Jump to content

If pi ratio " was" squared and = 9.8 m/s/s how would this change the whole of science?


Iwonderaboutthings

Recommended Posts

I too thought it was a reasonable question.

 

What you don't appear to have appreciated, Iwonderabouthings, is that your chaotic, random, disorganised, flighty posting, in which you generally disregard the heart of anything other posters tell you, is itself rude and offensive. Yet members put up with it and seek to interact with you, since they sense an enthusiasm and genuine interest. If we can put up with your rudeness, should you not follow Strange's advice, grow up and put up with ours?

 

I hope the moderators will delay acting on your request, to give you time reconsider.

 

Edit: Cross-posted with Iwonder.

Edited by Ophiolite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Oh for heavens sake, grow up. It was just a question. And hardly a rude one.

 

It helps if people can understand the people they are conversing. In your case, you have a very chaotic and hard to follow way of conversing, throwing all sorts of random ideas together. It would be helpful to know why.

I already stated that I am kind of retarded,

 

Did you really read this thread>??????????????????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we can put up with your rudeness,

I don't think so Iwonderabouthings was ever rude. At least I have not seen such behaving.

 

I hope the moderators will delay acting on your request, to give you time reconsider.

I hope so too.

Iwonderabouthings, I will give you in private message mine private database of science discoveries & theories in order they were published (1600-2014 years)..

With links to articles and links to authors, people involved in discovery or theory.

So you will have a couple months of reading.

 

Please don't speculate, don't create your own theories how something works before learning mainstream explanations that are well documented, well tested.

Edited by Sensei
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so Iwonderabouthings was ever rude. At least I have not seen such behaving.

 

 

I hope so too.

Iwonderabouthings, I will give you in private message mine private database of science discoveries & theories in order they were published (1600-2014 years)..

With links to articles and links to authors, people involved in discovery or theory.

So you will have a couple months of reading.

 

Please don't speculate, don't create your own theories how something works before learning mainstream explanations that are well documented, well tested.

ok

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT! I have to admit, I did not notice you asked me if I knew how to derive pi ratio from planetary motion which I assume is f=ma..

 

Simply no I don't, I don't need to...

 

No, I didn't ask how to drive some "pi ratio"..

 

PI^2=9.869604

but

g = 9.81

That's >0.6% difference.

 

I asked whether you know how to measure and calculate acceleration in experiment that your can perform anytime at home..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already stated that I am kind of retarded

 

Sorry, I can't take a comment like "retarded" seriously. It is not like it is a medical diagnosis, or something, just a generic insult. You use an offensive word like that but then get upset when someone asks a reasonable question about a possible genuine problem - that makes little sense.

 

 

Did you really read this thread?

 

Yes. Although, as always, much of what you write is an incomprehensible jumble of random ideas and disconnected words. But I try and make sense of it so that, if possible, I can provide a few answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No, I didn't ask how to drive some "pi ratio"..

 

PI^2=9.869604

but

g = 9.81

That's >0.6% difference.

 

I asked whether you know how to measure and calculate acceleration in experiment that your can perform anytime at home..

Oh, no I don't, how do you do that?

 

Sorry, I can't take a comment like "retarded" seriously. It is not like it is a medical diagnosis, or something, just a generic insult. You use an offensive word like that but then get upset when someone asks a reasonable question about a possible genuine problem - that makes little sense.

 

 

Yes. Although, as always, much of what you write is an incomprehensible jumble of random ideas and disconnected words. But I try and make sense of it so that, if possible, I can provide a few answers.

I agree, but the comment was after I stated this... Thats all,..

 

No, I didn't ask how to drive some "pi ratio"..

 

PI^2=9.869604

but

g = 9.81

That's >0.6% difference.

 

I asked whether you know how to measure and calculate acceleration in experiment that your can perform anytime at home..

 

0.6% is a 1/2 difference.... where did you get 0.6% from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so Iwonderabouthings was ever rude. At least I have not seen such behaving.

When I post I try, towards the limits of my ability, to create a post that is clear, concise and comprehensive. I also try to make it informative and entertaining, though I have less control over that. To do otherwise is, in my opinion, rude and anti-social. To write in a disorganised fashion, to use overly complex sentences, to have no underlying structure, are all actions that make it difficult for the reader - and that, in my view is rude.

 

I certainly don't think Iwodneraboutthings was doing it deliberately, but the effect on the reader is the same either way. So, I took the time, in a direct manner, to make him aware of it. I'm quite happy to be thought a rude, uncaring bastard, as long as I can help him to write more effectively. The first step is to be aware of the problem. If he wasn't before, he is now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, no I don't, how do you do that?

