I forget what Carl Sagan said and when, but Feynman's "Cargo Cult Science" speech was (looking at the date) 49 years ago, and many of the things he described happened many decades earlier. I've read this several times - the oil drop results and the psychology experiment stand out in my mind.
http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm
There have been instances where experimental results may have been 'selected' to match a hypothesis, and Robert Millikan's selection of his oil drop results is one example. Another, I believe, is the selection of favourable results in the first observation of the precession of Mercury's orbit.
https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200608/history.cfm
Both of these possible 'massagings' have since been put to rest by more sophisticated experiments that have proven both hypotheses to be correct beyond reasonable doubt.
Last edited:
Your video flagged up as "age restricted" and only available to watch on YouTube.
I wonder if I am old enough to watch it?
Best to be cautious as I am such a tender soul!
Einstein relativity: Atomic clocks accuracy.
It is true, verified h24, in GPS system over all satellites and ground stations.
One nanosecond is one foot.
It has been a long day on the General Relativity front, at the system7 Institute for Advanced Science.
I have read 150 pages about 4D Spacetime, 4-momentum, the Metric Tensor, The Ricci Tensor and the Curvature Scalar in my new Sean Carroll Gravity book. Time for a break.
40 pages to go, but already I am formulating my ideas. I shall be telling you all about it soon. The Curvature Scalar is twice the value of that old favourite of mine the Gaussian Curvature. I would think that is a 4D thing.
Do be careful not to confuse manifolds which use intrinsic co-ordinates, from 2D surfaces embedded in 3D Space and viewed externally. This was Gauss' insight.
The Einstein deniers will eat some crow with this breaking news however.
Spaghettification by stars that foolishly wander near Black Holes like in NGC 3799 released today:
https://phys.org/news/2023-07-tidal-disruption-event-chinese-astronomers.html
It's the Tidal force ripping a star apart again. A Tidal Disruption Event.
I suspect my 50mm Toy Telescope won't be able confirm it. But interesting, eh.
I have read 150 pages about 4D Spacetime, 4-momentum, the Metric Tensor, The Ricci Tensor and the Curvature Scalar in my new Sean Carroll Gravity book. Time for a break.
40 pages to go, but already I am formulating my ideas. I shall be telling you all about it soon. The Curvature Scalar is twice the value of that old favourite of mine the Gaussian Curvature. I would think that is a 4D thing.
Do be careful not to confuse manifolds which use intrinsic co-ordinates, from 2D surfaces embedded in 3D Space and viewed externally. This was Gauss' insight.
The Einstein deniers will eat some crow with this breaking news however.
Spaghettification by stars that foolishly wander near Black Holes like in NGC 3799 released today:
https://phys.org/news/2023-07-tidal-disruption-event-chinese-astronomers.html
It's the Tidal force ripping a star apart again. A Tidal Disruption Event.
I suspect my 50mm Toy Telescope won't be able confirm it. But interesting, eh.
A TDE occurs when a star is catapulted by gravitational perturbations directly towards a supermassive black hole.
The doomed star gets violently ripped apart in a matter of just a few hours, producing a highly energetic and luminous flare.
TDEs are rare. Astronomers estimate that a galaxy like the Milky Way has a TDE no more than once every 100,000 years.
Bonsai once furnished me with this link: https://www.astronomy.com/science/how-do-black-holes-swallow-stars/
Attachments
That’s the Feynman talk I was thinking about - didn’t realise it was as far back as 1974
I have just looked at this "simple math". But I do not recognize a "space-time"-dilation, but only a "frequency" compression or -dilation: "Doppler effect". A "space-time"-dilation in this case would correspond to a dilation of the coordinate system. It would have to be to be explained why the "physical events" entered into the coordinate system stretch, bend or something else the coordinate system which corresponds to the "space-time". It amazes me that supposedly seasoned "scientists" don't even know what a coordinate system is.
Also I recommend to calculate with the "speed of sound" instead of the "speed of light". The speed of light is difficult to follow, it seems;-) By using the speed of sound, no one would suspect that spacetime would be bended, warped.
Also, just replace the "moving observers" by "points". Because of me accompanied by clocks. Besides, in e.g. a system with three points only is relevant who looks at, not who moves. Because the "movement" would be - in most cases - defined only by an observer outside of the system. The observer can be put into each of the e.g. three points. The result would always be a "frequency" compression or stretching: "Doppler effect".
