Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #584548 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-04-30 07:16 +0200 |
| Last post | 2022-05-21 10:02 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 80 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-30 07:16 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-04-29 23:19 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 15:08 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 09:10 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 09:31 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 16:46 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 09:50 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 19:28 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-19 11:34 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Russell Eaton <deliveredonline@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 03:42 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Russell Eaton <deliveredonline@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 03:53 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-05-20 10:43 -0400
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 08:10 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 08:11 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 08:31 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-05-20 13:17 -0400
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 10:27 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-05-20 14:08 -0400
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 11:21 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-05-20 16:18 -0400
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 13:40 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 14:16 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 11:23 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-05-20 23:42 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 21:27 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-01 14:29 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-06-02 10:23 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-06-02 14:14 +0300
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-06-02 13:54 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 05:29 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-06-02 17:49 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 08:53 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-06-02 18:30 +0300
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-06-02 23:05 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 11:26 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 09:05 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 07:50 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-05-20 13:10 -0500
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-20 11:36 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-05-20 14:19 -0500
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-28 07:07 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-05-28 17:48 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 05:31 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Hannu Poropudas <haporopuda@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 01:21 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Hannu Poropudas <haporopuda@gmail.com> - 2022-06-07 01:19 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 19:11 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Jonas Tanaka <wrbh@ifzgqznn.zq> - 2022-05-01 20:55 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-04-30 22:37 +1000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-04-30 14:39 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 06:07 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 15:08 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 09:06 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 19:31 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-01 09:36 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 12:16 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 12:19 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 10:37 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 18:32 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-02 07:54 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 11:16 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2022-05-02 14:30 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-07 08:50 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-04-30 23:57 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 15:15 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 21:45 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-30 20:41 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 12:22 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 11:11 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Colin Ohba <owfs@gcftghsf.tk> - 2022-04-30 20:43 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-04-30 16:24 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 10:49 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 19:28 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 14:06 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 13:30 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 19:14 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-30 21:47 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Job Chikamatsu <fkpy@ekyzcfxq.wn> - 2022-05-01 09:56 +0000