 

Take photo camera, attach it to tripod (so it'll be steady recording in one direction), and point it to f.e. white wall with attached vertical scale.

Start recording movie, and release some solid heavy small object f.e. metal ball (because we're not interested in air resistance, or other effects - if density of object would be smaller than air density like balloon with hydrogen or helium it would actually flight up).

Then transfer movie to computer and load it to movie software such as VirtualDub, Movie Maker or After Effect or so, where you can scrub timeline and see each frame of movie.

Read distance object traveled at given frame from vertical scale.

In 30 FPS (frames per second) movie, each frame is 1/30 second = 0.03333(3) second.

 

You will receive data like f.e.

t = 0 s, distance = 0

t = 0.1 s, distance = 0.04905 m = 4.9 cm

t = 0.2 s, distance = 0.1962 m = 19.62 cm

etc.

 

Enter data to OpenOffice Spread Sheet to Distance column like in this image:

 

post-100882-0-87028000-1405207035.png

 

post-100882-0-87028000-1405207035_thumb.png

 

To calculate velocity you have to subtract distance at time t1, from distance at time t0, and divide by time it took flight.

 

v = (x1-x0)/(t1-t0)

so in OpenOffice it's calculation:

=(B3-B2)/(A3-A2)

 

(it's in third column)

 

Then acceleration is

a = (v1-v0)/(t1-t0)

so in OpenOffice it's calculation:

=(C4-C3)/(A4-A3)

 

(it's in forth column)

 

As you can see, it's steady 9.81 m/s^2 for this little home experiment.

 

If it wouldn't be "home experiment" we would also pomp out air and do experiment and hermetic tube with vacuum to remove any air influence, and use high frequency recording camera like 1000 FPS or more.

 

Without camera it's possible to measure it with precise stopper and scale. Release object from 1m and see how long it takes to reach ground, then repeat for 2m, 4m etc. The more precise time measurement, the better result you will get. But in times when everybody have digital camera, why not use it.

 

Repeating it on the moon or other planet would show different accelerations.

 

Repeating it with higher air pressure, or in liquid would show also different result. Especially in liquid.

Edited by Sensei
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Repeating it with higher air pressure, or in fluid would show also different result. Especially in fluid.

Excellent post. Excuse me for being picky, but air is a fluid. I think you meant in a liquid. Fluids, in a colloquial sense, are equivalent to liquids, but in science the term covers liquids and gases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Take photo camera, attach it to tripod (so it'll be steady recording in one direction), and point it to f.e. white wall with attached vertical scale.

Start recording movie, and release some solid heavy small object f.e. metal ball (because we're not interested in air resistance, or other effects - if density of object would be smaller than air density like balloon with hydrogen or helium it would actually flight up).

Then transfer movie to computer and load it to movie software such as VirtualDub, Movie Maker or After Effect or so, where you can scrub timeline and see each frame of movie.

Read distance object traveled at given frame from vertical scale.

In 30 FPS (frames per second) movie, each frame is 1/30 second = 0.03333(3) second.

 

You will receive data like f.e.

t = 0 s, distance = 0

t = 0.1 s, distance = 0.04905 m = 4.9 cm

t = 0.2 s, distance = 0.1962 m = 19.62 cm

etc.

 

Enter data to OpenOffice Spread Sheet to Distance column like in this image:

 

post-100882-0-87028000-1405207035.png

 

attachicon.gifAcceleration Calculation.png

 

To calculate velocity you have to subtract distance at time t1, from distance at time t0, and divide by time it took flight.

 

v = (x1-x0)/(t1-t0)

so in OpenOffice it's calculation:

=(B3-B2)/(A3-A2)

 

(it's in third column)

 

Then acceleration is

a = (v1-v0)/(t1-t0)

so in OpenOffice it's calculation:

=(C4-C3)/(A4-A3)

 

(it's in forth column)

 

As you can see, it's steady 9.81 m/s^2 for this little home experiment.

 

If it wouldn't be "home experiment" we would also pomp out air and do experiment and hermetic tube with vacuum to remove any air influence, and use high frequency recording camera like 1000 FPS or more.

 

Without camera it's possible to measure it with precise stopper and scale. Release object from 1m and see how long it takes to reach ground, then repeat for 2m, 4m etc. The more precise time measurement, the better result you will get. But in times when everybody have digital camera, why not use it.

 

Repeating it on the moon or other planet would show different accelerations.

 

Repeating it with higher air pressure, or in fluid would show also different result. Especially in fluid.

