I want to thank the person in this video for taking the time to read the paper and finding the meaning I was trying to describe.
Thanks Aaron
This guy is fun
Thanks Aaron
This guy is fun
Showing posts with label Newton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Newton. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 30, 2015
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Newton, Quantum Mechanics and Vibrations
THE PRINCIPIA. BOOK III
PROPOSITION IV. THEOREM IV.
That the moon gravitates towards the earth, and by the force of gravity is continually drawn off from a rectilinear motion, and retained in its orbit.
The mean distance of the moon from the earth in the syzygies in semidiameters of the earth, is, according to Ptolemy and most astronomers, 59 : according to Vendelin and Huygens, 60 ; to Copernicus, 60 1/3 ; to Street, 60 2/5 ; and to Tycho, 56 1/2. But Tycho, and all that follow his tables of refraction, making the refractions of the sun and moon (altogether against the nature of light) to exceed the refractions of the fixed stars, and that by four or five minutes near the horizon, did thereby increase the moon s horizontal parallax by a like number of minutes, that is, by a twelfth or fifteenth part of the whole parallax. Correct this error, and the distance will become about 60 1/2 semi-diameters of the earth, near to what others have assigned.
===========
Newton's calculations of the distance are close. But yet, so are all the listed astronomer. All within a few thousand kilometers.
I understand what you find so compelling about Newton's work. It is geometric. It is decidally understandable through drawings and averages. I see the importance of this work. It broke man out of the middle ages. It brought understandable science to a God ordered world. It maintained that order.
But the universe is based on chaos. This is determined by 3 gluons. Quantum Mechanics shows us it is impossible to determine the exact position of any sub-atomic particle. This is shown through the experiments of the giant accelerators.
Newton's work will bring an answer that is close, but understandable. Quantum Mechanics understands that it is probably not correct with a margin of error. My understanding is about the error or the change in fields and the effect that has on the baryon.
===========
This is from the General Science Journal Forums under 'theory of everything'
Aaron: Yes, they did a great job. All of them. At getting closer and closer to a more accurate system. It has been an amazing time.
But the Standard Particle Model shows that there is no gravity. It is easy to see the 4 forces and what they do. It is also glaringly apparent that gravity is not relevant. The same process of densities moving shows not an attractive unit to motion but a repulsive/expressive one. And I say expressive, because this is all about information. The forces are nothing but information in motion.
There is no chaos if one has control of the polarity, direction of charge,rate of spin of the baryon. Really all the information describing the baryon.
Chaos results when the model breaks down. Chaos occurs when the model can not finish, because it does not describe the relation to the other forces. Chaos is what we don't expect. And in this case all we have to do to bridge that line of thinking is reverse the direction of gravity, extend the 3 dimensional nature of density of the baryon. You have essentially the same result, but now you have finer control. You know the fields involved to remove the chaos.
No need for a flat universe. No need to explain a big bang as all the universe in a bang. Space is no longer relevant to matter. Matter expresses itself as information that passes through dark energy. Dark energy does not care if it Dark or Baryonic matter. It is the medium in which information vibrates.
=====
A baryon is repulsive and hot. It also has a charge, direction of charge and a spin. A baryon can bond to other baryons creating different results in vibrations. A baryon, a collection of gluons, expresses itself with/as forces.
The Z Boson is precise. The logic behind this vibration is to express the baryon's heat and electricity. It does this by creating a lepton which creates a boson. The lepton is the electron and the boson is the photon. It is required that the photon is emitted by the electron. It is also required that the electron read the photon.
The photon says my baryon is precisely this spectra, it was this hot when I left it, and I traveled this far to get you receiving lepton. (Frequency, Wave Length, Temperature, counter) The receiving baryon can now calculate heat, pressure from heat, direction of heat.
The electron also transmits information on the baryon's electrical information. This is my current, charge, voltage and spin. The spin is resistance.
The analogy to music is strong.
PROPOSITION IV. THEOREM IV.
That the moon gravitates towards the earth, and by the force of gravity is continually drawn off from a rectilinear motion, and retained in its orbit.
