Re: About GR (kst)



Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> Sue... wrote:
> > Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> > > You and I are astronauts, sitting on the pad
> > > and the count-down begins, 5,4,3,2,1...blast-off!
> > > at t=1.
> > >
> > > The g-meter goes from 1g to 2,3,4,5g and stabilizes.
> > >
> > > A mechanical deformation heated the space-craft
> > > as it strained under the effects of the acceleration,
> > > the space-craft was heated and an extra infared
> > > energy was produced and emitted.
> > >
> > > You look out the window and find you're still
> > > sitting on the pad......why?
> > >
> > > Answer:
> > > At t=1 the Earth's density increased by factors,
> > > 1,2,3,4,5, hence it's mass increased likewise
> > > while the volume and radius remained constant.
> > >
> > > Using AE's law G_uv=k*T_uv we would find,
> > >
> > > Guv at (t=5) = 5*Guv at (t=1) and
> > >
> > > Tuv at (t=5) = 5* Tuv at (t=1).
> > >
> > > The later is interesting, because as the acceleration
> > > increased, the space-craft was heated and emitted
> > > quantized radiation in the infared spectrum.
> >
> > I don't thing infared would be the culprit (a big
> > *** of shielding foil LOL ) but
> > we get the idea. An increase in the motion
> > contributing to induced dipole forces might
> > behave as you are describing and that would be
> > unshieldable as magnetism is.
> >
> > Sue...
>
>
> Yes! The effect of a changing acceleration on
> a mechanical instrument, I believe would heat
> that instrument, and make photons, as a result
> of a change in T_uv.
>
> Hence G_uv =/=0 when a spaceship is in the
> g-field, ha,ha,ha...
>
> Thanks Sue
> Ken

I never make photons, I only loose them
but I *usually* don't mind if other folks
use the terminology. I would take special
exception in this case because it is not
necessary for quanta of light to be emitted
for induced dipoles to alter their coupling.

IMHO it is incidental but you might be
using a different definition such as:
..
<<Molecular absorption
A typical molecule, M, has many different energy levels. When a
molecule absorbs a photon, its energy is increased by an amount equal
to the energy of the photon. The molecule then enters an excited
state,>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon#Creation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann's_constant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_ensemble

Sue...

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > The change in Guv from t=1 to t=5 appeared to the
> > > astronaut's to be acceleration, but in fact, it was a
> > > gravitational change given by,
> > >
> > > g00-1 (at t=5) = 5*(g00-1) (at t=1),
> > >
> > > as the Earth's density increased.
> > >
> > > That's AE's law G_uv =k*T_uv in operation with the
> > > Principle of Equivalence.
> > >
> > > Normally GRist's use G_uv=0 and Schwart's Solution,
> > > but in juxtaposition this example demo's the induction
> > > of heat when a change in T_uv occurs and creates
> > > quantum radiation using the differential of the realistic
> > >
> > > G_uv =k*T_uv.
> > >
> > > The induction needs the relative motion of charges,
> > > therefore the AE law applies to a relation.
> > > ((the continuum is being replaced by relations))
> > >
> > > That differential that outputs the infared radiation is
> > > discontinuous, aka quantized, hence,
> > >
> > > T_uv;w =0 ,however,
> > >
> > > T_uv;w is not a constant.
> > >
> > > but the integral
> > >
> > > $ T_uv;w dx^w = a relative constant .
> > >
> > > Physically, we're incrementing the energy in
> > > a volume of spacetime by inducing a quanta
> > > of energy like a photon, or perhaps emitting,
> > > as the spacecraft is deformed, and from various
> > > refs, that constant is relativistic.
> > > Ken S. Tucker

.