Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

ant of stargrail · 2004-07-19 16:02:04

What is the number prior to infinity?

The dot in the centre of the circle, before it moves and goes round and round forever, making a circle (PI) then a sphere, expanding and then contracting.

I suppose when forever ends the point goes back to its origin or starts again from a different point.

Ant

MarsDog · 2004-07-19 20:56:53

To be pedantic, the velocity of light in a vacuum is the same everywhere.

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0009023] Near-field Superluminally

Gravitational phase speed comment from above pdf file:

Current astronomical observations estimate the phase speed of gravity to be greater than 2x10^10c.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Past the near field: http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/200 … .asp]Light pulses flout sacrosanct speed limit

Because electromagnetic waves radiate through air much as they do in a vacuum, Chiao says, the "spectacular work" by the Italians demonstrates that even in a vacuum, light could outpace c.

GCNRevenger · 2004-07-19 21:16:28

According to Einstein, gravity is not a thing or a force persay either, it is the physical manifestation of the curve of space (and time) being deformed. Since it really isn't "anything" it doesn't really travel, then it is not bound by the 1C limit. If you are talking Quantum Gravity, then the concept of location itself is shakey.

Again, wierd tunneling-like or entanglement-like effects for the laser experiments, which have absolutely no bearing on energy-mass equivilence or other physical laws that reguard 1C as a constant limit, because the limit is not actually violated... it just looks like it.

JimM · 2004-07-20 01:15:14

The ratio that would ratify a solution to squaring a circle would also be a transendental number, obtained from the radius and square length ratio.

A funny way to put it, but it illustrates my point. If that would be a transendental number (I think you are right, it would) then clearly it cannot be determined exactly. Therefore you can't square a circle, just as I said Lindemann had proved way back in 1882.

Are you implying that C^2 can only been seen as the transendental number of the speed of light as measured in a vacuum? .

c (as defined--and this was previously discussed here) is clearly not a transendental number.

I can only see the 2 of E=MC^2 as a transendental number the rest an algebraic formula..

The number 2 is also quite clearly not transendental.

(You still havn't got this transendental thing, have you?)

JimM · 2004-07-20 01:52:33

What is the number prior to infinity?

Infinity minus 0.00000....((infinity minus 1) number of zeros)...00001

(Or to put it anouther way, infinity. I told you infinity is strange.)

So, what is...

(1) 0/infinity ?
(2) infinity/infinity ?
(3) infinity^2 ?
(4) infinity^infinity ?

Answers on a postcard, please ...

ant of stargrail · 2004-07-20 03:18:08

If that would be a transendental number (I think you are right, it would) then clearly it cannot be determined exactly.

The ratified number would be as acurate as Pi, but I have no interest in solving that task. I'm too busy already.

Therefore you can't square a circle, just as I said Lindemann had proved way back in 1882.

I don't agree.

c (as defined--and this was previously discussed here) is clearly not a transendental number.

Then C must be an algabraic number, having a minimum and maximum or a sliding solution, depending on the value of the variable M as both are linked to E.

Therefore I reason that a minimum solution to Energy must be possible.

As I have been building the matrix up, I and others have been observing it's movement and development. I have arrived at the stage where the articulating square matrix appears just enough to make the wheel turn continuously.

I just need to sort out this axle.

Ant

JimM · 2004-07-20 05:31:08

Therefore you can't square a circle, just as I said Lindemann had proved way back in 1882.
I don't agree.

With respect, it does not matter whether you agree or not, Lindemann is right and you are wrong. Learn to live with it.

c (as defined--and this was previously discussed here) is clearly not a transendental number.
Then C must be an algabraic number, having a minimum and maximum or a sliding solution, depending on the value of the variable M as both are linked to E.

c is an algebraic number in the sense that it has an exact value. It is a CONSTANT, which is BY DEFINITION 299,792,458 meters/sec. That is the ONLY value it CAN EVER have. Period. To talk of minimum and maximum values for c is just nonsense. Learn to live with it.
Pi is a transendental number in the sense that it does not have an exact solution. Thus Pi, which begins with 3.141… has been solved to 10 billion places but still without any end in sight. But Pi too is a CONSTANT. It has one value and one value only, but because we cannot determine it exactly it is called a transendental number, and that's why we cannot square a circle. (Or, if you insist, cube a sphere.) Learn to live with it.

ant of stargrail · 2004-07-20 06:41:44

With respect, it does not matter whether you agree or not, Lindemann is right and you are wrong. Learn to live with it.