This is truly something to work on, WOW! thanks..I need to borrow a friends lap top that has office, wont be an issue..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I was afraid of that. I've run into the same problem working with spanish speakers, where the word for speed (a scalar quantity) is the same as for velocity (a vector quantity).

Anyway, its a minor point, but worth being aware of.

 

(What is your native language? The sensei suggests Japanese, but you may have chosen that name for another reason. If I am being to personal please excuse me.)

 

Sorry, two posts went through while I was writing this: the post is in reply to sensei's number 36 post.

Edited by Ophiolite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OpenOffice is free to download. Don't confuse it with Microsoft Office.

ohhhhh ;) , I just thought of something as the meter is concerned, the speed of light and pi^12 affects on photon energy.

 

In relation to " Not sure" The mass of the proton. Not even sure what the units would be, I think 0.001 is a frequency, but then it is also = to the micron as a distance..0.001 is a micron? Algebra is confusing in regards to " Time and Frequencies"

 

Their is a math relationship.

 

299.792458*6.626e-33 = 1.986424826708e-31

 

1.98650352574581e+31* pi^12 = 6.24441297605896e+43
0.001/6.24441297605896e+43 = 1.60143155783257e-47
This is not even close to a scientific explanations, but I will say it anyway..
e-47 suggest that pi^12 = pi^47+1 = 48, where pi ratio remains constant, or balanced in time and 1 is the quantized energy states of the electron.
proton and electric charge have opposite signs making this inquiry and relation possible..
I heard however, that g has no effects at atomic scales, I can't help to think it does...
IE pi^= 9.8, the "number"
It came to mind when you said, not interested in air resistance nor other " volume factors"
I would assume this be the photon it has no mass..Why does pi come close to the proton or electron charge as a frequency in empty space?
It is something to ponder on atleast for now..It is what I have been wondering about in regards to empty space and the gravitron, a supposed mediator for gravity... These are not facts here, they are creative ideas to still un- resolved solutions...
I HAVE TO ADMIT AS A SIDE NOTE:
I have read online and in books that pi ratio has many science and math connections and is not only related to g, but even the planck scales, I have read it has relation to metric systems from biblical times, and etc and I respect their research and work,
So this is an add on ;)
Edited by Iwonderaboutthings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

is that why the sky is blue?

Let's explore this for a moment. Why would an arbitrary definition of states of matter have any influence on the colour of the sky? Our classification does not effect the reality of what we are classifying. Why do you think it does?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[math]\pi^{12}=924269.181..... [/math]. Your equation is wrong here.

 

Also this is dead wrong. pi^12 = pi^47+1 = 48

I can't control round off errors using online calculations sorry.

 

I often read online, that we should look at the mathematical relationship this is what I am best at.

 

For instance:

 

 

A radar system determines the distance from an approaching
airplane by the round trip time of a radar pulse. If a plane is
10 km away how long does the radar pulse take to return to
the radar?
I think this is how its done?
t = 2*distance/c = 2[10*10e3 km]/ c 3*10e8 = 6.7*10e-5 = 6.7*10e-5 = 0.00067= 67 micron s
which one??
0.00067?
or
67 micron s ?
Why does my calculator tell me this: 0.00067?
what are all those zeros? is this is round off error??
why do we add 10e-5, where did this come from??
This example comes from here:Lenz’s Law page 71
I may be overlooking something..
Edited by Iwonderaboutthings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

micron is 1/1,000,000 (1 per million) of second.

So result should be 67/1000000 = 0.000067 = 6.7e-5

(four zeros after dot, not three)

 

t = 2*distance/c = 2[10*10e3 km]/ c 3*10e8 = 6.7*10e-5 = 6.7*10e-5 = 0.00067= 67 micron s

 

We have been talking about it in thread

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/83549-is-coulumbs-law-symmetrical/page-2#entry809747

 

You can write 10*10^3 or 10e3 or 1e4.

You can write 3*10^8 or 3e8

Don't mix these two systems..

Edited by Sensei
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's explore this for a moment. Why would an arbitrary definition of states of matter have any influence on the colour of the sky? Our classification does not effect the reality of what we are classifying. Why do you think it does?.

 

This is going off topic, but I will answer and get denoted later :blink:

 

You are 100% correct, but lets look at it this way:

 

Because as children we never notice these things, until adults " define reality for us." Not to mention math, philosophy and other obstructions of " free thinking." We thus grow costumed to conventional forms of thinking, that don't comply with a standard accepted way of cognitive expression as full grown adults with the same child like curiosities as simple explorers of the world we live in.

