Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #610594 > unrolled thread

Calculating G

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-28 06:13 -0800
    Re: Calculating G Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 15:40 +0100
      Re: Calculating G Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 15:41 +0100
      Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-28 22:10 -0800
        Re: Calculating G "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-28 22:29 -0800
        Re: Calculating G Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 08:07 +0100
          Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-29 16:53 -0800
    Re: Calculating G Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 09:27 -0800
    Re: Calculating G Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-29 17:21 +1100
      Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-29 04:21 -0800
        Re: Calculating G Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-12-29 09:11 -0500
          Re: Calculating G "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-29 06:34 -0800
            Re: Calculating G noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 15:40 -0800
            Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-29 16:52 -0800
          Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-29 16:59 -0800
            Re: Calculating G Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 12:19 -0600
              Re: Calculating G noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 12:43 -0800
        Re: Calculating G Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-30 13:22 +1100
          Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-30 01:11 -0800
            Re: Calculating G Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-30 21:43 +1100
              Re: Calculating G "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-30 06:48 -0800
              Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-30 14:43 -0800
                Re: Calculating G Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-31 11:35 +1100
                  Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-30 17:06 -0800
                    Re: Calculating G Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-31 12:40 +1100
                      Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-30 23:22 -0800
                      Re: Calculating G Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-31 20:28 +1100
                        Re: Calculating G "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 11:07 -0800
                          Re: Calculating G "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-31 11:16 -0800
                        Re: Calculating G "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 13:22 -0800
                          Re: Calculating G "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-31 15:36 -0800
                          Re: Calculating G Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-01 11:49 +1100
                Re: Calculating G Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 15:09 -0600
                  Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-01-03 16:22 -0800
                    Re: Calculating G noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 16:57 -0800
                    Re: Calculating G Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 10:22 -0600
                      Re: Calculating G Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-01-05 16:02 -0800
                        Re: Calculating G Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 07:09 -0600

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#610594 — Calculating G

Calculating G

The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has the value G=6.674E-11m3kg−1s−2 (cubic meters per kilogram second squared).

G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar

	  gstar	   rstar	   Mstar	    G	
Sun	 273.97	696,000,000	 1.99E+30	6.674E-11	
ACa	 200.18	853,992,000	 2.19E+30	6.674E-11	
ACb	 332.10	602,040,000	 1.80E+30	6.674E-11	
AC c	1695.00	 98,136,000	 2.45E+29	6.674E-11	

gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec
rstar = radius in m
Mstar = mass in kg

G can also be derived from g, radius and mass of the planets by the formula
G=gpl*rpl^2/mpl

	  gpl	   rpl(m)	    mpl	            G	
MER 	 3.71	 2,439,000	3.30E+23	6.674E-11	
VEN 	 8.87	 6,051,602	4.87E+24	6.674E-11	
EAR 	 9.80	 6,378,621	5.97E+24	6.674E-11	
MAR 	 3.71	 3,397,360	6.42E+23	6.674E-11	
JUP 	24.79	71,499,344	1.90E+27	6.674E-11	
SAT 	10.44	60,273,223	5.68E+26	6.674E-11	
URA 	 8.87	25,556,472	8.68E+25	6.674E-11	
NEP 	11.15	24,765,365	1.02E+26	6.674E-11	
PLU 	 0.62	 1,158,753	1.25E+22	6.674E-11	

gpl = surface acceleration of a planet
rpl = radius of a planet
mpl = mass of a planet

The calculated G numbers of the Sun, Alpha Centauri A, B and C and nine planets are identical with the Codata value of G=6.674E-11.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#610595

Dne 28/12/2016 v 15:13 Peter Riedt napsal(a):
> Calculating G
> 
> The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has the value G=6.674E-11m3kg−1s−2 (cubic meters per kilogram second squared).
> 
> G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
> 
It is the opposite.

The star masses are derived from our knowledge of G value.
Calculating G from the star masses would be a circular calculation.

