power law.
This is why LIGO can never detect orbiting pulsars but LISA might. The
Tensor is a rate of change of gravitational pull. Rate of change of
rate of change gives us a quadrupole. That is the physical reality.
- Ian Parker
hanson
Lodo-"Ian Parker" <ianpa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9dcd512a-6a10-47d6...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
No, its not too abstract for physical understanding. Let us understand
that if we have mirrors suspended on glass fibers in a long evacuted
tube (LIGO) or mirrors in space (LISA) the two mirrors will experience
different gravitational pulls. Very small difference if we are
thousands of light years away from the original event but detectable
(hopefully) differences. The fact that the Tensor is differential in
itself means QUADRUPOLAR. It means that GEs obey a fourth power law.
This is why LIGO can never detect orbiting pulsars but LISA might. The
Tensor is a rate of change of gravitational pull. Rate of change of
rate of change gives us a quadrupole. That is the physical reality.
>
---------------------------------------------------------
Yehiel Porat 4 : Lodo Parker 0
---------------------------------------------------------
ahahahhaha... Lodo, the only Tensor you know is the
feeling that you get when a "rate of change of
gravitational pull" tenses your sphincter that evacuates
a quadruple of your turds... It's your memes, Lodo
It's your memes.... "Trust me!? ... "Go figure" and
Thanks for the laughs... ahahaha... ahahanson
Androcles
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
news:81gvk.369$393.189@trnddc05...
This is fuckin' funny. This wonderful Yankee gadget out in space
is supposed to detect "orbiting pulsars" light years away and it can't
even detect the Moon orbiting the Earth, something the river estuary
just down the road can do.
http://easytide.ukho.gov.uk/EASYTIDE/EasyTide/ShowPrediction.aspx?PortID=0111&PredictionLength=7
Ian Parker
> "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
>
> news:81gvk.369$393.189@trnddc05...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
The Moon is only travelling at 1km/s it gives off very little in the
way of gravitational radiation. Pulsars are being hurled around at
round about 5%c. Tides are NOT radiation.
BTW - LISA is NASA but a considerable input is coming from ESA. I hope
there will be collaboration on ultra stability in general.
- Ian Parker
hanson
>
Lodo-"Ian Parker" <ianpark...@gmail.com> wrote
> >> > gravity GRADIENTS rather than gravity that is being operated on. This
> >> > is what makes the waves quadrupolar (or spin 2 as EP physicists would
>
> This is fuckin' funny. This wonderful Yankee gadget out in space
> is supposed to detect "orbiting pulsars" light years away and it can't
> even detect the Moon orbiting the Earth, something the river estuary
> just down the road can do.
> http://easytide.ukho.gov.uk/EASYTIDE/EasyTide/ShowPrediction.aspx?Por
>
The Moon is only travelling at 1km/s it gives off very little in the
way of gravitational radiation. Pulsars are being hurled around at
round about 5%c. Tides are NOT radiation.
BTW - LISA is NASA but a considerable input is coming from
ESA. I hope there will be collaboration on ultra stability in general.
>
Andro, see!.. Lodo landed on your flypaper.
and he is buzzing... buzzwords... ahaha...Enjoy!
... ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
Androcles
radiates. A whacking great heave of water 20 foot tall twice a day pulled
by the Sun and Moon, going antiphase to the East coast of the USA
water (with NASA and ESA mirrors floating on it) and the dozy bastard
can't detect it because his head is right where sunshine Al points it out to
be, to wit:
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/sunshine.jpg