The mean distance of the moon from the earth in the syzygies in semidiameters of the earth, is, according to Ptolemy and most astronomers, 59 : according to Vendelin and Huygens, 60 ; to Copernicus, 60 1/3 ; to Street, 60 2/5 ; and to Tycho, 56 1/2. But Tycho, and all that follow his tables of refraction, making the refractions of the sun and moon (altogether against the nature of light) to exceed the refractions of the fixed stars, and that by four or five minutes near the horizon, did thereby increase the moon s horizontal parallax by a like number of minutes, that is, by a twelfth or fifteenth part of the whole parallax. Correct this error, and the distance will become about 60 1/2 semi-diameters of the earth, near to what others have assigned.
===========
Newton's calculations of the distance are close. But yet, so are all the listed astronomer. All within a few thousand kilometers.
I understand what you find so compelling about Newton's work. It is geometric. It is decidally understandable through drawings and averages. I see the importance of this work. It broke man out of the middle ages. It brought understandable science to a God ordered world. It maintained that order.
But the universe is based on chaos. This is determined by 3 gluons. Quantum Mechanics shows us it is impossible to determine the exact position of any sub-atomic particle. This is shown through the experiments of the giant accelerators.
Newton's work will bring an answer that is close, but understandable. Quantum Mechanics understands that it is probably not correct with a margin of error. My understanding is about the error or the change in fields and the effect that has on the baryon.
===========
This is from the General Science Journal Forums under 'theory of everything'
Aaron: Yes, they did a great job. All of them. At getting closer and closer to a more accurate system. It has been an amazing time.
But the Standard Particle Model shows that there is no gravity. It is easy to see the 4 forces and what they do. It is also glaringly apparent that gravity is not relevant. The same process of densities moving shows not an attractive unit to motion but a repulsive/expressive one. And I say expressive, because this is all about information. The forces are nothing but information in motion.
There is no chaos if one has control of the polarity, direction of charge,rate of spin of the baryon. Really all the information describing the baryon.
Chaos results when the model breaks down. Chaos occurs when the model can not finish, because it does not describe the relation to the other forces. Chaos is what we don't expect. And in this case all we have to do to bridge that line of thinking is reverse the direction of gravity, extend the 3 dimensional nature of density of the baryon. You have essentially the same result, but now you have finer control. You know the fields involved to remove the chaos.
No need for a flat universe. No need to explain a big bang as all the universe in a bang. Space is no longer relevant to matter. Matter expresses itself as information that passes through dark energy. Dark energy does not care if it Dark or Baryonic matter. It is the medium in which information vibrates.
=====
A baryon is repulsive and hot. It also has a charge, direction of charge and a spin. A baryon can bond to other baryons creating different results in vibrations. A baryon, a collection of gluons, expresses itself with/as forces.
The Z Boson is precise. The logic behind this vibration is to express the baryon's heat and electricity. It does this by creating a lepton which creates a boson. The lepton is the electron and the boson is the photon. It is required that the photon is emitted by the electron. It is also required that the electron read the photon.
The photon says my baryon is precisely this spectra, it was this hot when I left it, and I traveled this far to get you receiving lepton. (Frequency, Wave Length, Temperature, counter) The receiving baryon can now calculate heat, pressure from heat, direction of heat.
The electron also transmits information on the baryon's electrical information. This is my current, charge, voltage and spin. The spin is resistance.
The analogy to music is strong.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
More on Disproof of Gravity
I still cannot get past the Scalar * a dimensionless object = a field. That breaks laws of addition. Commutative.
I say a dimensionless object because mass has no volume. It does not matter if the mass is a shell, a point or a complex composite of material of masses. Each bit has no volume.
If we are to use mass then we cannot determine the volume. If we cannot determine volume we cannot determine position. If we cannot determine position then we cannot determine motion. If we cannot determine motion we cannot determine speed. If we cannot determine speed then we cannot determine vector accelleration. If we cannot determine vector accelleration then we cannot determine direction. This is from GSJ , my posting in the gravity thread.
This is a simple problem for those who Know Newton's Gravity is correct. Please If you can solve this simple problem.