-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610596

Dne 28/12/2016 v 15:40 Poutnik napsal(a):
> Dne 28/12/2016 v 15:13 Peter Riedt napsal(a):
>> Calculating G
>>
>> The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has the value G=6.674E-11m3kg−1s−2 (cubic meters per kilogram second squared).
>>
>> G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
>>
> It is the opposite.
> 
> The star masses are derived from our knowledge of G value.
> Calculating G from the star masses would be a circular calculation.
> 
P.S.: Note also we know the G value with much better accuracy
that we know the star masses.

-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

A wise man guards words he says,
as they say about him more,
than he says about the subject.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610667

On Wednesday, December 28, 2016 at 10:40:37 PM UTC+8, Poutnik Fornntp wrote:
> Dne 28/12/2016 v 15:13 Peter Riedt napsal(a):
> > Calculating G
> > 
> > The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has the value G=6.674E-11m3kg−1s−2 (cubic meters per kilogram second squared).
> > 
> > G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
> > 
> It is the opposite.
> 
> The star masses are derived from our knowledge of G value.
> Calculating G from the star masses would be a circular calculation.
> 
> -- 
> Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

What is the equation to calculate the mass of a star or planet using G?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610676

 "Peter Riedt" <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> who wants to get 
onto "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> 
Glazier's List of Bert-Turd eaters, excitedly asked:
What is the equation to calculate the mass of a star or planet using G?
> reber  is an honest human being as many of the quotes imply.
>
hanson wrote:
So, Riedt, use reber's G=EMC^2, or ...
are you only as honest as Glazier is.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610681

Dne 29/12/2016 v 07:10 Peter Riedt napsal(a):
> 
> What is the equation to calculate the mass of a star or planet using G?

It is much more beneficial for you
to search and study materials on your own.
This way you will understand equations you would learn.


-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

A wise man guards words he says,
as they say about him more,
than he says about the subject.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610816

On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 3:07:06 PM UTC+8, Poutnik Fornntp wrote:
> Dne 29/12/2016 v 07:10 Peter Riedt napsal(a):
> > 
> > What is the equation to calculate the mass of a star or planet using G?
> 
> It is much more beneficial for you
> to search and study materials on your own.
> This way you will understand equations you would learn.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
> 
> A wise man guards words he says,
> as they say about him more,
> than he says about the subject.

No problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610607

G is from matter

G = V/(2 pi C m)

V is proton volume, m is proton mass
C is 5.131534 second^2

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610672

On 29/12/2016 1:13 AM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> Calculating G
>
> The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has the value G=6.674E-11m3kg−1s−2 (cubic meters per kilogram second squared).
>
> G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
>
> 	  gstar	   rstar	   Mstar	    G	
> Sun	 273.97	696,000,000	 1.99E+30	6.674E-11	
> ACa	 200.18	853,992,000	 2.19E+30	6.674E-11	
> ACb	 332.10	602,040,000	 1.80E+30	6.674E-11	
> AC c	1695.00	 98,136,000	 2.45E+29	6.674E-11	
>
> gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec
> rstar = radius in m
> Mstar = mass in kg

How are you going to get the mass and surface acceleration of the star?

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610729

On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 2:21:38 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 29/12/2016 1:13 AM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> > Calculating G
> >
> > The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has the value G=6.674E-11m3kg−1s−2 (cubic meters per kilogram second squared).
> >
> > G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
> >
> > 	  gstar	   rstar	   Mstar	    G	
> > Sun	 273.97	696,000,000	 1.99E+30	6.674E-11	
> > ACa	 200.18	853,992,000	 2.19E+30	6.674E-11	
> > ACb	 332.10	602,040,000	 1.80E+30	6.674E-11	
> > AC c	1695.00	 98,136,000	 2.45E+29	6.674E-11	
> >
> > gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec
> > rstar = radius in m
> > Mstar = mass in kg
> 
> How are you going to get the mass and surface acceleration of the star?
> 
> Sylvia.

