Re: Mystery about "c".

On Mar 11, 4:02 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[....]

Hi, Sue, I've been studying this....

Recently I've been focusing on the relation of Power "W_00"
to the time metric g_00.
For instance, I beam a laser vertically, the rate of changes.
(dW_00 = - dg_00) correspond, where the Power of the
laser depends upon Energy/time.
In GR, Energy and time are inversely varied, so that the
Energy is "red shifted" in proportion to frequency, but
the "rate of time" increases, so Power transforms in
the negative proportion to g_00,

W_00 = p_0/x0 = energy/time.

As a service, we might take two equal resistors, both
calibrated to be 1 Ohm. Then we place a current loop
running up a tower and back down with a resistor at
the Hi and Lo in that circuit.
The power output, Power = Voltage x Current can be
measured by the emission of heat and thus photons
from those resistors, at that location.

I find Power W_00 = V_0 I_0 == Voltage x Current.
((I prove that if asked)).

For notation, call g= g_00 , V=V_0, I=I_0, W=W_00,

so that the gravitational field is the derivative dg.

dg = - (dW = I dV + V dI).

Recall dV & dI are based on "complex impedance"
that uses the "j" operator.

Let's now apply the Principle of Equivalence, (PoE).

Does the probability of local inertia depend upon
the "complex impedance"?

I wonder which interpretation of Pound-Snider
Tajmar and de Matos would support. ;-)

"Complex impedance" is a term of art where the
imaginaries are inductive or capacitive and result
from the coupling structure. so the short answer is no.

You surprise me Sue, I thought you taught
me that a vacuum had an "impedance" of 377
Ohms. So I thought I'd try applying "complex
impedance" in a gravitational field, using power
as a basis, for a lively change.

The electromagnetic impedance is 377 ohms.
I was pretty underwhelmed with an old paper
where Nigel?Cook tried to come-up with an inertial
impedance. I suppose you could have a value for
all of space derived from K.E. = 1/2 mv^2. Acoustic
impedance is often specified so I'll look into it.
(or was it a writer named Ivor?Cates?)

I suppose it would be all reactive (the power is apparent)
and there is no distinction X_C or X_L. (advance and retard)

Everything would be retarded or resistive. Resistive
would be a weight falling into a bucket of water?

Reactive would be centrifugal and orbital forces.


The imaginaries in QED result from temporal and spatial
application of statistics.

Microscopically yes, but my oscilloscpe
is bang on always. But you're right, reduce
the current and increase amplification and
the wave-form becomes fuzzy.

Schrodinger Fuzz ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger_equation


[...]

The term "complex impedance" seems perfectly
happy in its classical world and gravity doesn't
seem to depend on atomic emission/absorption
processes so there is nothing countable for accessing
a temporal domain.

By my resistor experiment there could be,
all I need to do it remove the wire.

I fail to see how gravity or inertia have any influence on
such an experiment. Shouldn't the resistor be Joule's
paddlewheel?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Prescott_Joule

Orbits and ridgid bodies would be reactive components.
*Appearing* to have energy exchange, but not actually
heating anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_orbital_energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_energy_conservation_equation




<<Planck's original result involved counting the number
of uncoupled harmonic oscillator modes partaking in
the field's motions in a disordered system averaged
over some random phase f of the oscillators at each
frequency. If instead of non-interacting modes we
have a system with a fixed number of oscillators and
two coupled modes of which one is coherent, the
zero point energy vanishes at first order. This point
has also been stressed by Post. http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/GRAV.htm

The marriage sounds less holy than all Einstein
and Feynman's sins combined. LOL

Are you flirting again :-o

Nope... not flirting with adam's apple perverts.
I can't compete with Janet's intelect anyway. :o)


"Particle in curved space"
<< For a particle in curved space the kinetic term
depends on the position and the above time slicing
cannot be applied, this being a manifestation of the
notorious operator ordering problem in Schrödinger
quantum mechanics. One may, however, solve this
problem by transforming the time-sliced flat-space
path integral to curved space using a multivalued
coordinate transformation (nonholonomic mapping
explained here)... >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation

I think we don't really know if the frequency change in
Pound-Snider is a conservative inertial effect or
a lossy radiative effect (ignoring Okun's cautions).

I'm ok with either, Energy Conservation rules.

Gravity there, makes inertia here. I can't reconcile
that with a local inertial ether except if it is ~modulated~
on the Coulomb force.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermolecular_forces


That answer may lie in Tate's mass anomaly.

What may look elegant on paper is really the
adoption of quite a house of cards resulting from
several unresolved issues. Don't some of these
ambiguites need to be resolved before making
extrapolations on the scale you propose?

I have a hard on for Energy Conservation, that
is often expressed in action units etc. so I'm
looking at the Generally Covariant expression
of "complex impedence" using Power.


Hmmm I think writer is concluding we should speak
of the light-of-inertia rather than the inertia-of-light.
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0609015

Just because a component is imaginary doesn't
allow you to freely interchange it with other imaginaries.
There are some rules.

The business of inerta is reactive not resistive.
Gravity works without atomic emission or absorbtion
so the tools of Gaussian statistics are not availible
as with atomic light.


Blame Dr. Yablon, (we should go to his castle
and burn it for blastforme), I recommend that
course of study, I mean about GR Power.

OK... Good idea. (not the arson) I'll see if Hulse-Tayor
or some other workers actually derive some kind of
lumpy (inhomgenous) value for an inertial impedance
as resistive and reactive components.

It is done in acoustics so perhaps you haven't
spilled all your marbles trying to weigh a Proca photon.
:o)


Sue...

Regards
Ken-


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Mystery about "c".
    ... Evidentally, the universe tends ... In GR, Energy and time are inversely varied, so that the ... The power output, Power = Voltage x Current can be ... "Complex impedance" is a term of art where the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Standing-Wave Current vs Traveling-Wave Current
    ... My assumption is that the input impedance matches the impedance of the line. ... one in which the mismatch was infinite (perfect voltage source at the input) and one in which the voltage reflection coefficient at the source was 0.5. ... will be applied over that time period so the amount of energy on the line is equal to the amount of energy contained in the power applied over time by two half waves, so total power applied is 2 * initial power. ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
  • Re: Capacitor discharge question
    ... power circuits. ... concerned about the capacitor being damaged. ... capacitor discharged into .1ohms what peak energy rating on the resistor is ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Is temperature relative?
    ... >> all, and ignoring Tom's caveat that power is not a scalar, power is ... >> d(Energy)/dt, and both the energy and the time elements are dilated ... >> resistor. ... TEMPERATURE of each resistor. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)