I do, along with the rest of the human race.

c is an algebraic number in the sense that it has an exact value. It is a CONSTANT, which is BY DEFINITION 299,792,458 meters/sec. That is the ONLY value it CAN EVER have. Period.

I agree C^2 is a constant when you refer the equation to light in a vacuum. Natural light comes from the biggest mass in the solar system the Sun.

Pi is a transendental number in the sense that it does not have an exact solution. Thus Pi, which begins with 3.141… has been solved to 10 billion places but still without any end in sight. But Pi too is a CONSTANT. It has one value and one value only, but because we cannot determine it exactly it is called a transendental number, and that's why we cannot square a circle. (Or, if you insist, cube a sphere.)

What happened to PI the fraction? The result that is obtained from using pi as a decimal does give a transendental number in base 10.

Ant

MarsDog · 2004-07-20 08:29:27

I agree C^2 is a constant when you refer the equation to light in a vacuum.

Constant by a definition only:
"It may be a surprise for many physicists that even within the framework of general relativity faster-than-light speed is allowed, provided that the space-time metric of the universe is globally hyperbolic" http://homepage.sunrise.ch/homepage/sch … e.html]The Speed of Light - A Limit on Principle?

-

What happened to PI the fraction? The result that is obtained from using pi as a decimal does give a transendental number in base 10.

When constructing, you only get accuracy to so many decimal places, so an approximation of PI is sufficient. The best you could do is a whole number of atoms.

JimM · 2004-07-20 09:22:12

I agree C^2 is a constant when you refer the equation to light in a vacuum. Natural light comes from the biggest mass in the solar system the Sun.

But it does not matter what the source of the light is, or what frequency it is, or how rapidly or slowly the light-source is moving away from you or towards you, IT IS STILL EXACTLY C. (This is why it's called the Theory of Relativity, as it happens: the velocity of light in a vacuum is ALWAYS exactly the same: c.

For example:

(1) suppose you are stationary and a train is coming towards you at 90% of the speed of light, and it shines a light towards you as it does so. What speed would that beam of light be travelling at when it reaches you? (1 +.9)*c, ie. 190% of c? No, the answer is exactly c.

(2) suppose you are stationary and a train is going away from you at 90% of the speed of light, and it shines a light towards you as it does so. What speed would that beam of light be travelling at when it reaches you? (1 -.9)*c, ie. 10% of c? No, the answer is exactly c.

The answer is ALWAYS exactly c.

What happened to PI the fraction?

It makes no difference how you present or represent Pi; it is still exactly the same transendental number.

JimM · 2004-07-20 09:35:54

Constant by a definition only:
"It may be a surprise for many physicists that even within the framework of general relativity faster-than-light speed is allowed, provided that the space-time metric of the universe is globally hyperbolic"

The possibility of travelling faster than light is not relevant to the question of what is the velocity of light in a vacuum, c. It's a red herring.

BTW, if I were you I'd not hold my breath while waiting for faster-than-light travel to get here. It that day ever arrives, it's going to do so mighty slowly.

ant of stargrail · 2004-07-20 11:51:31

The answer is ALWAYS exactly c.

Magic Squares give the illusion that each equal square has a line of numbers that add up the same, in any straight line up or down or corner to opposite corner. I have studied them as a hobby for 14 years and Love it. I want to continue to study them until I die.

Each magic square's line sum can be seen as a constant. A bit like the speed of light, but lower of course. Each Magic Square's line sum has a constant. The constant line value of a 6 Magic Square is 111.

The machine I am constructing will answer my speculated questions, I was hoping others would be interested.

By the vote at least some relate to what I am saying. I have time available tomorrow to go to the scrapies to get a more suitable axle. Once a suitable replacement is obtained, work will resume to complete it.

Ant

JimM · 2004-07-20 14:37:27

Magic Squares give the illusion that each equal square has a line of numbers that add up the same, in any straight line up or down or corner to opposite corner. I have studied them as a hobby for 14 years and Love it. I want to continue to study them until I die.

Well I think that's fine and entirely commendable.

Once a suitable replacement is obtained, work will resume to complete it.

I look forward to hearing how you get on.

