Electron Charge from Cosmological Parameters
Ranjit
Any and all criticisms of the following discovery are welcome.
This discovery is not based on various trial and error or
numerological methods.
It is based on a straight forward derivation by applying 19th century
statistical mechanics to 20th century observations of Hubble's
constant and background radiation along with the hypothesis that space
is filled with some unknown aether particles that obey
statisticalmechanics.
Abstract
In this paper we present a relationship among the charge e of an
electron, the cosmic background radiation temperature (T) and Hubble’s
constant (H).
Electron Charge as a Function of Cosmological Parameters
The charge e of an electron can be calculated from cosmological
parameters using the following formula:
e^6 = (256/3) єo^3Gc^-2 (kT)^4 H^-2 (1)
where:
єo = Permittivity of free space [1] = 8.854187817 x 10^-12 F/m
G = Newton’s gravitational constant [1] = 6.6742 x 10^-11 m3kg^-1s^-2
c = Speed of light [1] = 2.99792458 x 10^8 ms^-1
k = Boltzmann’s constant [1] = 1.3806505 x 10^-23 J oK^-1
T = Temparature of the cosmic background temperature [2] = 2.725^oK
H = Hubble’s constant = 2.3146 x 10^-18 s-1 (i.e. 1/H = 13.7 GY)
Its accuracy can be verified by substituting the above parameter
values in the formula. The value of e so calculated is 1.59476 x 10-19
C which compares very well with the actual value [1] of 1.60217653 x
10-19 C. The error in the fourth significant digit is a result of the
errors in the cosmological observations, primarily the Hubble’s
constant H.
In Planck Units equation (1) can be rewritten as:
e6 = (4/3) π^ -3 (kT)^4 H^-2 (2)
This is the very first time that the charge of an electron is
calculated from cosmological observations H and T. The above formulae
raise many interesting questions regarding our understanding of the
universe. For example, the cosmic background temperature T is believed
to vary significantly over the life of the universe whereas the other
parameters are assumed to be constants for lack of reliable proof
otherwise. The formulae strongly indicate the possibility that one or
more of these parameters may vary significantly over the life of the
universe.
By substituting appropriate other formulae, one can calculate Planck's
constant or alpha can also be calculated from the above astronomical
parameters.
References
[1] Peter J. Mohr and Barry N. Taylor, CODATA Recommended Values of
the Fundamental Physical constants: 2002, published in Rev. Mod. Phys.
Vol. 77(1) 1-107 (2005). Also in http://physics.nist.gov/constantsNIST.
[2] http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest3.html
Androcles
"Ranjit" <Ranji...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1190116657.0...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Any and all criticisms of the following discovery are welcome.
This discovery is not based on various trial and error or
numerological methods.
It is based on a straight forward derivation by applying 19th century
statistical mechanics to 20th century observations of Hubble's
constant and background radiation along with the hypothesis that space
is filled with some unknown aether particles that obey
statisticalmechanics.
You can stop right there, it's not a discovery but an admitted hypothesis
(and a silly one at that). Thank you for welcoming my criticism.
--
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
dare question it. -- Rabbi Albert Einstein
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/tAB=tBA.gif
"Neither [frame] is stationary, which is your problem." -- Blind
"I'm not a troll" Poe.
Ref: news:1189468758....@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B doesn't equal the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A in the stationary system, obviously.' --
Heretic Jan Bielawski, assistant light-bulb changer.
Ref: news:1188363019....@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com
"SR is GR with G=0." -- Uncle Stooopid.
The Uncle Stooopid doctrine:
http://sound.westhost.com/counterfeit.jpg
"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without
evidence." -- Uncle Stooopid.
"Counterfactual assumptions yield nonsense.
If such a thing were actually observed, reliably and reproducibly, then
relativity would immediately need a major overhaul if not a complete
replacement." -- Humpty Roberts.
Rabbi Albert Einstein in 1895 failed an examination that would
have allowed him to study for a diploma as an electrical engineer
at the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule in Zurich
(couldn't even pass the SATs).
According to Phuckwit Duck it was geography and history that Einstein
failed on, as if Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule would give a
damn. That tells you the lengths these lying bastards will go to to
protect their tin god, but its always a laugh when they slip up.
Trolls, the lot of them.
"This is PHYSICS, not math or logic, and "proof" is completely
irrelevant." -- Humpty Roberts.
dlzc
On Sep 18, 4:57 am, Ranjit <RanjitK...@aol.com> wrote:
> Any and all criticisms of the following discovery
> are welcome. This discovery is not based on
> various trial and error or numerological methods.
> It is based on a straight forward derivation by
> applying 19th century statistical mechanics to
> 20th century observations of Hubble's constant
> and background radiation along with the
> hypothesis that space is filled with some
> unknown aether particles that obey
> statistical mechanics.
>
> Abstract
>
> In this paper we present a relationship among
> the charge e of an electron, the cosmic
> background radiation temperature (T)
You understand, of course, that this temperaure is a decreasing
function of time.
> and Hubble’s constant (H).
You understand, of course, that this value is also a function of time,
and varies from near zero to values much higher than we have now.
> Electron Charge as a Function of Cosmological
> Parameters
>
> The charge e of an electron can be calculated
> from cosmological parameters using the following
> formula:
>
> e^6 = (256/3) єo^3Gc^-2 (kT)^4 H^-2 (1)
> where:
> єo = Permittivity of free space [1]
> = 8.854187817 x 10^-12 F/m
> G = Newton’s gravitational constant [1]
> = 6.6742 x 10^-11 m3kg^-1s^-2
> c = Speed of light [1]
> = 2.99792458 x 10^8 ms^-1
> k = Boltzmann’s constant [1]
> = 1.3806505 x 10^-23 J oK^-1
> T = Temparature of the cosmic background temperature [2]
> = 2.725^oK
> H = Hubble’s constant
> = 2.3146 x 10^-18 s-1 (i.e. 1/H = 13.7 GY)
Dead on arrival. Only true *today*, fails miserably in ages past,
whereas observations of the fine structure constant have less than 1
part in 10^8 change in 12 or so billion years.
David A. Smith