Lets do a bit of math. 28 days worth. An hour by hour evaluation of the Sun-Earth-Moon relationship.
Lets use Newtonian Mechanics. f=gM1M2/r^2
Lets use the Wiki data for Mass, Distance and the sort. And everything in Metric
Sun Mass = 1.9891×10^30 kg
Earth Mass = 5.9736 × 10^24 kg
Moon Mass = 7.347 7 × 10^22 kg
Earth Aphelion = 152,097,701 km :Starting point
Moon Aphelion = 405,696 km :Starting/End point
Moon Perigee = 363,104 km :Mid point
Lets do one orbit and see what we get. Lets see if gravity can manage the lunar orbit. Sometimes we in physics need to evaluate the data.
This is a simple Newtonian Mechanics problem. All of the Gravity people should have solved this problem before accepting attraction between massive bodies as a Fact. Oh Yeah, Show your work. There should be 1344 calculations over 672 iterations for 28 days.
==========
This is an impossible problem. Even Newton could not solve this problem. Scientist have tried to evaluate this problem but have done nothing but produce confusing math. There is no solution.
The reason this does not work is because of the Zero Dimensional Mass. As I have described in this blog, mass does not have volume.
I say a dimensionless object because mass has no volume. It does not matter if the mass is a shell, a point or a complex composite of material of masses. Each bit has no volume.
If we are to use mass then we cannot determine the volume. If we cannot determine volume we cannot determine position. If we cannot determine position then we cannot determine motion. If we cannot determine motion we cannot determine speed. If we cannot determine speed then we cannot determine vector accelleration. If we cannot determine vector accelleration then we cannot determine direction. This is from GSJ , my posting in the gravity thread.
This is a simple problem for those who Know Newton's Gravity is correct. Please If you can solve this simple problem.
Lets do a bit of math. 28 days worth. An hour by hour evaluation of the Sun-Earth-Moon relationship.
Lets use Newtonian Mechanics. f=gM1M2/r^2
Lets use the Wiki data for Mass, Distance and the sort. And everything in Metric
Sun Mass = 1.9891×10^30 kg
Earth Mass = 5.9736 × 10^24 kg
Moon Mass = 7.347 7 × 10^22 kg
Earth Aphelion = 152,097,701 km :Starting point
Moon Aphelion = 405,696 km :Starting/End point
Moon Perigee = 363,104 km :Mid point
Lets do one orbit and see what we get. Lets see if gravity can manage the lunar orbit. Sometimes we in physics need to evaluate the data.
This is a simple Newtonian Mechanics problem. All of the Gravity people should have solved this problem before accepting attraction between massive bodies as a Fact. Oh Yeah, Show your work. There should be 1344 calculations over 672 iterations for 28 days.
==========
This is an impossible problem. Even Newton could not solve this problem. Scientist have tried to evaluate this problem but have done nothing but produce confusing math. There is no solution.
The reason this does not work is because of the Zero Dimensional Mass. As I have described in this blog, mass does not have volume.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
The fallacies of gravity
This comes from my posting at GSJ
Gravity is the bane of physics. It is the center most axiom in matter physics. The whole concept needs to be abandon if we are to advance science. A theory of motion must work at all levels; quantum, itty-bitty, tiny, normal, massive, supermassive, and ultramassive.
The first major fallacy of gravity is a concept called Zero Point Mass. This is a mass without a volume. This is not found in the universe. The main problem here is the reduction of 3 dimensional densities to 0 dimension masses. Once you reduce the density to mass you cannot return a mass to the shape of the density. So you cannot cube a zero and get anything but another zero. This breaks the commutative properties of addition.
Lets look at some of the equations and how gravity fails at a fundamental level.
1) F=ma : Force equals mass times accelleration.
We have a zero dimensional mass * a 2 dimensional vector and that does not equal a 3 dimensional field. So the main axiom of gravity fails the commutative test.
This alone should disprove gravity.
But wait there is more.
F = G(M1*M2)/r^2 : Force = (The constant of Gravity * The zero dimensional mass 1 * The zero dimensional mass 2)/ The 3 dimensional length between them squared.
So every object pulls every other object.