I got the mass of the sun and Alpha Centauri A, B, C from sources available on the Internet:

	   Mstar	  
Sun	1.98855E+30	
ACa	2.18741E+30 (1.1 mass of the sun)	
ACb	1.80361E+30 (.907 mass of the sun)	
ACc	2.44592E+29 (.123 mass of the sun)

I found the suggested surface acceleration of ACa (log g = 4.30), ACb (log g = 4.37) and ACc (log g = 5.20) not accurate. Recalculating the g values of the three AC stars with a formula of my own I was able to produce four values of G all consistent with Codata (6.674E-11): g of Sun=273.35m/sec, ACa=200.18m/sec, ACb=332.10m/sec, ACc=1695.00m/sec.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610733

On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 04:21:54 -0800 (PST), Peter Riedt wrote:

>On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 2:21:38 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 29/12/2016 1:13 AM, Peter Riedt wrote:
>> > Calculating G
>> >
>> > The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has the value G=6.674E-11m3kg?1s?2 (cubic meters per kilogram second squared).
>> >
>> > G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
>> >
>> > 	  gstar	   rstar	   Mstar	    G	
>> > Sun	 273.97	696,000,000	 1.99E+30	6.674E-11	
>> > ACa	 200.18	853,992,000	 2.19E+30	6.674E-11	
>> > ACb	 332.10	602,040,000	 1.80E+30	6.674E-11	
>> > AC c	1695.00	 98,136,000	 2.45E+29	6.674E-11	
>> >
>> > gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec
>> > rstar = radius in m
>> > Mstar = mass in kg
>> 
>> How are you going to get the mass and surface acceleration of the star?
>> 
>> Sylvia.
>
>I got the mass of the sun and Alpha Centauri A, B, C from sources available on the Internet:

I got G from the internet:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
 Its value is approximately 6.674×10-11 N·m2/kg2.

No calculations required.



>	   Mstar	  
>Sun	1.98855E+30	
>ACa	2.18741E+30 (1.1 mass of the sun)	
>ACb	1.80361E+30 (.907 mass of the sun)	
>ACc	2.44592E+29 (.123 mass of the sun)
>
>I found the suggested surface acceleration of ACa (log g = 4.30), ACb (log g = 4.37) and ACc (log g = 5.20) not accurate. Recalculating the g values of the three AC stars with a formula of my own I was able to produce four values of G all consistent with Codata (6.674E-11): g of Sun=273.35m/sec, ACa=200.18m/sec, ACb=332.10m/sec, ACc=1695.00m/sec.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610734

"Wally W." <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
>
Peter Riedt wrote:
>>> > Calculating G
>>> > gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec
>>>
Sylvia wrote.
>>> How are you going to get the mass and surface acceleration of the star?
>>> >>
Peter Riedt wrote:
>> I got the mass of the sun and Alpha Centauri A, B, C
>> from sources available on the Internet:
>
"Wally W." wrote:
> I got G from the internet:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
> Its value is approximately 6.674×10-11 N·m2/kg2.
> No calculations required.
>
hanson wrote:
Yeah, yeah!... you gotta love Peter's "acceleration in m/sec"
while for other folks, for centuries, it was "acceleration in m/sec^2"
IOW, a second here and a second there, and pretty soon
you'll  arrive at Peter's new, novel & post-modern physics.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610807

got to do that, yeah

> Yeah, yeah!... you gotta love Peter's "acceleration in m/sec"
> while for other folks, for centuries, it was "acceleration in m/sec^2"
> IOW, a second here and a second there, and pretty soon
> you'll  arrive at Peter's new, novel & post-modern physics.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610815