JimM · 2004-07-20 16:03:21

From another forum, too good not to share:

Actually, Betsy Ross invented pi - specifically cherry pi - after George Washington cut down her cherry tree.

Pi is equal to one brownie or two scoops of ice cream in the Richard Simmons Deal-a-Meal plan.

No matter what they tell you in school, pi is not squared. Pi is round. However, if you take the crust off a circle of pi and try to arrange it in a line across the middle of the pi, you will still have pi.

ant of stargrail · 2004-07-21 01:40:39

Actually, Betsy Ross invented pi - specifically cherry pi - after George Washington cut down her cherry tree.
Pi is equal to one brownie or two scoops of ice cream in the Richard Simmons Deal-a-Meal plan.
No matter what they tell you in school, pi is not squared. Pi is round.

Symbolism in a Cherry must be an American 'thing'.

In England, where I lived before moving to Scotland, nursery school songs teaches 4 and 20 blackbirds come from a pi.

Ant

MarsDog · 2004-07-21 17:48:04

We should be listening for Pi in the sky.
-
An alien intelligence might also consider Pi as the most significant, fundamental, constant; and keep bradcasting Pi, in binary, as a beacon.

JimM · 2004-07-22 07:30:41

An alien intelligence might also consider Pi as the most significant, fundamental, constant; and keep bradcasting Pi, in binary, as a beacon

You've been reading Carl Sagan's "Contact" (not the movie, the book)

You make it sound as easy as pi......

The problem is, to how many binary places? Or if not, if seeking absolute accuracy, once started the broadcast goes on for ever and if you tune in half way, how do you know what its all about? It'll just sound like a string of meaningless '1's and '0's.

MarsDog · 2004-07-22 08:29:46

You are right, it needs to be more obvious.
The signal would have 2 parts; a steady carrier alternated with a message. The message would have to be, as proposed, a simple picture, alternating with other more complex messages.

ant of stargrail · 2004-07-28 16:25:44

I now have an axle. Tomorrow I will make a suitable axle support.

I will know within 2 days either way.

Ant

ant of stargrail · 2004-08-01 18:10:41

Just letting you know, as most of you suspect, it is not as easy as E=6*45 Squared.

However from my observations of the wheel, I still believe that E=MC^2 has a minimum solution. I will continue to expand the square articulating matrix one at a time, as funds permit, until it works or until I loose my religion.

The next time I post this subject will be when the Wheel is working under its own power, oh... I will include the numbers of the minimum solution.

Ant

SpaceNut · 2004-08-01 18:50:01

I think that everyone is missing the point on the equation of E=MC>2 . Energy is release from a mass at a constant of the speed of light but light is not the only thing that is release from such efforts. There is radiation for one thing since the sun is an expression of the equation at work. So hence I think that if the mass is also larger then quite possibly the constants can change also in the equations based on the out come of the energy release.

JimM · 2004-08-03 01:59:48

There is radiation for one thing...

Light IS radiation

SpaceNut · 2004-08-03 07:04:50

Radiation like in x-rays, Gamma ...
Like in lethal...

Euler · 2004-08-03 11:22:48

X-rays, gamma rays=high frequency light.

SpaceNut · 2004-08-03 12:41:42

Frequency is the inverse of time.
So light has limits of min and max for the equation based on energy form that is released.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2004-07-19 16:02:04

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#77 2004-07-19 20:56:53

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#78 2004-07-19 21:16:28

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#79 2004-07-20 01:15:14

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#80 2004-07-20 01:52:33

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#81 2004-07-20 03:18:08

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#82 2004-07-20 05:31:08

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#83 2004-07-20 06:41:44

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#84 2004-07-20 08:29:27

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#85 2004-07-20 09:22:12

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#86 2004-07-20 09:35:54

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#87 2004-07-20 11:51:31

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#88 2004-07-20 14:37:27

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#89 2004-07-20 16:03:21

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#90 2004-07-21 01:40:39

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#91 2004-07-21 17:48:04

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#92 2004-07-22 07:30:41

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#93 2004-07-22 08:29:46

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#94 2004-07-28 16:25:44

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#95 2004-08-01 18:10:41

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#96 2004-08-01 18:50:01

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#97 2004-08-03 01:59:48

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#98 2004-08-03 07:04:50

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#99 2004-08-03 11:22:48

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

#100 2004-08-03 12:41:42

Re: Gravity Wheel - Is E=6*45^2, minimum solution?

Board footer