We have mass 1 pulling on mass 2 and mass 2 pulling on mass 1. F1 = F2. This is just wrong. The force that the moon pulls the earth is not equal to the force that the earth pulls on the moon.
A constant is what is used to fill in the gaps. When things do not work the way we want them to we just add a constant to fix the problem.
Physicist know about this problem. They created gravity waves and sphere modeling to compensate for the dimensionless mass. But gravity is still dimensionless. The dimensionless mass now creates a 3 dimensional wave. I'll get back to this.
Objects are not spherical. The Earth is not a sphere, the Sun is not a sphere. The galaxy is not a sphere.
We all know that gravity collapses under the scrutiny of the tiny. Quantum level objects do not show any signs of gravity.
Gravity fails the multi-body test. You can only compute the Force between 2 objects. Any equation that uses a sum of objects fails in this way. First the two objects force is computed then the third body is computed with the resultant of the first two bodies. Then that resultant is computed with the 4 body... That is how summation works. The problem is that the distance between object 1 and 2 is not evaluated in the next iteration.
The gravity sphere model was designed to add volume to the problem. This analogy of the spheres is still does not match evidence. Lets look at the spheres as the different layers of the atmosphere.
http://www.williamsclass.com
Lets look at a hurricane that is traveling over the ocean. The spinning winds cause rotation in the ocean. The low pressure of the storm causes a bulge upward in the ocean. Heat and pressure are two of the main variables in this system. As the temp increases it decreases the pressure of the storm, causing an increase in intensity in the storm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_(cyclone)
The heated air is forced up the eye wall. This is an example of a temperature/pressure force on density.
There is no way that gravity can describe this system, with or without spheres.
This this person with no name that I call bnon wrote.
As I asked you: "Who said rain and heat exchange is explained by gravity? "
If you have not understood my point, I can help you:
- the rain fall because of gravity
- the rain occurs because of water vapor cooling (temperature going closer to the dew point)
- the rain formation in itself is a very complex phenomena
- the dynamics of rain formation depends on the presence of aerosols and fine particles
- the dynamics of rain formation also depends on complex collision and coelescence phenomena
- the ascending motion of air is driven by gravity on all parts of the atmosphere
- this ascending motion is also affected by the Coriolis force
- this motion is affected also by the drag of rain
- this motion is also affected by the detailled geometry of the hurricane
- the fluid dynamics itselfs exhibits an incredible complexity, like turbulence and instabilities
- the term "T" in the Navier-Stokes equation above hides a lot of complexities that often still need to be understood
- heat exchange plays an important role, yet it is not simpler than the fluid dynamics
- yet, suppress gravity and there are no hurricanes anymore
Therefore Aaron, if you don't understand my reaction to your stupid comments, I don't care.
just show that you can do better than this:
So, I wrote
Let's examine your points one at a time.
- the rain fall because of gravity
Rain falls because as cold water it is more dense or less buoyant then the surrounding air. Remember Buoyancy
- the rain occurs because of water vapor cooling (temperature going closer to the dew point) Yes, that is one way of looking at density and Buoyancy
- the rain formation in itself is a very complex phenomena
Yes
- the dynamics of rain formation depends on the presence of aerosols and fine particles
Yes, the mixture of dirty water causes it to be a more dense mixture.
- the dynamics of rain formation also depends on complex collision and coelescence phenomena
Yes again, as the less dense gas collides with other gases, their temperature reduces and the gas becomes liquid. This process occurs until the liquid water is heavier than the force of the updraft.
- the ascending motion of air is driven by gravity on all parts of the atmosphere
No. The ascending motion of air is due to the changes in temperature. The air heats at the ground and rises. As it rises it cools and becomes liquid again. The liquid water is more dense then the surrounding air.
- this ascending motion is also affected by the Coriolis force
There are only 4 forces, Gluon - nuclear, W Boson - magnetism, Z Boson - electricity, and the Photon - heat. Those are the only forces that have been experimentally shown.
- this motion is affected also by the drag of rain
Of course, As rain falls it drags against the updraft. This is the friction that removes the heat from the air. Heat radiates to cold.
