![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: antigravity, classical, electrodynamics, mond, predictions |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
The following paper derives classical electrodynamics from first
principles and, amongst other things, predicts the presence of modified Newtonian dynamics assuming only that the physical vacuum is a relativistic continuum in motion: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0607102 - Sabbir. |
| Ads |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
"LEJ Brouwer" wrote in message
ups.com... The following paper derives classical electrodynamics from first principles and, amongst other things, predicts the presence of modified Newtonian dynamics assuming only that the physical vacuum is a relativistic continuum in motion: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0607102 You are still on that neutrino kick? DOA. It is virtual and "less than virtual" fermionic pairs not neutrinos. FrediFizzx Quantum Vacuum Charge papers; http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/qu...uum_charge.pdf or postscript http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/qu...cuum_charge.ps http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0601110 http://www.vacuum-physics.com |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
FrediFizzx wrote: "LEJ Brouwer" wrote in message ups.com... The following paper derives classical electrodynamics from first principles and, amongst other things, predicts the presence of modified Newtonian dynamics assuming only that the physical vacuum is a relativistic continuum in motion: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0607102 You are still on that neutrino kick? What do you mean by 'neutrino kick'? DOA. It is virtual and "less than virtual" fermionic pairs not neutrinos. Sorry, I don't follow you. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"LEJ Brouwer" wrote in message
ups.com... The following paper derives classical electrodynamics from first principles and, amongst other things, predicts the presence of modified Newtonian dynamics assuming only that the physical vacuum is a relativistic continuum in motion: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0607102 Your equation 53 is not correct. When (r0 = 0) and (n =2), the spacetime yields ds^2 = c^2 (1 - Q / sqrt(r^2 + Q^2)) dt^2 - ... Not as what you have derived of ds^2 = c^2 dt^2 / (1 + Q / r) - ... Where ** Q = 2 G M / c^2 Hilbert's solution still remains to be the simplest. On top of that, I don't understand why you and Dr. Crothers never go beyond what you have discovered by generalizing the solution to the field equations. Following the same logical logic as provided by Dr. Crothers, Hilbert derived the current accepted solution known as the Schwarzschild metric. In this case, we have ds^2 = c^2 (1 - 2 U) dt^2 - dr^2 / (1 - 2 U) - r^2 ... Where ** U = 2 G M / c^2 / r As Dr. Crothers has pointed out, it becomes very trivial to extend the general solution to the following. ds^2 = c^2 (1 - 2 W) dt^2 - dR^2 / (1 - 2 W) - R^2 ... Where ** W = 2 G M / c^2 / R ** R = f(r), not necessarily the following as Dr. Crothers had pointed out ** ((r - r0)^n + (2 G M / c^2^n)^(1 / n) So, we have dR = (df/dr) dr The above equation describing a segment of spacetime as a function of R becomes ds^2 = c^2 (1 - 2 W) dt^2 - (df/dr)^2 dr^2 / (1 - 2 W) - f^2 ... The equation describing the same segment of spacetime becomes ever more complicated. In fact, it is too complicated and too general and very capable of predicting just about anything. When a theory is able to predict anything, it becomes totally useless, stupid, and utterly nonsense. As you and Dr. Roberts and Dr. Carlip have been arguing the mathematical result of this solution to the field equations, something as significant as black holes can exist or not by a vote of which solution to accept. The analogy is similar to Brothers Grimm's fairy tales of dwarves, goblins, and other fantasy creatures created by the minds of very insignificant but overly creative Man. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Koobee Wublee wrote: "LEJ Brouwer" wrote in message ups.com... The following paper derives classical electrodynamics from first principles and, amongst other things, predicts the presence of modified Newtonian dynamics assuming only that the physical vacuum is a relativistic continuum in motion: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0607102 Your equation 53 is not correct. When (r0 = 0) and (n =2), the spacetime yields ds^2 = c^2 (1 - Q / sqrt(r^2 + Q^2)) dt^2 - ... Not as what you have derived of ds^2 = c^2 dt^2 / (1 + Q / r) - ... You are quite right. Thanks for pointing out the error. Where ** Q = 2 G M / c^2 Hilbert's solution still remains to be the simplest. On top of that, I don't understand why you and Dr. Crothers never go beyond what you have discovered by generalizing the solution to the field equations. Following the same logical logic as provided by Dr. Crothers, Hilbert derived the current accepted solution known as the Schwarzschild metric. In this case, we have ds^2 = c^2 (1 - 2 U) dt^2 - dr^2 / (1 - 2 U) - r^2 ... Where ** U = 2 G M / c^2 / r As Dr. Crothers has pointed out, it becomes very trivial to extend the general solution to the following. ds^2 = c^2 (1 - 2 W) dt^2 - dR^2 / (1 - 2 W) - R^2 ... Where ** W = 2 G M / c^2 / R ** R = f(r), not necessarily the following as Dr. Crothers had pointed out ** ((r - r0)^n + (2 G M / c^2^n)^(1 / n) So, we have dR = (df/dr) dr The above equation describing a segment of spacetime as a function of R becomes ds^2 = c^2 (1 - 2 W) dt^2 - (df/dr)^2 dr^2 / (1 - 2 W) - f^2 ... The equation describing the same segment of spacetime becomes ever more complicated. In fact, it is too complicated and too general and very capable of predicting just about anything. When a theory is able to predict anything, it becomes totally useless, stupid, and utterly nonsense. As you and Dr. Roberts and Dr. Carlip have been arguing the mathematical result of this solution to the field equations, something as significant as black holes can exist or not by a vote of which solution to accept. The analogy is similar to Brothers Grimm's fairy tales of dwarves, goblins, and other fantasy creatures created by the minds of very insignificant but overly creative Man. Thanks, - Sabbir. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Dark matter ? MOND ? or Something else ? | clintuk@email.com | Physics - General Discussion | 4 | July 14th 06 05:01 AM |
| Re : Classical Electrodynamics paper; quarks and monopoles | whopkins@csd.uwm.edu | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 2 | March 15th 05 07:17 PM |
| Classical Electrodynamics paper; quarks and monopoles | Jay R. Yablon | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 2 | March 9th 05 09:04 AM |
| dark matter and MOND explained | alistair | The Theory of Relativity | 6 | May 8th 04 12:53 AM |
| Types of scattering in classical electrodynamics | Martin Lohmann | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 0 | October 8th 03 08:24 AM |