GR ch21 Mach?

[Capiert]

2 hours ago, Strange said:

You are multiplying by an arbitrary factor. You could multiply by 1 or divide by a million. It would be equally meaningless.

Unfortunate, that you didn't notice I used 4 (*1/4=1),

 so you complain when you don't understand.

Quote

Then why are you using degrees?

Because it is a well known & used standard.

Habit?

But since you don't know my preference,

 it would not have been acceptable (for e.g. you).

You are (conservative, &) NOT interested in anything new

 that will also do the job.

Quote

What is "decimal cycle"?

It's (a compacter syntax, &) just another (syntax) way to express angle.

1 cycle=360 degrees,

 so you can imagine

 o.5=180 degrees

 o.25=90 degrees.

The o (for circle) comes before the decimal

 (dropping the redundant zero);

 as most left side (unlike the raised degree symbol written (on the) right above)

o1=360 degrees

o2=720 degrees.

 

o1.25=450 degrees.

 

It's useful when discussing wavelength's

 & their phase angle delay,

 as a non_integer composite=combination

 (without plus symbol).

 

Unfortunately, I have to tell you

 (to your discuss[ion]=discussed=disgust)

 I made it up,

= I created it

 because I have NOT found it anywhere else,

 & I know how much you do NOT like my creations=works=efforts.

But you asked for it.

Quote

Do you mean gradian: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gradian

No. Not related.

Quote

It looks like someone needs to. And it isn't going to be you.

Should I call you Father (=Daddy, or Rev(erend), for your belief (in Physics))?

Quote

There are lots of free online courses provided by good universities, etc.

Please suggest a few.

You've got a pretty good idea where I stand,

 or at least you think you do.

Quote

I doubt it. The courses are quite demanding. You might pretend to be bored as an excuse to avoid doing some hard work and learning, though.

You can not stop my head from turning off,

 when there are so=too many counter intuitive ideas, as a mess.

Mission impossible,

 & your learning strategy is old outdated.

Nowadays you hook people with curiosity,

 NOT old fashsioned dicipline.

Many many decades ago,

 teachers stopped beating (up) their pupils.

Nowadays a bit of psychology is used, marketing & advertizing.

Humour & entertainment are important.

"Thou shalt not bore." 11th commandment of TV, Radio, & profit_see.

Quote

You might also have to learn to write like a grown up.

Ok daddy.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Capiert

[Strange]

21 minutes ago, Capiert said:

Please suggest a few.

I have done a few courses through Coursera (https://www.coursera.org) from, for example, the University of Leiden and the Ohio State University. It works well. But needs a certain amount of discipline to keep up with the course work (I was also working full time when I did these).

There is also the Open University who now offer some of there courses free (http://www.open.edu/openlearn/free-courses). I started studying towards a degree with them but had to stop when they put their prices up because they lost government funding.

There are several other providers of online courses, but I haven't used them so can't comment. You could start a thread to ask about it.

[Capiert]

Thanks for the links.

Btw The "decimal (earth) day" (=24 hrs, which is a lowered musical G)

 could also be used as a (new alternative) notation for time,

 with the same (decimal) method.

Unfortunately,

 that does NOT work well

 for an earth year (which is a musical C#, +/-2 days).*

Maybe a (small) "d" prefix,

 (could be used, indicating (earth) "day");

 not to be confused with (large) "D" (Diameter), hieroglyphic.

 

The only thing missing now for (new) standards of "space"(&)time orientation**,

 would be maybe a (simple) hydrogen wave"length".

 

*1900 Planck believed the atom was musical

 =harmonically constructed.

(I can't find the (German) quote.)

 

** Better sequenced: (angle) length time.

(To be thorough=consistent.)

 

Edited May 22, 2018 by Capiert

[Strange]

46 minutes ago, Capiert said:

24 hrs, which is a lower musical G

How one Earth (excuse the pun) can be a musical note? It is 0.00667 Hz 1.157x10^-5, well below the range of human hearing.

46 minutes ago, Capiert said:

The "decimal (earth) day" (=24 hrs, which is a lower musical G) could also be used as a (new alternative) notation for time, with the same method.

The French tried this after the Revolution. It never aught on. 

Also, the Earth's rotation is far too variable to be used as a time standard. 

 

Edited May 22, 2018 by Strange

[Capiert]

27 minutes ago, Strange said:

How one Earth (excuse the pun) can be a musical note? It is 0.00667 Hz, well below the range of human hearing.

1 siderial day~86164 s (23 h 56 m 4 s) stars side

 divided by 2^41

 gives 389.425 Hz (as harmonic, but lower than concert pitch (A4 440 Hz)  G4 391.995 Hz).

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-notenames.htm

 

That frequency has a period,

(&) it'(i)s a rythem,

 which is part of (the) music,

The drummer has to hold (=maintain) the beat (rythem) (synchronized)

 to keep the song working right.

Rythems are sub_harmonics.

Seen from the rythem (=lower frequency, perspective),

 the musical notes are the harmonics

 (octaves, of (the) circle of 5ths (=3x the fundamentals, =2nd harmonics).

 

(Sorry, I didn't catch the pun. ?)

Quote

The French tried this after the Revolution. It never caught on. 

Yeh, the French didn't have digital watchs back then,

 & more than 5 (decimal) digits is needed to do (=convert, time) seconds well.

Quote

Also, the Earth's rotation is far too variable to be used as a time standard. 

I think we get by, don't we?

Everybody knows what 24 hrs is, just to get to work.

It's only a (math) conversion (for atomic clocks).

 

But that( all i)'s only a precusor (=substitute)

 for binary decimal time.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Capiert

[Strange]

20 minutes ago, Capiert said:

That frequency has a period,(&) it'(i)s a rythem, which is part of (the) music,The drummer has to hold (=maintain) the beat (rythem) (synchronized) to keep the song working right.Rythems are sub_harmonics.Seen from the rythem (=lower frequency, perspective), the musical notes are the harmonics (octaves, of (the) circle of 5ths (=3x the fundamentals, =2nd harmonics).

And, as usual, your incoherent ramblings don't answer the question.

Of course that frequency has a period. It is 24 hours. Sheesh.

(I thought that number looked wrong. It is nearer 10^-5 Hz.)

The frequency of the lowest musical G is 12.25 Hz; ie. roughly one million times higher pitch than the rotation of the Earth (so not even a harmonic relationship).

I can't see much pleasure in music consisting of a drummer striking a drum once every 24 hours.

20 minutes ago, Capiert said:

I think we get by, don't we?

Everybody knows what 24 hrs is, just to get to work.

We get by because we don't use the Earth as a time reference.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Strange

[swansont]

5 hours ago, Capiert said:

 You are (conservative, &) NOT interested in anything new

 that will also do the job.

Show that it does the job and people will be interested. 

Right now it seems that you are attempting to solve a personal problem — your own lack of understanding of circular motion. It is not a problem that others suffer from.

You have also stated that conservation of momentum and conservation of energy are issues, and you have not shown this to be the case. You will have some difficulty doing so, because there is no problem.

20 minutes ago, Capiert said:

I think we get by, don't we?

If you use GPS or cell phones or high-speed internet, then the answer is "no." None of those would work without atomic clocks.

[Capiert]

57 minutes ago, Strange said:

And, as usual, your incoherent ramblings don't answer the question.

Sorry I didn't get your pun.

Now I've got it.

All I can say is math fractions to the musical note frequencies can be calculated

 as periods,

 even though those periods are not acoustic notes.

Quote

Of course that frequency has a period. It is 24 hours. Sheesh.

(I thought that number looked wrong. It is nearer 10^-5 Hz.)

See above again, please.

Quote

The frequency of the lowest musical G is 12.25 Hz; ie. roughly one million times higher pitch than the rotation of the Earth (so not even a harmonic relationship).

The G is an annalogy.

Please excuse my mistakes.

Quote

I can't see much pleasure in music consisting of a drummer striking a drum once every 24 hours.

Or worse per year.

Quote

We get by because we don't use the Earth as a time reference.

Pity.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Capiert

[Strange]

7 minutes ago, Capiert said:

All I can say is math fractions to the musical note frequencies can be calculated as periods, even though those periods are note acoustic notes.

Well, obviously. 

But that doesn't make 24 hours a low G.

 

[Capiert]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Show that it does the job and people will be interested. 

What do you need or want to see.

I set up the equation,

 I'm an interpreter.

What doesn't work?

Quote

Right now it seems that you are attempting to solve a personal problem — your own lack of understanding of circular motion. It is not a problem that others suffer from.

The crux is probably angle.

Do you have an equation (e.g. y wrt) for angle

 (not a Taylor series)

 that I can deal with?

Quote

You have also stated that conservation of momentum and conservation of energy are issues, and you have not shown this to be the case. You will have some difficulty doing so, because there is no problem.

I'll assume you have interpretted mass "defects" differently from me.

Quote

If you use GPS or cell phones or high-speed internet, then the answer is "no." None of those would work without atomic clocks.

Do you mean (various) communication delays (against their synchronizations)?

I can't quite imagine what the problem(s) is.

16 minutes ago, Strange said:

Well, obviously. 

But that doesn't make 24 hours a low G.

Analogy, math multiple (or fraction, depending on how you want to do the math, is)

 to ruffly the G period.

The result is closer to G than A.

It's only a comparison.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Capiert

[Phi for All]

13 minutes ago, Capiert said:

What do you need or want to see.

I set up the equation,

 I'm an interpreter.

What doesn't work?

!

Moderator Note

You've been told repeatedly what doesn't work, and you reject it. Discussion becomes impossible when you remove what works from problem solutions.

This can't stay in mainstream, and it's not worthy of speculations since you refuse to engage in normal discussion style, and choose instead to favor your own made up maths. Thread closed.