Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #398980 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-11-19 15:14 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-11-24 21:37 -0800 |
| Articles | 17 on this page of 97 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-19 15:14 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-11-19 23:48 +0000
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-19 19:35 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-11-20 14:57 +0000
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-20 16:10 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-20 17:27 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 22:06 +0100
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-20 16:15 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 15:19 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-20 16:18 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-20 21:22 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-20 23:47 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-21 05:22 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-21 16:26 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-21 17:28 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-21 23:04 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-22 05:05 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-22 16:14 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-22 17:42 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-11-22 17:53 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-22 19:17 -0800
Cretin Peter Riedt hard at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-22 19:31 -0800
Re: Cretin Peter Riedt hard at work "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-11-22 21:28 -0800
Re: Cretin Peter Riedt hard at work Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-22 22:44 -0800
Re: Cretin Peter Riedt hard at work Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-23 04:24 -0800
Re: Cretin Peter Riedt hard at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-23 06:26 -0800
Re: Cretin Peter Riedt hard at work Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-23 09:40 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-23 04:21 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-23 09:30 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-23 16:24 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-23 17:23 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-23 18:40 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-23 19:04 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-23 19:35 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-24 07:06 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-23 19:12 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-23 19:32 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-23 20:19 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-24 01:47 -0800
Cretin Peter Riedt perseveres "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-24 07:08 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-24 08:42 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-26 10:10 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-26 14:29 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-26 14:35 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-26 14:49 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 08:23 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g xxein1@att.net - 2016-11-24 07:20 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-24 18:05 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-11-24 21:03 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-24 19:46 -0800
Pathetic crank Peter Riedt perseveres in his imbecility "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-24 20:00 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-11-24 20:15 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-11-24 23:27 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-25 03:12 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-25 03:19 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-25 06:36 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-25 07:08 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-25 18:30 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-26 10:26 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-11-26 08:47 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-26 14:33 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-11-24 19:18 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-26 10:08 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-27 01:55 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-27 04:04 -0800
Peter Riedt discloses his new cretinisms "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-27 05:39 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 08:24 -0600
Cretin Peter Riedt hard at work embarrassing himself "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-23 17:36 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-26 10:06 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-26 14:27 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-21 17:38 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-21 22:57 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 07:43 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Maryann Tonn <libradaz@libradazert.info> - 2016-11-22 14:03 +0000
Re: The relationship G and g Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 08:57 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Dusty Kollman <uberdriver@uberdriver.info> - 2016-11-22 17:23 +0000
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-22 16:07 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-23 09:28 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-23 16:29 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 07:09 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-22 19:30 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-23 09:33 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-23 07:48 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-23 10:25 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-23 08:47 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 08:08 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 08:02 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g patdolan@comcast.net - 2016-11-19 15:55 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-11-19 16:07 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-11-19 17:07 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-11-19 16:55 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 15:17 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-20 16:16 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 08:01 -0600
Re: The relationship G and g "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-11-21 06:04 -0800