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-19 07:40 +0200
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-19 02:09 -0700
Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the electrodynamics of moving bodies ' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-21 10:02 +0200
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 13:40 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <94792a41-f7a2-480e-9391-cb184dedf836n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585686 |
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 5:18:13 PM UTC-3, tjrob137 wrote: > On 5/20/22 2:21 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > The complex mathematical description of the motion of the Moon around > > Earth is, as of today, incredibly accurate. > > > > I don't see any problem incorporating such body of knowledge into a > > computer, which correctly may calculate the required transformations > > of Earth's UTC into the entire surface of the Moon, or at any CLOSE > > planet. > But if you used that as a "clock", none of the laws of physics in > textbooks would be correct -- because those laws all use local time > (i.e. based on nearby clocks using standard seconds). > > After all, as TIME IS WHAT YOUR CLOCK SHOWS > But your computer display IS NOT A CLOCK, it is a repeater of UTC. > > [There are many meanings of "clock", beware of puns.] > > If all you care about is accuracy at the level of 1 second or so, none > of this matters for durations less than a few years. But if you want to > measure atomic spectra, or any other time-based measurement at the part > per billion level, you need to understand what physicists mean by > "clock", and why the second is defined as it is. This includes accepting > that clocks at different gravitational potentials, or moving relative to > each other, will not remain in sync. > > Tom Roberts Thanks for your reply. Regarding measures of time duration lower than 1 second, even at femtoseconds range, I perfectly can imagine a layered structure of time: Global (at the Solar System): for coordinated time above 1 second mark, up to years (15 digits, if needed). Local (within the context of experiments at quantum level): Floating local time mark, down to the level of attoseconds, if you want. Your universal time for whatever needed would be a composite value: SOLAR_TIME::LOCAL_TIME. Of course, mechanisms to implement synchronization at 1 second level should be implemented in SOLAR_TIME clocks. Then, you can project UTC time within the boundaries of the Solar System, without disrupting the established body of knowledge. It's more a job for a body of standard committees than anything else. Like ISO, ITU, BIMP, etc., NORMALIZING this concept for every place. I'm sure that discrepancies between experiments that involve places at different celestial bodies can be accommodated for time durations as shown in both SOLAR_TIME::LOCAL_TIME marks (maybe introducing a third mediating layer between Solar and Local, that works as a buffer memory for excess in LOCAL_TIME). Such thing, used only in a scientific environment, would prevent the corruption of the concept of "time duration" for other activities. But, I'm afraid I'm going too far with my imagination. At any case, what I wrote is consistent and possible IMHO.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 14:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <6648edc8-4661-49f4-8575-627abbcadc2en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585686 |
On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 22:18:13 UTC+2, tjrob137 wrote: > On 5/20/22 2:21 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > The complex mathematical description of the motion of the Moon around > > Earth is, as of today, incredibly accurate. > > > > I don't see any problem incorporating such body of knowledge into a > > computer, which correctly may calculate the required transformations > > of Earth's UTC into the entire surface of the Moon, or at any CLOSE > > planet. > But if you used that as a "clock", none of the laws of physics in > textbooks would be correct Too bad for your moronic laws of physics. Well, of course you imagine we have to abandon the clocks we're using when they don't fit your precious little formulas... a mistake of yours. > (i.e. based on nearby clocks using standard seconds). Take your "clocks using standard second" and put them straight into your dumb, fanatic ass. They're useless and they're not going to be used. Common sense was warning your idiot guru.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 11:23 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <dbad2df5-4d8c-404e-a49b-7b301c82ef75n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585673 |