 

This is based on physical observation within the evolution of time..Ask a new born baby what is the color of the sky "earth", I am sure you wont get an answer, same with a beings from another world " alien per say."

 

Although the speed of light is constant in all places in the universe ' Space ' it sure transmits " information" very differently in the minds of different entities. The mind is a very complex thing...Not to mention they say we are all connected to a Central Membrane in the Universe..

 

Since light bends in water, and you say that air is as a fluid... The two go hand in hand with what I have learned from adults as a child.

 

Water is blue and so is the sky... Of coarse I know the colors vary, but this is the conventional mind frame, and those incredible blue aqua beaches!

Suddenly I feel a breeze........

 

Not to mention that 90% of what I study in relation to:

 

Integration " Calculus", The Ether, Especially Electrical Engineering, suggest that their is a Sea of Energy That is the Flow of All energy..Quoted by some well known and famous scientist by the way.

 

Rather this is true or not, again, I am looking at the relationships.

 

 

Its hints like these that confuse me, that's all...It appears to flow in another direction, Science is like being in the jungle looking for buried treasure.....

micron is 1/1,000,000 (1 per million) of second.

So result should be 67/1000000 = 0.000067 = 6.7e-5

(four zeros after dot, not three)

 

 

We have been talking about it in thread

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/83549-is-coulumbs-law-symmetrical/page-2#entry809747

 

You can write 10*10^3 or 10e3 or 1e4.

You can write 3*10^8 or 3e8

Don't mix these two systems..

I remember now, it is a shame that we do not have a calculator that just does all this...

Sounds " not right to say" I know,,

 

I will go over that page again thanks....

but what am I doing wrong here
pi^12, what am i doing wrong here?? I don't understand...I am only using the 3 1 4 and the dot only..
as 3.14 nothing else but the base of 12....
3.14*3.14*3.14*3.14*3.14*3.14*3.14*3.14*3.14*3.14*3.14*3.14 = 918662.0518429505
Google Calculator says this...
here I am using:3.14159265 to the 12th power..
3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265 = 924269.16885
Google Calculator says this...
Something else!
Why does this:
(l) = 20/ f (in GHz)
(l)<----------------------------- that right there, say this in my note pad program??
1 = c/ f it copies and past like this..
Here is the link:
Scroll down to page 10, copy and past:
( wave symbol ) = 20/ f (in GHz)
The wave symbol looks like this:
Wave_equation.JPG
When you copy and past the symbol in note pad it turns to the number 1.
Yes I know what your thinking, Its just a coincidence, but doesn't a wave = 1 already??
Yes I know that the program note pad does not have all formats for the ASCII conversion, but why the number 1????
Again I am looking at the pattern, is this also happening to others??
Cycles from what I know of refer to pi ratio??
Edited by Iwonderaboutthings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In relation to " Not sure" The mass of the proton. Not even sure what the units would be, I think 0.001 is a frequency, but then it is also = to the micron as a distance..0.001 is a micron? Algebra is confusing in regards to " Time and Frequencies"

 

 

The photon has no mass.

 

0.001 by itself is neither a frequency or a distance (or a weight or ...) You must specify the units.

 

0.001 Hz is a frequency.

0.001 inches is a distance.

0.001 kg is a mass.

( wave symbol ) = 20/ f (in GHz)

 

The wave symbol looks like this:

Wave_equation.JPG

 

 

 

When you copy and past the symbol in note pad it turns to the number 1.

The "wave symbol" is the Greek letter lambda, the Greek equivalent to the letter L.

 

When you cut and past it, you are copying the code for the letter, but not the font it is displayed in. Therefore it appears as a lower case L in your file (which looks a little bit like a 1 in some fonts). Change the font to Times Roman and you will see it is an l not a 1. Change it to Symbol and it will appear as lambda.

 

As is often the case, you are seeing significance where there is none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1.98650352574581e+31* pi^12 is not 6.24441297605896e+43

pi^12 is 924269.18 (or so- there may be rounding errors).

1.98650352574581e+31* 924269.18
is about 1.836 e 37

So you are wrong by about three million fold.

 

Google's calculator says that

"3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265*3.14159265"

is

924269.16885

and that pi^12 is

924269.181523

 

The difference is because pi isn't exactly 3.14159265

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ugh one of these people

the type that tries to spin a huge amount of senseless jibberish with some numbers and illogical physical principles, saturated with mystical phraseology and unanswerable riddles, just so as to try and puzzle science with their 'great insights' about the universe.

im not convinced its worth the effort to try to give constructive criticism to somebody who's inner need for intellectual superiority overrides their willpower to actually learn and grow, but if you guys want to, be my guest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • 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.