Re: The relationship G and g Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-11-25 15:19 +1100
Re: The relationship G and g "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-11-24 21:37 -0800
Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]
| From | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-22 19:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6680401b-400e-40f7-ab36-fd58b4ac89c1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #399286 |
On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 9:08:58 PM UTC+8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 11/21/2016 6:26 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > > According to your definitions, the formula you quoted is useless gibberish and > > does not provide a formula to equate G with g. It is symptomatic of GR unable > > to answer simple questions of gravity. > > Peter, I think you should at this point abandon trying to learn things > on usenet and instead read a book. You have a bad habit of calling > things gibberish if you don't understand them. This is why sitting down > with a book that explains each step in detail, each new term in more > familiar language, is a better approach. > > > -- > Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables I know things that your textbooks do not.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-23 09:33 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o14csa$e7d$6@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #399435 |
On 11/22/2016 9:30 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 9:08:58 PM UTC+8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 11/21/2016 6:26 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: >>> According to your definitions, the formula you quoted is useless gibberish and >>> does not provide a formula to equate G with g. It is symptomatic of GR unable >>> to answer simple questions of gravity. >> >> Peter, I think you should at this point abandon trying to learn things >> on usenet and instead read a book. You have a bad habit of calling >> things gibberish if you don't understand them. This is why sitting down >> with a book that explains each step in detail, each new term in more >> familiar language, is a better approach. >> >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > I know things that your textbooks do not. > The problem is not so much what you don't know. It's what you think you know that aren't so. You still haven't answered a direct question I put to you. What is your problem with reading books? Why do you avoid them? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-23 07:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <02c53133-cb82-4a48-aef1-1d4aa6dbb644@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #399472 |
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 7:33:33 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > You still haven't answered a direct question I put to you. What is your > problem with reading books? Why do you avoid them? > The idiot is not interested in learning, the idiot ALREADY KNOWS that "relativity is wrong".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-23 10:25 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o14ftf$ldh$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #399476 |
On 11/23/2016 9:48 AM, Dono, wrote: > On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 7:33:33 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> >> You still haven't answered a direct question I put to you. What is your >> problem with reading books? Why do you avoid them? >> > The idiot is not interested in learning, the idiot ALREADY KNOWS that "relativity is wrong". > Well, no, he doesn't know that. He wants to believe it's wrong. But that's actually only a means to an end. The end he wants is to do something positive in physics, a subject he is infatuated with but poorly equipped to do. Some people have been told they are stupid or slow their whole lives, and then at some point something snaps and they suddenly tell themselves that they are not really stupid and slow but in fact very bright and unappreciated. These are the people who now have to find excuses not to read books (something that is very hard for them to do), and who attempt to sidestep skill-building to just try to "think things through" using their bright and unappreciated brains. Unfortunately, people like this only end up frustrating themselves. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-23 08:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <28fb93a3-0909-4b43-aa6e-504903c9cae1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #399479 |
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 8:25:22 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > Some people have been told they are stupid or slow their whole lives, > and then at some point something snaps and they suddenly tell themselves > that they are not really stupid and slow but in fact very bright and > unappreciated. yep, this is a perfect characterization of the autistic imbeciles : Ken Shito, Pat Dolan, Peter Riedt, Ralph Babbage, Jan Pantelje, Pentcho Valev, etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-21 08:08 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o0uv50$1s7r$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #399126 |
On 11/21/2016 1:47 AM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 1:23:00 PM UTC+8, Gary Harnagel wrote: > >> >> c^2*d^2x/ds^2 = Del[(GM/R)(1 + v∙R/cR) + terms involving acceleration. >> > Thank you. Please define > c = > d = > x = > ds = > Del = > R = > v = > terms involving acceleration = > > Peter, he gave you a book reference. He also told you where specifically to look in the book reference. In other words, he has given you a treasure map in response to your request for treasure. I don't believe he is obligated to replicate the book for you online. Is there a reason you are unable to go find the book in a bookstore and to sit and flip through it, looking for your answers? Are you really that incapacitated or that lazy? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-21 08:02 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o0uupk$1s7r$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #399083 |
On 11/20/2016 6:18 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 5:19:21 AM UTC+8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 11/19/2016 9:35 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: >>> On Sunday, November 20, 2016 at 7:48:18 AM UTC+8, Michael Moroney wrote: >>>> Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> writes: >>>> >>>>> The relationship G and g >>>> >>>>> Can GR explain the relationship of G to g? Relationship or causes, not >>>>> definition! >>>> >>>> Ordinary physics can. Little 'g' is defined by big 'G', the mass of the >>>> earth and the radius of the earth. >>> >>> Correct. Newton can, GR cannot. >>> >> >> Not true. GR can. To find out how, I can suggest several good books on GR. >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > You always can but you do not know yourself. > I have read the books, Peter. If you would do the same, then you would know what I know. Does that not make sense? Why do you think it's better for me to try to explain what I've read, rather than you reading it yourself? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan@comcast.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-19 15:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f4e959e6-95bd-4f26-8ab2-04f678e4edd4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #398980 |