On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 20:08:19 UTC+2, tjrob137 wrote: > On 5/20/22 1:27 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 2:17:09 PM UTC-3, tjrob137 wrote: > >> On 5/20/22 11:31 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > >>> Not just one. There is TAI, GPS, UTC, zone times... though the > >>> differences ale slight, they are different. > > > >> And NONE of them are valid on the moon, not to mention Jupiter or > >> the Andromeda galaxy. So the claim "absolute" is just plain wrong. > >> > >> Tom Roberts > > > > Putting aside the stupidity of trying to mess with pico and > > femtoseconds to dictate TIME, and going back to SECONDS, I don't see > > any problem in the normalization of ABSOLUTE SOLAR SYSTEM TIME, > > giving the proper conversion formulae that make such concept to work > > in our neighborhood. > > > > After all, to develop a worldwide standard for time in the XIX > > century took 30 years of discussions, plus France disputing England. > > > > By 1911, the problem was settled (France surrendered). > > > > This normalization effort COULD be done at a Solar System level, even > > when I don't see the advantages of such endeavor. > > > > Better use Earth's UTC as a reference for everything. > It's easy to SAY that, but it's not so easy to DO that. Does an idiot physicist only consider easy things? > Ask yourself: how could I (you) construct a clock on the moon that > displays UTC? Smartly. > Be sure your clock will still display properly when all > radio links to earth are down, and your clock will work on the far side > of the moon (i.e. without any radio link to earth). And I need to be sure of that, because....?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 23:42 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <1ps9y8f.vzt5oy1aohlr1N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #585673 |
Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > On 5/20/22 1:27 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 2:17:09 PM UTC-3, tjrob137 wrote: > >> On 5/20/22 11:31 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > >>> Not just one. There is TAI, GPS, UTC, zone times... though the > >>> differences ale slight, they are different. > > > >> And NONE of them are valid on the moon, not to mention Jupiter or > >> the Andromeda galaxy. So the claim "absolute" is just plain wrong. > >> > >> Tom Roberts > > > > Putting aside the stupidity of trying to mess with pico and > > femtoseconds to dictate TIME, and going back to SECONDS, I don't see > > any problem in the normalization of ABSOLUTE SOLAR SYSTEM TIME, > > giving the proper conversion formulae that make such concept to work > > in our neighborhood. > > > > After all, to develop a worldwide standard for time in the XIX > > century took 30 years of discussions, plus France disputing England. > > > > By 1911, the problem was settled (France surrendered). > > > > This normalization effort COULD be done at a Solar System level, even > > when I don't see the advantages of such endeavor. > > > > Better use Earth's UTC as a reference for everything. > > It's easy to SAY that, but it's not so easy to DO that. > > Ask yourself: how could I (you) construct a clock on the moon that > displays UTC? Be sure your clock will still display properly when all > radio links to earth are down, and your clock will work on the far side > of the moon (i.e. without any radio link to earth). The fully relativistic time scale for the solar system that is used for calculating motions of planets, probes and so on is TCB. (temps coordinée barycentrique) or Barycentric Coordinate Time. [1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_Coordinate_Time> It is the time of a hypothetical clock that is comoving with the barycentre of the solar system, but 'infinitely far' removed from it. So in practice outside of the potential wells of the solar system. TCB runs about half a second per year faster than TAI. (yes, it really is a -huge- effect) In practice it is of course computed by applying appropriate corrections to TAI. Hypothetical atomic clocks in other places in the solar system can be related to each other or to clocks on Earth by using TCB as an intermediate. This is no different in principle than comparing atomic clocks at different locations on Earth using TAI. What is needed for the future, to increase the precision of solar system measurements, is flying an interplanetary mission with atomic clocks on board, preferably far out. Jan [1] TCB is the time component of the relativity-compliant barycentric celestial reference system (BCRS) <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_and_geocentric_celestial_reference_systems>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 21:27 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <88c5fe6d-89ed-4cc6-b275-07d9adebb574n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585690 |