- this motion is also affected by the detailled geometry of the hurricane
The motion is the geometry of the cyclone. Geometry is a snapshot in time of an object.
- the fluid dynamics itselfs exhibits an incredible complexity, like turbulence and instabilities
The whole system is buoyancy. Buoyancy is only fluid dynamics. As a matter of opinion, everything is fluid dynamics.
- the term "T" in the Navier-Stokes equation above hides a lot of complexities that often still need to be understood
Like G. They change that frequently. These changes of G try to mimic the evidence. Just change the constant and you will get what you want to see.
- heat exchange plays an important role, yet it is not simpler than the fluid dynamics
Heat exchange is intrinsic to fluid dynamics. You cannot remove heat from the fluid dynamics problem.
- yet, suppress gravity and there are no hurricanes anymore
One cannot suppress gravity. Gravity is not real. Its an old model of how objects move. Evidence has force major changes in gravity. There is no supporting evidence of a graviton. Its like the higgs boson. Something that was built to try to explain interactions. But it does not.
Kepler's ellipse motion is more in line with how planets orbit the sun. This is because of the motion of the sun around the galaxy. This causes the elliptical shape of the orbit. Not gravity. Gravity cannot explain 3 body interaction. You can put up all the equations you want. If they have a G in them then they are a Zero Point Mass system and that does not exist in the universe.
The rules of the universe are simple. An atoms position in a system is based upon its density in relation to the surrounding densities and the changes in magnetism, electricity and temperature. This occurs inside a non-baryonic dark matter bubble as explained in this blog.
Gravity is the bane of physics. It is the center most axiom in matter physics. The whole concept needs to be abandon if we are to advance science. A theory of motion must work at all levels; quantum, itty-bitty, tiny, normal, massive, supermassive, and ultramassive.
The first major fallacy of gravity is a concept called Zero Point Mass. This is a mass without a volume. This is not found in the universe. The main problem here is the reduction of 3 dimensional densities to 0 dimension masses. Once you reduce the density to mass you cannot return a mass to the shape of the density. So you cannot cube a zero and get anything but another zero. This breaks the commutative properties of addition.
Lets look at some of the equations and how gravity fails at a fundamental level.
1) F=ma : Force equals mass times accelleration.
We have a zero dimensional mass * a 2 dimensional vector and that does not equal a 3 dimensional field. So the main axiom of gravity fails the commutative test.
This alone should disprove gravity.
But wait there is more.
F = G(M1*M2)/r^2 : Force = (The constant of Gravity * The zero dimensional mass 1 * The zero dimensional mass 2)/ The 3 dimensional length between them squared.
So every object pulls every other object.
We have mass 1 pulling on mass 2 and mass 2 pulling on mass 1. F1 = F2. This is just wrong. The force that the moon pulls the earth is not equal to the force that the earth pulls on the moon.
A constant is what is used to fill in the gaps. When things do not work the way we want them to we just add a constant to fix the problem.
Physicist know about this problem. They created gravity waves and sphere modeling to compensate for the dimensionless mass. But gravity is still dimensionless. The dimensionless mass now creates a 3 dimensional wave. I'll get back to this.
Objects are not spherical. The Earth is not a sphere, the Sun is not a sphere. The galaxy is not a sphere.
We all know that gravity collapses under the scrutiny of the tiny. Quantum level objects do not show any signs of gravity.
Gravity fails the multi-body test. You can only compute the Force between 2 objects. Any equation that uses a sum of objects fails in this way. First the two objects force is computed then the third body is computed with the resultant of the first two bodies. Then that resultant is computed with the 4 body... That is how summation works. The problem is that the distance between object 1 and 2 is not evaluated in the next iteration.
The gravity sphere model was designed to add volume to the problem. This analogy of the spheres is still does not match evidence. Lets look at the spheres as the different layers of the atmosphere.
http://www.williamsclass.com
Lets look at a hurricane that is traveling over the ocean. The spinning winds cause rotation in the ocean. The low pressure of the storm causes a bulge upward in the ocean. Heat and pressure are two of the main variables in this system. As the temp increases it decreases the pressure of the storm, causing an increase in intensity in the storm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_(cyclone)
The heated air is forced up the eye wall. This is an example of a temperature/pressure force on density.