On Saturday, November 19, 2016 at 3:14:53 PM UTC-8, Peter Riedt wrote: > The relationship G and g > > Can GR explain the relationship of G to g? Relationship or causes, not definition! Is G a constant in general relativity? Or does it's value vary depending on frame of reference? Is there any theory where G is not constant?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-19 16:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c5f641c0-3364-403b-bf9e-0516282e7acf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #398985 |
Is G a constant in general relativity? Or does it's value vary depending on frame of reference? Is there any theory where G is not constant? G is the Slope or rate of change in the procession of seconds caused by mass. This skewed passage of time between two different spatial locations causes physical movement of mass towards each other to maintain a static total Kinetic Energy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-19 17:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <71f060f6-f2ed-4d03-9a12-2ce814862e31@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #398985 |
On Saturday, November 19, 2016 at 1:55:39 PM UTC-10, patd...@comcast.net wrote: > On Saturday, November 19, 2016 at 3:14:53 PM UTC-8, Peter Riedt wrote: > > The relationship G and g > > > > Can GR explain the relationship of G to g? Relationship or causes, not definition! > > Is G a constant in general relativity? Yes >Or does it's value vary depending on frame of reference? No. > > Is there any theory where G is not constant? Yes. My "thick time" theory, where fusion changes to stronger gravity G and weaker Coulomb force.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-19 16:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <d5dd553e-94eb-4e77-a227-42a584c2c2cb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #398980 |
On Saturday, November 19, 2016 at 1:14:53 PM UTC-10, Peter Riedt wrote: > The relationship G and g > > Can GR explain the relationship of G to g? Relationship or causes, not definition! No, not GR. The cause of gravity is in G for Gen Rel. If baryons cause gravity then I say: G = Volume of proton / (2 pi m * 5*10^-9 second^2) where m is proton mass G is a translation factor into "mass oriented force" calculations. Mass is not a cause, mass is affected by gravity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-20 15:17 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o0t3tl$177u$12@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #398980 |
On 11/19/2016 5:14 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > The relationship G and g > > Can GR explain the relationship of G to g? Relationship or causes, not definition! > Yes. As you may know, g is derivable from other measured numbers. g, as you will also surely know, varies with gravitating body and distance from the body, while G does not. That's because g is dependent on some of those variables. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-20 16:16 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <cfefb5ed-a6fe-49c2-a47b-2b5e511d05a1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #399057 |
On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 5:17:45 AM UTC+8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 11/19/2016 5:14 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > > The relationship G and g > > > > Can GR explain the relationship of G to g? Relationship or causes, not definition! > > > > Yes. > > As you may know, g is derivable from other measured numbers. > > g, as you will also surely know, varies with gravitating body and > distance from the body, while G does not. That's because g is dependent > on some of those variables. > Correct but it doesn't answer the question.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-21 08:01 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o0uunu$1s7r$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #399082 |
On 11/20/2016 6:16 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 5:17:45 AM UTC+8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 11/19/2016 5:14 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: >>> The relationship G and g >>> >>> Can GR explain the relationship of G to g? Relationship or causes, not definition! >>> >> >> Yes. >> >> As you may know, g is derivable from other measured numbers. >> >> g, as you will also surely know, varies with gravitating body and >> distance from the body, while G does not. That's because g is dependent >> on some of those variables. >> > Correct but it doesn't answer the question. > If you want to know about general relativity and how it derives things, don't you think it would be a better approach to pick up a book on the subject and read it, rather that insisting that GR has no such explanation and inviting people to prove you wrong? What's your problem, exactly, with reading a book? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-21 06:04 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9ca3ccdd-c025-425a-9d1d-db0b55f95ad2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #399161 |
On Monday, November 21, 2016 at 6:01:37 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > What's your problem, exactly, with reading a book? > His problem is called "mental illness". Incurable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-25 15:19 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <e9psf2F5926U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #398980 |
On 20/11/2016 10:14 AM, Peter Riedt wrote: > The relationship G and g > > Can GR explain the relationship of G to g? Relationship or causes, not definition! > Theories do not explain. They describe. GR does the describing very well. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-24 21:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <66e30acd-4618-4b3d-ae27-1adf3580b224@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #399661 |
http://planckmomentum.com/black-hole-electron/black-hole-electron-dimensions.html 6.670253275813383e-11 / gravitational constant = 0.999426629 c / (1 + (((1 / 0.999426629) - 1) / 50)) = 299789018 m / s 137.0359997 * 1.00015289392 = 137.056951671 http://oi63.tinypic.com/k1x4r9.jpg
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web