On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 23:42:47 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Tom Roberts <tjrobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > On 5/20/22 1:27 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 2:17:09 PM UTC-3, tjrob137 wrote: > > >> On 5/20/22 11:31 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > >>> Not just one. There is TAI, GPS, UTC, zone times... though the > > >>> differences ale slight, they are different. > > > > > >> And NONE of them are valid on the moon, not to mention Jupiter or > > >> the Andromeda galaxy. So the claim "absolute" is just plain wrong. > > >> > > >> Tom Roberts > > > > > > Putting aside the stupidity of trying to mess with pico and > > > femtoseconds to dictate TIME, and going back to SECONDS, I don't see > > > any problem in the normalization of ABSOLUTE SOLAR SYSTEM TIME, > > > giving the proper conversion formulae that make such concept to work > > > in our neighborhood. > > > > > > After all, to develop a worldwide standard for time in the XIX > > > century took 30 years of discussions, plus France disputing England. > > > > > > By 1911, the problem was settled (France surrendered). > > > > > > This normalization effort COULD be done at a Solar System level, even > > > when I don't see the advantages of such endeavor. > > > > > > Better use Earth's UTC as a reference for everything. > > > > It's easy to SAY that, but it's not so easy to DO that. > > > > Ask yourself: how could I (you) construct a clock on the moon that > > displays UTC? Be sure your clock will still display properly when all > > radio links to earth are down, and your clock will work on the far side > > of the moon (i.e. without any radio link to earth). > The fully relativistic time scale for the solar system Relativistic time scale is not for the solar system. It is different for every fucking muon in the solar system. And you're a very, very, very impudent liar, as expected from a relativistic stinker.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-01 14:29 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <2af1c403-78f7-4f22-9722-91725b6480a0n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585690 |
On May 20, J. J. Lodder wrote: > The fully relativistic time scale for the solar system > that is used for calculating motions of planets, probes and so on > is TCB. (temps coordinée barycentrique) > or Barycentric Coordinate Time. [1] > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_Coordinate_Time> > It is the time of a hypothetical clock > that is comoving with the barycentre of the solar system, > but 'infinitely far' removed from it. How do they determine the barycenter? -- Rich
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 10:23 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <1psx31w.19n3bl51yxqxk7N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #586272 |
RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 20, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > The fully relativistic time scale for the solar system > > that is used for calculating motions of planets, probes and so on > > is TCB. (temps coordinée barycentrique) > > or Barycentric Coordinate Time. [1] > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_Coordinate_Time> > > It is the time of a hypothetical clock > > that is comoving with the barycentre of the solar system, > > but 'infinitely far' removed from it. > > How do they determine the barycenter? By calculation, from the known positions and masses of the sun and the planets. Here it is: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycenter#/media/File:Solar_system_barycenter.svg> Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 14:14 +0300 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <t7a61p$c9k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #586295 |
On 2022-06-02 08:23:52 +0000, J. J. Lodder said: > RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On May 20, J. J. Lodder wrote: >>> The fully relativistic time scale for the solar system >>> that is used for calculating motions of planets, probes and so on >>> is TCB. (temps coordinée barycentrique) >>> or Barycentric Coordinate Time. [1] >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_Coordinate_Time> >>> It is the time of a hypothetical clock >>> that is comoving with the barycentre of the solar system, >>> but 'infinitely far' removed from it. >> >> How do they determine the barycenter? > > By calculation, from the known positions and masses > of the sun and the planets. Here it is: > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycenter#/media/File:Solar_system_barycenter.svg> > > > Jan In average the barycentre of the Solar system is where Sun is. Temporary deviations can be determined from Doppler shifts in spectra of stars. Mikko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 13:54 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <1psxbub.mz6o1jvi3ddqN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #586299 |
Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote: > On 2022-06-02 08:23:52 +0000, J. J. Lodder said: > > > RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> On May 20, J. J. Lodder wrote: > >>> The fully relativistic time scale for the solar system > >>> that is used for calculating motions of planets, probes and so on > >>> is TCB. (temps coordinée barycentrique) > >>> or Barycentric Coordinate Time. [1] > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycentric_Coordinate_Time> > >>> It is the time of a hypothetical clock > >>> that is comoving with the barycentre of the solar system, > >>> but 'infinitely far' removed from it. > >> > >> How do they determine the barycenter? > > > > By calculation, from the known positions and masses > > of the sun and the planets. Here it is: > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycenter#/media/File:Solar_system_barycente