There is no way that gravity can describe this system, with or without spheres.
This this person with no name that I call bnon wrote.
As I asked you: "Who said rain and heat exchange is explained by gravity? "
If you have not understood my point, I can help you:
- the rain fall because of gravity
- the rain occurs because of water vapor cooling (temperature going closer to the dew point)
- the rain formation in itself is a very complex phenomena
- the dynamics of rain formation depends on the presence of aerosols and fine particles
- the dynamics of rain formation also depends on complex collision and coelescence phenomena
- the ascending motion of air is driven by gravity on all parts of the atmosphere
- this ascending motion is also affected by the Coriolis force
- this motion is affected also by the drag of rain
- this motion is also affected by the detailled geometry of the hurricane
- the fluid dynamics itselfs exhibits an incredible complexity, like turbulence and instabilities
- the term "T" in the Navier-Stokes equation above hides a lot of complexities that often still need to be understood
- heat exchange plays an important role, yet it is not simpler than the fluid dynamics
- yet, suppress gravity and there are no hurricanes anymore
Therefore Aaron, if you don't understand my reaction to your stupid comments, I don't care.
just show that you can do better than this:
So, I wrote
Let's examine your points one at a time.
- the rain fall because of gravity
Rain falls because as cold water it is more dense or less buoyant then the surrounding air. Remember Buoyancy
- the rain occurs because of water vapor cooling (temperature going closer to the dew point) Yes, that is one way of looking at density and Buoyancy
- the rain formation in itself is a very complex phenomena
Yes
- the dynamics of rain formation depends on the presence of aerosols and fine particles
Yes, the mixture of dirty water causes it to be a more dense mixture.
- the dynamics of rain formation also depends on complex collision and coelescence phenomena
Yes again, as the less dense gas collides with other gases, their temperature reduces and the gas becomes liquid. This process occurs until the liquid water is heavier than the force of the updraft.
- the ascending motion of air is driven by gravity on all parts of the atmosphere
No. The ascending motion of air is due to the changes in temperature. The air heats at the ground and rises. As it rises it cools and becomes liquid again. The liquid water is more dense then the surrounding air.
- this ascending motion is also affected by the Coriolis force
There are only 4 forces, Gluon - nuclear, W Boson - magnetism, Z Boson - electricity, and the Photon - heat. Those are the only forces that have been experimentally shown.
- this motion is affected also by the drag of rain
Of course, As rain falls it drags against the updraft. This is the friction that removes the heat from the air. Heat radiates to cold.
- this motion is also affected by the detailled geometry of the hurricane
The motion is the geometry of the cyclone. Geometry is a snapshot in time of an object.
- the fluid dynamics itselfs exhibits an incredible complexity, like turbulence and instabilities
The whole system is buoyancy. Buoyancy is only fluid dynamics. As a matter of opinion, everything is fluid dynamics.
- the term "T" in the Navier-Stokes equation above hides a lot of complexities that often still need to be understood
Like G. They change that frequently. These changes of G try to mimic the evidence. Just change the constant and you will get what you want to see.
- heat exchange plays an important role, yet it is not simpler than the fluid dynamics
Heat exchange is intrinsic to fluid dynamics. You cannot remove heat from the fluid dynamics problem.
- yet, suppress gravity and there are no hurricanes anymore
One cannot suppress gravity. Gravity is not real. Its an old model of how objects move. Evidence has force major changes in gravity. There is no supporting evidence of a graviton. Its like the higgs boson. Something that was built to try to explain interactions. But it does not.
Kepler's ellipse motion is more in line with how planets orbit the sun. This is because of the motion of the sun around the galaxy. This causes the elliptical shape of the orbit. Not gravity. Gravity cannot explain 3 body interaction. You can put up all the equations you want. If they have a G in them then they are a Zero Point Mass system and that does not exist in the universe.
The rules of the universe are simple. An atoms position in a system is based upon its density in relation to the surrounding densities and the changes in magnetism, electricity and temperature. This occurs inside a non-baryonic dark matter bubble as explained in this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
