| |  | |  | | Blue Belt
Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 107
17  | |
04-08-2005, 09:32 AM
| These are just examples, though. If your theory tells you something else then focus on that.... it may just be a matter of time before you discover the other things.
DG | | | | Raider of the lost time
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 6,036
| |
04-08-2005, 02:19 PM
| another explanation of why the location or position of a photon is indeterminable is that, between interactions with matter, it's in a state of higher dimension. Before it can interact with matter, it must adjust its dimension to match that of matter in order for interactions to be feasible at that particular level of existence.
when i was working on a quantum of mass, i was able to derive the universal constant of gravity from the values of Planck's constant, Planck length, and the speed of light in vacuum.
where a is Planck length, c is speed of light, and h is Planck's constant. So in an earthlike planetary system with perpetual cloud cover, the constant of gravity can be possibly discovered after the discovery of electromagnetism and quantum theory. So that Maxwell and Planck came before Galileo, Kepler, and Newton. | | | | Blue Belt
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 105
20  | |
04-08-2005, 02:20 PM
| | And the "light-question" from the first post...? | | | | Raider of the lost time
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 6,036
| |
04-08-2005, 02:35 PM
| when we measure distance, the measurement is based on the validity of the quadratic form similar to the Pythagorean theorem
when we measure the speed of light for n=2, we get ~300,000 km per second. But when n is less than 2, the distance is longer and when n is greater than 2, the distance is shorter. So the speed of light is different in different dimension of n. | | | | Raider of the lost time
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 6,036
| |
04-08-2005, 02:57 PM
| the variation of  in  seems to indicate that the Planck length is different for different dimension of spacetime.
when n=0, the Planck length is exactly 1.
when n=1, the Planck length is not known.
when n=2, the Planck legnth is  centimeter
when n=3, the Planck length is not known
when n=4, the Planck length is not known (maybe 300,000 kilometers?)
when n=5, the Planck length is not known but greater than n=4
Last edited by AntonioLao; 04-08-2005 at 03:03 PM.
Reason: add length at 4D
| | | | Blue Belt
Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 107
17  | |
04-09-2005, 10:52 AM
| Antoniolao, that is the most interesting post I have seen yet of this forum. Is there any way to calculate the planck length where n=6 and n=10?
Essentially I am trying to find out the rate of expansion of the early universe to find out whether there is any correlation bewteen it and the speed of light. I have worked out so far that the mean rate of expanision (if expansion has been constant since the time of creation) is 3.164010547^19 m per second. If the dimensions are linearly independant, then there can only be six, but I would also be curious to know n=10 as this is what string theorists are so adamant is the case.
DG | | | | Raider of the lost time
Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 6,036
| |
04-09-2005, 05:42 PM
| | if we extrapolate from n=0, n=2, n=4, but the curve appears to be nonlinear or could be degree of polynomial is greater than 2 or 3 or 4? | | | | Orange Belt Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 26
9  | |
07-04-2006, 07:19 PM
| | Re: "Picking on Einstein" Article I Have A Good Idea Why Time Slows Down In Frame Moving Approximately Equal To C. As We See The Result From Mass Variation That In Which Mass Increases With High Speed Its Mean Inertia Increases. Then In Clock Which Is Operated By Battery And Charge Flow From Battery To Clocks Machine. As Experiment Shows That Charge Is Invariant Under Hige Speeds. So Mass Of Whole Clock Increases With High Speed But That Charge Remains Same Which Applies Same Effort To Move Clocks Arms As It Apply At Rest. So Due To High Inertia Arms Move Slowly. But I Want To Ask One Question Is That How High Speed Effects The Biological Clock. | | | | Blue Belt
Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 107
17  | |
07-05-2006, 06:13 PM
| Re: "Picking on Einstein" Article just in the name of "picking on Einstein", has anyone considered that the legitimacy of General Relativity hinges in the detection/observance of Stress-Energy Tensors. I reckon that these will never be found, and this would seem to infer that General Relativity is actually a theory of the mind.
If I've said this before on this thread, I apologise. I am too lazy to ge back and check.  | | | | Master
Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 620
18  | |
07-07-2006, 01:33 AM
| Re: "Picking on Einstein" Article Perfect Day
When you come to the end of a perfect day,
And you sit alone with your thoughts,
While the chimes ring out with a carol gay
For the joy that the day has brought;
Do you think what the end of a perfect day
Can mean to a tired heart,
When the sun goes down with a flaming ray
And the dear friends have to part?
By permission Carrie Jacobs Bond and Son, Chicago, ILL. Copyright, 1915.
__________________ Michelle | | | |  | | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:41 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4 Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
VBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys.
| |