r.svg> > > > > > > Jan > > In average the barycentre of the Solar system is where Sun is. This is wrong. It would be true iff all orbits in the Solar system were circular. But anyway, the average barycentre is useless, given that planetary orbits can nowadays be calculated and observed to far greater precision than the deviations of the barycentre. The real time orbit of the Sun around the barycentre needs to be calculated too. > Temporary deviations can be determined from Doppler shifts in > spectra of stars. Nonsense. Changing Doppler shifts in the spectra of stars can only give you the (instantaneous) velocity of the Earth, (and to a far too low accuracy too) Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 05:29 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <3878f962-b09a-4016-83ec-f3ab0e6bcb62n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #586301 |
On Thursday, 2 June 2022 at 13:54:49 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Nonsense. Changing Doppler shifts in the spectra of stars > can only give you the (instantaneous) velocity of the Earth, > (and to a far too low accuracy too) Haven't your idiot gurus taught you about the relativity of the motion? The Earth velocity is 0, according to all Earth observers (i.e. all of us) regardless of any Doppler shifts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 17:49 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <1psxh3t.dz41p716wthetN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #586304 |
Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday, 2 June 2022 at 13:54:49 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > Nonsense. Changing Doppler shifts in the spectra of stars > > can only give you the (instantaneous) velocity of the Earth, > > (and to a far too low accuracy too) > > Haven't your idiot gurus taught you about the relativity > of the motion? The Earth velocity is 0, according to all > Earth observers (i.e. all of us) regardless of any Doppler > shifts. Certainly, but then the collective velocity of the whole universe will be variable. It is all relative, you know, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 08:53 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <539da7cb-8643-4818-89f7-0030ab23e67an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #586312 |
On Thursday, 2 June 2022 at 17:49:08 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thursday, 2 June 2022 at 13:54:49 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > > Nonsense. Changing Doppler shifts in the spectra of stars > > > can only give you the (instantaneous) velocity of the Earth, > > > (and to a far too low accuracy too) > > > > Haven't your idiot gurus taught you about the relativity > > of the motion? The Earth velocity is 0, according to all > > Earth observers (i.e. all of us) regardless of any Doppler > > shifts. > Certainly, but then the collective velocity of the whole universe > will be variable. And that's exactly what we (observers from Earth) should observe according to your idiot gurus. Haven't you heard of their magnificient gedankens with trains and cars and boats and barns?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 18:30 +0300 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <t7al1p$5oi$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #586301 |
On 2022-06-02 11:54:46 +0000, J. J. Lodder said: > Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote: > >> Temporary deviations can be determined from Doppler shifts in >> spectra of stars. > > Nonsense. Changing Doppler shifts in the spectra of stars > can only give you the (instantaneous) velocity of the Earth, > (and to a far too low accuracy too) with respect to the babrycentre, which is sufficent to determine the velcity of the barycentre wrt Earth. As relative velcities in Solar System are known, that is sufficient to determine the velocity of the barycentre wrt any object, e.g. Sun. Mikko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 23:05 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <1psxo6w.tfufx3449wb6N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #586310 |
Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote: > On 2022-06-02 11:54:46 +0000, J. J. Lodder said: > > > Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote: > > > >> Temporary deviations can be determined from Doppler shifts in > >> spectra of stars. > > > > Nonsense. Changing Doppler shifts in the spectra of stars > > can only give you the (instantaneous) velocity of the Earth, > > (and to a far too low accuracy too) > > with respect to the babrycentre, which is sufficent to determine > the velcity of the barycentre wrt Earth. > As relative velcities in Solar System are known, that is sufficient > to determine the velocity of the barycentre wrt any object, > e.g. Sun. You really need to rethink this, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 11:26 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <a9e08b75-797b-4b13-ab48-60ecd2b190d7n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585670 |
