MaximT

Members
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About MaximT

  • Rank
    Quark

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Misunderstanding there, when the moon is at the opposite of the sun, the moon attraction retrieved from the force of the Sun on the Earth. I mean both attract the earth, so the sum of force will be less on the Sun side, by that fact. But I understand that it's not modifying the gravity...
  2. In fact, yes, when it's at the opposite of the Sun, our star. I'm asking to myself, if that phenomena's happening at galaxy level? After some thinking, I'm expecting that the galaxy, the milky way, is not orbiting around it's Black Hole, but around it's own mass. A mass that is One Million time bigger than it's suppose Black Hole, at Sagittarius. The density of the BH, is extract from the star S2 motion, and has nothing to do with the whole rotation of the Galaxy...
  3. Is a sum of mass orbiting a Black Hole, could contribute to the gravity force maintaining the rotation in orbit around the center of the galaxy, to make that galaxy objects spin around the center? Is that sum of mass (all orbiting objects) could reduced the theoretical mass of the Black Hole itself, creating a empty, cannot be seen, zone around it, at the place of dilating it's volume to achieved the same density?
  4. MaximT

    near light-speed travel

    Orbiting earth at such speed, can't, but if you are constantly pushing inside, why not. To me, it will suffice to achieve a time differential base on relativity. Time dilation should be constant, the signal won't reach him normally, it will have to be corrected every second... After a year of continuous correction, it will be the same, at correct time, the differential don't add over time.
  5. Is that because we analysed the mass of rotating matter around them, and extracted that they shall weight enough to attracted it, at a certain rotation speed? And after deduced from their looking size, by our observation, what density they should have? Where is the Science on that, and the part of relativity to it ?
  6. How do we measure speed of gravity, how to create waves of gravity, to get their speed?
  7. MaximT

    Global/Generalized Sagnac Effect Formula

    I disagree, I revised Maxwell's work recently, and there is nothing like that. But Maxwell was searching for a reasoning to achieved a medium for propagation of light, but without confirming it. At the last chapter of his work, he made clear that he didn't know, with putting this in relation with the work of an Italian, Betti, a well known one. If you have some clues about quaternions, where are they? Give us more... Personally, I agree, but I don't get what you are meaning. And, all the sciences, is against me. You could refer to his book: Maxwell book tome II
  8. MaximT

    Global/Generalized Sagnac Effect Formula

    I must agree with you, but not the actual sciences, Sagnac effect results had been explained by relativity, you may look on Wikipedia, the paper from India is wrong, to me. But what is behind you tough, about Aether? Are you sustaining that ether is not fix about all the Universe? Because all that, can only be explained by a non uniform repartition of the Aether, if there is...
  9. MaximT

    Ether wave production

    This theoretical image show how to create matter, with this concept of Aether. The Aether theory is not death yet:Louis de Broglie stated, "Any particle, ever isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous "energetic contact" with a hidden medium."
  10. MaximT

    Moon elevator

    In fact, you are right, My mistake, sorry: In celestial mechanics, the standard gravitational parameter μ of a celestial body is the product of the gravitational constant G and the mass M of the body. μ=GM For several objects in the Solar System, the value of μ is known to greater accuracy than either G or M.[11] The SI units of the standard gravitational parameter are m3s−2. However, units of km3s−2 are frequently used in the scientific literature and in spacecraft navigation This equation is derived from the circular orbit speed, as described in literacy: It's simply the breaking strength, in the spreadsheet, related to the mass of the cable, In it's most simple expression, but with centripetal force applied.
  11. MaximT

    Moon elevator

    I want to discuss the possibility to build an elevator on the Moon surface... There are some data: Basically, the speed on the surface will have to follow this rule: (where u = 4.905E12 m²/s) The limitation, for the length of the cable is 4,500 km high...
  12. In this operation, the most interesting part is the landing of the lunar rover. I hope we will get some images. Those from the long march 3b, lifting up, are incredible. China is now a major power in space colonization run.
  13. MaximT

    Smallest possible mass?

    Sorry, I'm getting your point. And gravitational perturbation can be as small than 0+. So there won't be any limitation on the smallest mass? By the distance of the perturbation and the mass origin of it?
  14. MaximT

    Smallest possible mass?

    Maybe I mistaken, but: I prefer matter to be atom, Hadrons, so quarks, but it's only a matter of perspective. The question was about the smallest mass, it's almost philosophical. So, my personal answer is quark Up.