This mentioned outside perspective would have to be taken by the "physicist" to get out of the "box". Consequently, it is not a "physical" event to interpret a "space-time" dilation but a consequence of the limited observation and interpretation)-;
Apparently, the many changes in perspectives, including the change in the respective characteristics, are causing major problems for the majority.
It just occurs to me that RT is not only a social, political, emotional and psychological phenomenon but also a neurological one: the handling of e.g. an unimaginably high speed transferred into the very limited everyday perception (for example rooms) leads to a translation into very very large rooms which are also expanding. The RT are a gigantic playing field for sociologists, political scientists, psychologists, neurologists, emotiologists, esotericists, mathematicians... but not for physicists;-)-;
Last edited:
Of course (This bloke..) Leonard Susskind is good.
A personal friend of the best Physicist (IMO) after Einstein, Richard Feynman:
The man who told us that if it disagrees with Experiment, it is WRONG! A wake-up moment for the Woo Mongers..
https://archive.org/details/TheBest...nce.Einstein.1993.DVDRip.DD2.0.x264-astro.mkv
Everybody close loved Richard. I too, at a distance, was enormously influenced by Richard, because I grew up and read the first two volumes, though the third on Quantum Mechanics lost me a bit. Perhaps not my strength. I prefer Classical Mechanics. Everyone is different.
What I am telling you, cumbb, is you might rate very highly on the Crackpot Index of Modern Physics:
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
Examine No. 14: 10 points for each new term you invent and use without properly defining it.
Whatever is RT?
Why shouId I care? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KT_(energy)
My advice is to get back in the mainstream. Thunderbolts and the Electric Universe is just rubbish.
A personal friend of the best Physicist (IMO) after Einstein, Richard Feynman:
The man who told us that if it disagrees with Experiment, it is WRONG! A wake-up moment for the Woo Mongers..
https://archive.org/details/TheBest...nce.Einstein.1993.DVDRip.DD2.0.x264-astro.mkv
Everybody close loved Richard. I too, at a distance, was enormously influenced by Richard, because I grew up and read the first two volumes, though the third on Quantum Mechanics lost me a bit. Perhaps not my strength. I prefer Classical Mechanics. Everyone is different.
What I am telling you, cumbb, is you might rate very highly on the Crackpot Index of Modern Physics:
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
Examine No. 14: 10 points for each new term you invent and use without properly defining it.
Whatever is RT?
Why shouId I care? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KT_(energy)
My advice is to get back in the mainstream. Thunderbolts and the Electric Universe is just rubbish.
Last edited:
;-)
No arguments, again;-)
RT = Relativitäts Theorien. German term of a german "scientist"-) The most do understand;-)
There are fellow human beings who should better reckon with values between 0 - 9 meters per second;-) You too;-?
You obviously do not understand "mainstream" either: majority. RT are popular, which is based on aggressive propaganda;-)
Joan Baez;-)
No arguments, again;-)
RT = Relativitäts Theorien. German term of a german "scientist"-) The most do understand;-)
There are fellow human beings who should better reckon with values between 0 - 9 meters per second;-) You too;-?
You obviously do not understand "mainstream" either: majority. RT are popular, which is based on aggressive propaganda;-)
Joan Baez;-)
There's no need to communicate with crackpots when you can talk to mad scientists like me!
R(t) is a scale factor that carries dimensions of length in one form of the FLRW (Friedmann, Lemaitre, Robertson, Walker) metric that describes the large scale features of the Universe assuming the homogeneity and isotropy of space.
Or, more likely, RT is short for Relativity Theory!
Not quite the full Zappa Beard! https://www.gillette.co.uk/blog/facial-hair-styles/zappa-beard/
I presume you are one of his fans?
We've had this discussion before Galu
There's an interesting discussion on the Universe's homogeneity and isotropy here:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/giant-arc-of-galaxies-puts-basic-cosmology-under-scrutiny-20211213/
The almost symmetrical arc of galaxies spans a massive 3.3 billion light years across, a whopping 1/15th the radius of the observable Universe.
If we could see it from Earth, it would be the size of 35 full moons displayed across the sky.
The Giant Arc throws into question the standard model of cosmology, which is founded upon the assumption that matter should be more-or-less evenly distributed across space.