On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 19:17:09 UTC+2, tjrob137 wrote: > On 5/20/22 11:31 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 17:11:24 UTC+2, seto...@gmail.com wrote: > >> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:43:59 AM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: > >>> On 5/20/22 6:53 AM, Russell Eaton wrote: > >>>> Time does not exist. [...] > >>> Of course not! Time is part of the MODEL, not the world. Models, of > >>> course, are how we humans understand and learn about the world we inhabit. > >> Absolute time exists. > > > > Not just one. There is TAI, GPS, UTC, zone times... > > though the differences ale slight, they are different. > And NONE of them are valid on the moon, not to mention Jupiter or the > Andromeda galaxy. So the claim "absolute" is just plain wrong. They're valid wherever human observers are involved, sorry.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 09:05 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <6600f375-399d-4366-a9b4-3b21a38eda3an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585666 |
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 12:11:24 PM UTC-3, seto...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:43:59 AM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: > > On 5/20/22 6:53 AM, Russell Eaton wrote: > > > Time does not exist. [...] > > > > Of course not! Time is part of the MODEL, not the world. Models, of > > course, are how we humans understand and learn about the world we inhabit. > Absolute time exists. The GPS uses absolute time to synch the GPS clock with the ground clock. > This is achieved by adding 4.1617 transitions of Cs 133 radiation to the GPS second as follows: > A ground clock second is defined by 9,192,631,770 transitions (periods) of the Cs 133 atom > A GPS second is defined by 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions (periods) of the Cs 133 atom. > The passage of 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions on the GPS clock represents the same amount of absolute time as the passage of 9,192,631,770 periods on the ground clock.This makes the GPS in synch with the ground clock in terms of absolute time. To satisfy the needs of the imbecile relativists, you have to add the 3D coordinates of the location of the atomic clock, referred to the point-like center of the Solar System, up to picometers accuracy. Then, you have to provide the transform of such coordinates with respect to the point-like reference within the black hole at the center of our galaxy. Then, you have to provide the transform of such coordinates with respect to the point-like reference at the 3D coordinates of mass center of the galaxy cluster that contains the Milky Way. Then, ....... Oh, my! It never ends. It's impossible to satisfy relativists. Better CANCEL ALL OF THEM.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 07:50 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <d8a41e0f-4f84-4367-9a51-aed7b8d311c6n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585654 |
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 7:53:17 AM UTC-3, deliver...@gmail.com wrote: > Time does not exist. The word "time" is a human shorthand for saying "the measurement of movement from A to B". There is no absolute "time" phenomenon that is out there somewhere waiting to be understood. . For example, we humans have decided to refer to a twenty-fourth movement of the earth's rotation as one hour. Hence, Einsteins spacetime does not exist. Gravity is not caused by a curvature of spacetime, it is caused by the expansion of the universe. As things move away from each other due to expansion, this movement away from each other causes inertia in all directions, and the inertia causes gravity. Don't over-complicate things. > Russell Eaton > On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 13:34:46 UTC-5, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 1:31:21 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 12:08:35 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > <snip> > > > > Time is based on ANY periodic process that is shown to have high stability > > > > and can be measured to good precision. > > > No, Supreme Thinker. > > > > > > Time is not based on anything that the IKEA man can conceive. > > > > > > What TIME means is still unknown, undeciphered by us, mere mortals. > > > > > > We assigned the name of TIME to the FLOW of occurrences that we may register, directly or by indirect means. > > > > > > Think about THIS: IF everything around you, including yourself (your body, not your mind) STANDS STILL, can you say > > > that time is FLOWING? Really? Or your mind into your quiet body THINK that time ceased to flow? > > > > > > Got it? > > > > > > The imbecile should have said: "Time DURATION is what my clock shows". > > > > > > And from that particular definition about measuring TIME DURATION (arbitrary, as any other means) he should have > > > derived his fucking relativity. > > > > > > I laugh thinking about the cretin trying to get Lorentz Transforms of TIME DURATION! > > > > > > One thing is to define a spatial event as either x or x'. > > > A very different thing is the heresy of define TIME as t or t' or whatever. He was a fucking SOPHIST, playing with pseudo-science > > > and metaphysics. > > > > > > And he and his heirs succeeded for 117 years to CONVINCE lesser minds (you?) about the 1905 shit. > > > > Note to the fucking polish parrot, Jan