Re: New & Improved Clock announced!!!



On May 15, 6:16 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The figure in the article is "4 x 10-19," ,http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110511162528.htm

We could expect to see small variations of altitude being measured.

Another is placing such a clock in a conducting electrically charged
sphere, too vary the rate, or alternatively, fine tune the rate.
That would also provide us with definitive measurements of the effect
of potential on the space-time field, thereby enabling direct tests of
a unified (gravity and electricity) field.
Regards
Ken S. Tucker


Hi Dr. Saam and friends.

On May 23, 8:40 pm, "Richard D. Saam" <rds...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 17, 7:50 pm, "Richard D. Saam" <rds...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>> On 1/16/11 10:59 PM, Ken S. Tucker wrote:> Hi Dr. Saam and all.

A general approach tohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress%E2%80%93energy_tensor
equating QM and GR.

>>E = energy
>>V = volume
>>v = velocity
>>A = area
>>p = momentum
>>t = time
>>p/t = force
>>E = p*v

>>T11 = T22 = T33 = T44 = E/V
>>T12 = T13 = T14 = p/V
>>T23 = T24 = T34 = p/(t A)
>>T12 = T13 = T14 = E/(t A)
>>T32 = T42 = T43 = p/A

>>Tuv = (c4/(8*pi*G)) Guv = p/t Guv

>>G11 = G22 = G33 = G44 = E/V * t/p = v*t/V
>>G12 = G13 = G14 = p/V * t/p = t/V
>>G23 = G24 = G34 = p/(t A) * t/p = 1/A
>>G12 = G13 = G14 = E/(t A) * t/p = v/A
>>G32 = G42 = G43 = p/A * t/p = t/A

>>one then can multiply through by factors of E,V,v,A,p,t
>>resulting in all kinds of interesting dimensional relationships
>>and all dimensionally consistent with Einsteins field equations
>>encompassing (if one wishes)

>>E=hf with h= ergs (energy) x secs (time) dimensionally,
>>also
>>energy = charge(a) x charge(b) / (epsilon*distance (a,b))

>>and with proper variable constructs:
>>consistent with the Work Energy principle

>>A much more interesting and fruitful approach
>>than the 'modern' dimensionless G=1,c=1,h=1 approach
>>which by dimensional definition
>>will not lead to the theory of anything.

>Are their any 'typo's' in the above?
I don't think so.

Conventionally, the T_uv is symmetric, I noted (for example),
T24 and T42 above have differing dimensionality on the R.H.S.

>> one then can multiply through by factors of E,V,v,A,p,t
>> resulting in all kinds of interesting dimensional relationships
>> and all dimensionally consistent with Einsteins field equations
>> encompassing (if one wishes)

>I generally work with tensors, that 'should' encompass dimensionality,
>but one needs to be aware of 'tensor densities'.
This awareness can be extended dimensionally to all types of physical
properties.
>Regards
>Ken S. Tucker
>[snip agreeably]

I worked through some of the Tuv = (c^4/(8*pi*G)) dimensionality
which is presented inhttp://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9905007
pages 38 - 40. May 10, 2011

That's a very nice 'book' you have written.
(I'm on ole dial-up, but it was well worth the wait).
(On pg. 19, above Fig. 2.7.1 is a word "condiction", I don't know
that word (?)).

"G" is apparently a 'dimensionful constant' , I'd to rethink that,
it's been awhile.

The universal constants (c,h,k)
are dimensionally and numerically represented
describing the universe expanding at c in spherical form(R^3)
from the big bang
and increasing universe mass(M)
and decreasing gravity parameter(G)
with increasing universe age(1/H) (such that H/G = constant)
incorporating an internal expanding CPT cellular form of length dimension(B)
and decreasing universe dielectric with increasing universe age(1/H)
with B*universe dielectric = constant
and constant mass(mt) within each cell
and no net charge (e+ = e-)
consistent with a universe density(~H^2/G)
decreasing with universe age(1/H).
This concept would explain
~70% of the universe described as 'dark energy'
Richard D. Saam

Cosmology is another issue, your paper has many Big Bang
details and assumptions.
Cheers
Ken S. Tucker
.