Jump to content

SergUpstart

Senior Members
  • Posts

    448
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by SergUpstart

  1. It seems to me that a more important physical constant is 4 *Pi*G*epsilon0, which shows how many times stronger bodies with masses of 1 kg interact gravitationally stronger than two charges of 1 Coulomb at the same distance. The dimension of this constant is Сoulomb^2/kg^2 that is, it does not depend on the distance scale.
  2. In 2014, Putin could have seized the whole of Ukraine, but limited himself to Crimea. Putin only needs the opportunity to export gas to Europe. He can send troops into Ukraine only in response to Ukraine's actions, which may be the offensive of Ukrainian troops on Donetsk or the blockade of Tiraspol.
  3. Even an ideal flywheel will lose energy if you take it away from it. So you won't get unlimited energy. And if you mean storing energy for an unlimited time, then a superconducting ring with a current or a vacuum capacitor is better.
  4. The movement towards authoritarianism is a global trend. Xi Jinping, Putin, Lukashenko, Erdogan, Aliyev, Maduro...
  5. The sensitivity of the human eye allows detecting a stream of 100 photons, but the frog's eye can detect even single photons. Therefore, if you move away from the glowing flashlight in the void and darkness, a person at some distance will stop seeing the flashlight. But the frog will always see the flashlight, but from a certain distance the light of the flashlight will blink and the frequency of blinking will decrease with increasing distance. http://fian-inform.ru/priborostroenie/item/518-eye-frog
  6. While the particle is spreading, it is a wave, but at the moment of absorption it becomes a corpuscle. Isn't it?
  7. Actually, the question was asked to the author of the previous topic, who was trying to find a classical explanation for the results of the experiment with electron diffraction at two slits. And it was set to show that it is impossible to find classical explanations for quantum effects.
  8. And can you explain the results of the Stern Gerlach experiment, which showed that the spin of a charged particle can have only two values, plus or minus 1/2????
  9. Matter and energy arise and disappear constantly in accordance with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. So the origin of the universe is most likely a quantum effect. God is not needed for this.
  10. Yes, and after BB, the universe rises in a gravitational well. This means that the red shift in the spectra of galaxies has not only a Doppler component, but also a gravitational one.
  11. As Hawking said, God is not needed to explain the origin of the Universe, God is superfluous.
  12. Sure. If we take the above formula g=C^2/r, then it gives only the module g, but g is a vector.
  13. Although I see an error in the above quote, near a more massive body, r will be smaller, not larger.
  14. The radius of curvature of spacetime is a quantity inversely proportional to the scalar curvature of spacetime. It has the dimension of length. For weak gravity there is an approximate formula r=c^2/g The graphic shows a projection of the path followed by a falling object in four-dimensional spacetime into three-dimensional space. Objects fall because they follow geodesics in this spacetime. They are of maximal length, maximizing proper time. For all trajectories, the initial angle or speed does not matter and the curvature is the same, . Near a very massive object such as a black hole, this value is considerably greater. https://demonstrations.wolfram.com/SpacetimeCurvatureForAFallingObjectNearTheEarthsSurface/
  15. @Marcus Hanke said "So visual appearance in curved spacetime does depend on the observer, because different events are linked by different sets of null geodesics." Exactly. The acceleration of gravity is related to the radius of curvature of spacetime by the approximate formula r = c^2/g or g=c^2/r In the reference frame of a remote observer, the radius of curvature of spacetime increases by k times, as do all distances, and, accordingly, the acceleration of gravity decreases by k times, as mentioned above.
  16. There are not one equivalence principle, but two, strong and weak. It is necessary to distinguish between "weak equivalence principle" and "strong equivalence principle"[13]. A strong equivalence principle can be formulated as follows: at each point of space-time in an arbitrary gravitational field, one can choose a "locally inertial coordinate system", such that in a sufficiently small neighborhood of the point under consideration, the laws of nature will have the same form as in non-accelerated Cartesian coordinate systems of SRT, where "laws of nature" mean all laws of nature[14]. The weak principle differs in that the words "laws of nature" are replaced in it by the words "laws of motion of freely falling particles"[13]. The weak principle is nothing but another formulation of the observed equality of gravitational and inert masses, while the strong principle is a generalization of observations of the influence of gravity on any physical objects. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Принцип_эквивалентности_сил_гравитации_и_инерции I believe that these equivalence principles should be applied depending on the situation. If the same system is observed by several observers in different places of the gravity well, they should all observe the same picture only at different time scales. There is a strong equivalence principle at work here. If one observer observes several identical systems but located in different places of the gravity well, then only a weak equivalence principle should work here.
  17. Initially, the topic was broader. Here is a quote from the first post of the topic Thus, this thought experiment with an oscillatory circuit shows that in the reference frame of a remote observer, the dielectric and magnetic constants must change in different directions in accordance with the change in the time/distance scale. Then it is not difficult to show that the Planck constant will also change in the reference frame of the remote observer, since it is equal to
  18. A very difficult, I would say practically unsolvable task. If we observe two objects that revolve around each other, then in order to measure G we must measure their masses and the distances between them. Any deviation in the period of rotation can be explained by both the deviation of G and the deviation in the masses of objects. How to distinguish a change in the masses of objects from a change in G?? In addition, in the first post of this topic, I showed on a thought experiment with an oscillatory circuit that in the reference frame of a remote observer, ε0 and µ0, and therefore h, should change. And here is the news on this topic. An international team of astronomers has discovered a giant dead galaxy that existed 12 billion years ago, when the age of the universe was 1.8 billion years. This is reported in a press release on Phys.org. The team conducted spectroscopic observations using the MOSFIRE spectrograph (Multi-Object Spectrograph for Infrared Exploration) located at the Keck Observatory (Hawaii). The galaxy, which was designated as XMM-2599, was characterized by a high rate of star formation (one thousand solar masses per year), but then this process completely stopped. Scientists do not yet know what the cause of death of XMM-2599 is. This may mean that in the early universe h was much smaller, which is why the stars did not light up.
  19. If you want to write your own program for reading QR codes, for example in C#, you can use the ZXing library
  20. Of course, the solutions will be different and the event horizon and singularity will not appear in them.
  21. This is not about refuting the GRT, but about correcting it. G in the GRT equation must be a variable whose value is inversely proportional to the time dilation. The fact that gravity is a curvature of space-time by the momentum energy tensor, the fact that it propagates in the form of gravitational waves at the speed of light, which is constant, all this is beyond doubt.
  22. And what about the reconstruction of pyramid construction technology? Elon Musk the year before last generally said that the pyramids were built by aliens Or reconstruction of bronze melting technology. The problem here is that there are no forests in Egypt, and charcoal is needed for metallurgy.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.