Piotr: > > > > 1) Bodkin already gave up, after years trying to understand 1905 relativity and failing miserably. It's also time that you retire, > > before your brain melt due to the struggle of your COGNITIVE DISSONANCES. You have already taken a toll due to your sterile > > fight against LOGIC and REASON, and you're next to become a drooling idiot. > > > > When the cretin wrote his 1905 paper, 100% based on the PLAGIARISM of Lorentz's 1904 paper, he saw a window to develop > > his metaphysical CRAP about time, which Lorentz CLEARLY dismissed as an auxiliary derivation of his length contraction pursuit. > > > > This shitty concepts about time, clocks, sync and relativity of time and lengths occupy 50% of his fucking paper, and is what is > > called SR or SRT today. > > > > The second half, about the electrodynamics around electrons (charged particles) IS OBSOLETE, and has been abandoned even > > at particle physics accelerators cult. > > > > He, as YOU today, didn't have a fucking clue of WHAT an electron was. He plagiarized 1 to 1 Lorentz' s paper, changing names. > > > > 2) For ALL CONCEPTS, as of today, Einstein's SR or SRT is only what Lorentz Transforms try to formulate, and fail. > > For one century, not a single proof exists that proves that length contraction HAS A REAL PHYSICS EXISTENCE. And due to this, > > the second equation involving TIME has not a physical OR mathematical meaning, because it was CO-DERIVED along lengths, > > in the same development. So, everything around SR is FALSE, is metaphysics, is pseudo-science, and has to be CANCELLED! > > > > 3) For more than 90 years, things that the cretin asserted in the second half of his fucking 1905 paper, have been proven WRONG, > > either theoretically or experimentally. The last bastion (mass increase) was debunked by first rank physicists (like Okun), in a > > decades long battle with retarded imbeciles, which you mirror hopelessly. > > > > 4) Time to pack and retire, Jan Piotr. You wasted your scientific lifetime for nothing. You should have kept programming PLC. > > Now, please everyone, and join Bodkin in the retirement house. You forgot one thing that exist from the lowest amount of volume (inside atoms) to the higher amount of volume (universe), and has a simple name: ROTATION Everything ROTATES in the entire 3D space, from within atoms to galaxy clusters. The universe itself ROTATES. Gravity is a not understood consequences of COSMIC ROTATION. This poorly understood concept, along with electrical charges, creates our reality at any level of perception, but it's barely studied.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 13:10 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <jeq3tgFo0gU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #585663 |
On 5/20/2022 9:50 AM, Richard Hertz wrote: <snip> > The universe itself ROTATES. What are you comparing the universe to. What is your test to make this determination? > Gravity is a not understood consequences of COSMIC ROTATION. Gotta blame gravity on something, but a statement without any demonstrable basis leaves us nowhere. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be able to agree with you, but it needs something more to make it fit the body of knowledge we already accept, in short, the stuff that actually works. > This poorly understood concept, along with > electrical charges, creates our reality at any level of perception, > but it's barely studied. Its hard to tell how much it is studied but that only means that not very much is being published. The amount that's being published correlates to the amount of success that has been achieved, which clearly is little to none. Have you ever considered the possibility that there are things that are beyond the ability of humans to understand? I'm not suggesting that's so, but we're sure having one hell of a time with several features of nature that are critical to better understanding what's what, and this is a possibility.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 11:36 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <ef7daac3-b2e0-4991-8f0e-b0cd0948e40an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585674 |
On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 3:11:00 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: > On 5/20/2022 9:50 AM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > <snip> > > > The universe itself ROTATES. > > What are you comparing the universe to. What is your test to make this > determination? > > Gravity is a not understood consequences of COSMIC ROTATION. > Gotta blame gravity on something, but a statement without any > demonstrable basis leaves us nowhere. Don't get me wrong, I'd love > to be able to agree with you, but it needs something more to make > it fit the body of knowledge we already accept, in short, the stuff > that actually works. > > This poorly understood concept, along with > > electrical charges, creates our reality at any level of perception, > > but it's barely studied. > Its hard to tell how much it is studied but that only means that > not very much is being published. The amount that's being published > correlates to the amount of success that has been achieved, which > clearly is little to none. > > Have you ever