General > General Technical Chat
Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
<< < (27/47) > >>
aetherist:

--- Quote from: YurkshireLad on April 06, 2022, 09:45:29 pm ---
--- Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 06, 2022, 09:40:52 pm ---
--- Quote ---The inflow streamlines that i alluded to are streamlines of aether acceleration, not streamlines of velocity or speed.
--- End quote ---
How does acceleration towards a central point from every point on a sphere not increase something in the middle? It has to go somewhere, doesn'tduznt it? So there must presumably be streamlines of deceleration to match. Somewhere.

And... how can you have acceleration without a change in velocity or speed?
--- End quote ---
There's something underneath aether that makes it accelerate. I just invented it, it's called "Uther".

Sorry, I couldn't resist!
--- End quote ---
I reckon that a true Einsteinist would automatically say that spacetime makes the aether accelerate. And that spacetime is under over in & all around the aether.
Uther makes more sense that spacetime. Progress.
HuronKing:

--- Quote from: aetherist on April 06, 2022, 09:33:33 pm ---Is there anything specific in what Mueller & Lenard said that is wrong, re their criticisms of STR & GTR?
Me myself i don’t agree with every criticism in Mueller's book. He has hundreds.
Some criticisms are fatal to STR or GTR, some are important but not fatal. My above question refers to any fatal criticism.

--- End quote ---

Lenard's arguments were answered directly by Einstein (Lenard's arguments apparently amounting to "wahh! relativity is hard and my brain is too dumb to get it").
https://theconversation.com/when-science-gets-ugly-the-story-of-philipp-lenard-and-albert-einstein-43165

Anything else regarding Lenard on the subject of relativity is scientific jealousy at best and outright racism at worst:

Reactionaries and Einstein's Fame: “German Scientists for the Preservation of Pure Science,” Relativity, and the Bad Nauheim Meeting
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1111/1111.2194.pdf

Compiling a giant list of 'objections' and 'criticisms' of STR or GTR is as infantile and hackneyed as those giant lists of 'scientists who oppose climate science':
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/31000-scientists-say-no-convincing-evidence

And there are equally large lists of people who claim to have discovered free energy. No one is under any obligation to publish them if they lack basic competency in the theories they're criticizing.

The G.O. Muller list is definitely interesting from a historical point of view and as a nice compilation of active pseudoscientists or honest people who keep making basic mistakes about relativity.
TimFox:
"The acceleration of the aetherwind inside Earth will reach a max at some depth, & hence gravity will reach a max at that depth. Skoolkids of course all wrongly (today) think that gravity is a max at the surface (so did i)."

Isaac Newton showed that in the interior of a sphere (assuming that the mass density is only a function of the radius), the gravitational force at a point is that of the sphere whose radius equals that of the point. 
The gravitational forces due to the shell outside that radius cancels out.  Consult any textbook about that.
Now, to keep things simple, let us assume that the mass density within the earth is a constant W.
The gravitational force at a radius r inside the sphere is therefore:
     F = GMm/r2, where G is Newton's universal gravitational constant, m is the mass of the test object at that radius and M is the mass of the sphere inside that radius. 
That mass  M = WV, where W is the volume density and V = (4pi/3)r3 is the volume of the sphere inside the radius.
The "strength" or acceleration of gravity is g = F/m.
Therefore, as a function of radius inside the sphere, the acceleration of gravity is
     g = GM/r2 = (G/r2) x WV = (G/r2)x(4pi/3)GWr3 = (4pi/3)xGWxr,
which is directly proportional to r, the radius from the center of the sphere.
This is the physics class calculation:  a civil engineer can then introduce the dependence of the mass density W with radius r and get a slightly different answer, but it will still go to zero at the center.
hamster_nz:

--- Quote from: aetherist on April 06, 2022, 10:17:22 pm ---If the acceleration of the aetherwind decreases somewhere inside Earth, then there must be a deceleration of the aetherwind, in which case gravity at the bottom of a deep hole might be upwards not downwards. No.

--- End quote ---

With a deep enough hole I think you will find the force of gravity is multiplied by i^2 (i.e. acts in the other direction). If not, dig deeper.


--- Quote from: aetherist on April 06, 2022, 10:17:22 pm ---Aether is annihilated in matter, ie in Earth. Hence there is no need for a theoretical deceleration.

--- End quote ---
What is the special attribute of matter in the Earth, vs that of a steel box around some electronics, or epoxy potting compound, or rock around a mine shaft that allows it to annihilate the aether?
aetherist:

--- Quote from: TimFox on April 06, 2022, 11:02:20 pm ---"The acceleration of the aetherwind inside Earth will reach a max at some depth, & hence gravity will reach a max at that depth. Skoolkids of course all wrongly (today) think that gravity is a max at the surface (so did i)."

Isaac Newton showed that in the interior of a sphere (assuming that the mass density is only a function of the radius), the gravitational force at a point is that of the sphere whose radius equals that of the point. 
The gravitational forces due to the shell outside that radius cancels out.  Consult any textbook about that.
Now, to keep things simple, let us assume that the mass density within the earth is a constant W.
The gravitational force at a radius r inside the sphere is therefore:
     F = GMm/r2, where G is Newton's universal gravitational constant, m is the mass of the test object at that radius and M is the mass of the sphere inside that radius. 
That mass  M = WV, where W is the volume density and V = (4pi/3)r3 is the volume of the sphere inside the radius.
The "strength" or acceleration of gravity is g = F/m.
Therefore, as a function of radius inside the sphere, the acceleration of gravity is
     g = GM/r2 = (G/r2) x WV = (G/r2)x(4pi/3)GWr3 = (4pi/3)xGWxr,
which is directly proportional to r, the radius from the center of the sphere.
This is the physics class calculation:  a civil engineer can then introduce the dependence of the mass density W with radius r and get a slightly different answer, but it will still go to zero at the center.
--- End quote ---
Yes i am ok with all of that. Yes, the reason for the max g being at some depth is that the density is much greater in the say iron core. And yes the gravity is always zero near center.

BA.   However, all of that reminds me of the borehole anomaly. It has been found that the decrease of g with depth does not follow Newton.
G.   And, the measurement of Newton's big G indicates that big G is not a constant.
Me myself i am the only person around who has explained the BA catastrophe & the big G catastrophe. Perhaps my most brilliant discovery. I really must brush up on my Swedish.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod