Re: GRAVITATION
- From: srp <srp2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 18:44:10 GMT
Phineas T Puddleduck a écrit :
In article <449EBEFE.90805@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, srp
<srp2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Phineas T Puddleduck a écrit :In article <449E9060.2040505@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, srpI assume nothing at all.
<srp2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This means that if you want to use G in theFollowing this on logically, are you saying G is a function of scale?
hydrogen atom, you have to recalculate G with
values that are meaningful to the hydrogen atom,
and which are
r = Bohr radius = 5.291772083E-11 m
M = mass of the proton = 1.67262158E-27 kg
and from the frequency of the Bohr ground
state energy (f = 6.57968391E15 Hz) you can
calculate T
T = 1/frequency = 1.519829851E-16 s
If you recalculate G for the hydrogen atom,
you get
G = (4 pi^2 r^3)/(M T^2) = 1.514172983E29
This is the bit I can't agree with.
I just apply the logical parameters that G was defined from.
Ref Georges Gamow "GRAVITY"
From that definition, G turns out not to be a constant at all.
Or else, maybe you can put a finger for me on where the mathematical
sequence is not proper.
André Michaud
I'm just unhappy with that - as you've said, in this fashion G is not
constant. Thats the bit I am not happy with.
I do understand how difficult it is to re-question stuff that supports
models that we have come to find thoroughly consistant.
Why do I understand ?
Because faced with the out of focus lot of conflicting theories, and
the fact that there exists only one coherent physical reality, I
concluded that there was no way out except to hacksaw off all of my
certainties, and rebuild from the smallest set of verified data. The
hardest of all things to do.
My opinion was and still is that it's the price that must be paied
by any individual who wants to be part of the solution.
André Michaud
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: GRAVITATION
- From: Phineas T Puddleduck
- Re: GRAVITATION
- References:
- GRAVITATION
- From: киров
- Re: GRAVITATION
- From: kirov
- Re: GRAVITATION
- From: srp
- Re: GRAVITATION
- From: Phineas T Puddleduck
- Re: GRAVITATION
- From: srp
- Re: GRAVITATION
- From: Phineas T Puddleduck
- GRAVITATION
- Prev by Date: Re: LHC due for 2007 start
- Next by Date: Re: GRAVITATION
- Previous by thread: Re: GRAVITATION
- Next by thread: Re: GRAVITATION
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|