considered the possibility that there are things that > are beyond the ability of humans to understand? I'm not suggesting > that's so, but we're sure having one hell of a time with several > features of nature that are critical to better understanding what's > what, and this is a possibility. Every single book on astronomy, astrophysics or cosmology that I've read present evidence of universal rotation as a NATURAL BEHAVIOR, as observed everywhere and for millennials. I have this book open in one tab at my computer for more than 10 days, and I reading carefully its content (more than 800 pages): GALAXY FORMATION AND EVOLUTION HOUJUN MO University of Massachusetts FRANK VAN DEN BOSCH Yale University SIMON WHITE Max Planch Institute for Astrophysics HOUJUN MO is Professor of Astrophysics at the University of Massachusetts. He is known for his work on the formation and clustering of galaxies and their dark matter halos. FRANK VAN DEN BOSCH is Assistant Professor at Yale University, and is known for his studies of the formation, dynamics, and clustering of galaxies. SIMON WHITE is Director at the Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics in Garching. He is one of the originators of the modern theory of galaxy formation and has received numerous international prizes and honors. Jointly and separately the authors have published almost 500 papers in the refereed professional literature, most of them on topics related to the subject of this book. This is part of Chapter 8 (rotation everywhere) 8 Formation and Evolution of Gaseous Halos 366 8.1 Basic Fluid Dynamics and Radiative Processes 366 8.1.1 Basic Equations 366 8.1.2 Compton Cooling 367 8.1.3 Radiative Cooling 367 8.1.4 Photoionization Heating 369 8.2 Hydrostatic Equilibrium 371 8.2.1 Gas Density Profile 371 8.2.2 Convective Instability 373 8.2.3 Virial Theorem Applied to a Gaseous Halo 374 8.3 The Formation of Hot Gaseous Halos 376 8.3.1 Accretion Shocks 376 8.3.2 Self-Similar Collapse of Collisional Gas 379 8.3.3 The Impact of a Collisionless Component 383 8.3.4 More General Models of Spherical Collapse 384 8.4 Radiative Cooling in Gaseous Halos 385 8.4.1 Radiative Cooling Time Scales for Uniform Clouds 385 8.4.2 Evolution of the Cooling Radius 387 8.4.3 Self-Similar Cooling Waves 388 8.4.4 Spherical Collapse with Cooling 390 8.5 Thermal and Hydrodynamical Instabilities of Cooling Gas 393 8.5.1 Thermal Instability 393 8.5.2 Hydrodynamical Instabilities 396 8.5.3 Heat Conduction 397 8.6 Evolution of Gaseous Halos with Energy Sources 398 8.6.1 Blast Waves 399 8.6.2 Winds and Wind-Driven Bubbles 404 8.6.3 Supernova Feedback and Galaxy Formation 406 8.7 Results from Numerical Simulations 408 8.7.1 Three-Dimensional Collapse without Radiative Cooling 408 8.7.2 Three-Dimensional Collapse with Radiative This is part of Chapter 9 (rotation is everywhere) 9 Star Formation in Galaxies 417 9.1 Giant Molecular Clouds: The Sites of Star Formation 418 9.1.1 Observed Properties 418 9.1.2 Dynamical State 419 9.2 The Formation of Giant Molecular Clouds 421 9.2.1 The Formation of Molecular Hydrogen 421 9.2.2 Cloud Formation 422 9.3 What Controls the Star-Formation Efficiency 425 9.3.1 Magnetic Fields 425 9.3.2 Supersonic Turbulence 426 9.3.3 Self-Regulation 428 9.4 The Formation of Individual Stars 429 9.4.1 The Formation of Low-Mass Stars 429 9.4.2 The Formation of Massive Stars 432 9.5 Empirical Star-Formation Laws 433 9.5.1 The Kennicutt–Schmidt Law 434 9.5.2 Local Star-Formation Laws 436 9.5.3 Star-Formation Thresholds 438 9.6 The Initial Mass Function 440 9.6.1 Observational Constraints 441 9.6.2 Theoretical Models 443 9.7 The Formation of Population III Stars **************************** I INVITE YOU TO BUY IT AND READ IT. It's material for post-graduate courses on the subject, with lot of math supporting assertions. Of course, THEIR ASSERTIONS. I choose what I do accept or not. I don't borrow knowledge. I borrow know-how, which is far more difficult to absorb. I'm not like Bodkin, the McGraw-Hill parrot. I think critically by myself, with the help of multiple sources of info. When I'm bored with that, I come here to write something (not too serious, of course. This is not the place for that.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-20 14:19 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' |
| Message-ID | <jeq7ujF1fruU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #585678 |
On 5/20/2022 1:36 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 3:11:00 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: >> On 5/20/2022 9:50 AM, Richard Hertz wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>> The universe itself ROTATES. >> >> What are you comparing the universe to. What is your test to make this >> determination? <snip> > Every single book on astronomy, astrophysics or cosmology that I've read present evidence of universal rotation as > a NATURAL BEHAVIOR, as observed everywhere and for millennials. <snip> I get your point but you didn't answer my question. It doesn't matter what all the books say, as far as I know none of them has a test for determining whether the entire universe is rotating. It probably is, but a test to assure us of that is still wanting.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web