On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 10:35:09 PM UTC+8, hanson wrote:
> "Wally W." <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote:
> >
> Peter Riedt wrote:
> >>> > Calculating G
> >>> > gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec
> >>>
> Sylvia wrote.
> >>> How are you going to get the mass and surface acceleration of the star?
> >>> >>
> Peter Riedt wrote:
> >> I got the mass of the sun and Alpha Centauri A, B, C
> >> from sources available on the Internet:
> >
> "Wally W." wrote:
> > I got G from the internet:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
> > Its value is approximately 6.674×10-11 N·m2/kg2.
> > No calculations required.
> >
> hanson wrote:
> Yeah, yeah!... you gotta love Peter's "acceleration in m/sec"
> while for other folks, for centuries, it was "acceleration in m/sec^2"
> IOW, a second here and a second there, and pretty soon
> you'll  arrive at Peter's new, novel & post-modern physics.

Thank you for pointing out my omissision.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610817

On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 10:11:31 PM UTC+8, Wally W. wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 04:21:54 -0800 (PST), Peter Riedt wrote:
> 
> >On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 2:21:38 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote:
> >> On 29/12/2016 1:13 AM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> >> > Calculating G
> >> >
> >> > The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has the value G=6.674E-11m3kg?1s?2 (cubic meters per kilogram second squared).
> >> >
> >> > G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
> >> >
> >> > 	  gstar	   rstar	   Mstar	    G	
> >> > Sun	 273.97	696,000,000	 1.99E+30	6.674E-11	
> >> > ACa	 200.18	853,992,000	 2.19E+30	6.674E-11	
> >> > ACb	 332.10	602,040,000	 1.80E+30	6.674E-11	
> >> > AC c	1695.00	 98,136,000	 2.45E+29	6.674E-11	
> >> >
> >> > gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec
> >> > rstar = radius in m
> >> > Mstar = mass in kg
> >> 
> >> How are you going to get the mass and surface acceleration of the star?
> >> 
> >> Sylvia.
> >
> >I got the mass of the sun and Alpha Centauri A, B, C from sources available on the Internet:
> 
> I got G from the internet:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
>  Its value is approximately 6.674×10-11 N·m2/kg2.
> 
> No calculations required.
> 
> 
> 
> >	   Mstar	  
> >Sun	1.98855E+30	
> >ACa	2.18741E+30 (1.1 mass of the sun)	
> >ACb	1.80361E+30 (.907 mass of the sun)	
> >ACc	2.44592E+29 (.123 mass of the sun)
> >
> >I found the suggested surface acceleration of ACa (log g = 4.30), ACb (log g = 4.37) and ACc (log g = 5.20) not accurate. Recalculating the g values of the three AC stars with a formula of my own I was able to produce four values of G all consistent with Codata (6.674E-11): g of Sun=273.35m/sec, ACa=200.18m/sec, ACb=332.10m/sec, ACc=1695.00m/sec.

I did not calculate G to produce G. I used a method to prove that G also applies to other stars. I have 10 different equations to calculate G. They do prove the relationships between elements of free fall orbits in the solar system and confirm the consistency of the system.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611498

On 12/29/2016 6:59 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> I did not calculate G to produce G. I used a method to prove that G also
> applies to other stars. I have 10 different equations to calculate G. They
> do prove the relationships between elements of free fall orbits in the solar
> system and confirm the consistency of the system.

Just a few comments.

- Just a little while ago you were claiming that G varies from star 
system to star system, while Newton claimed that G was universal. Now 
you are claiming that G's value is the same for other stars, and you are 
pretending this is something new.

- The value of G is determined from experimental data, whether that data 
is obtained with satellites orbiting the earth, or from planets orbiting 
our sun, or from stars orbiting the galactic center, or whatever 
gravitational system you care to choose. This is why G is considered 
universal. This is not new (except maybe to you) and has been known for 
literally centuries.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611521

I'd also like a fine toy ,,, bit late, but

> - The value of G is determined from experimental data, whether that data 
> is obtained with satellites orbiting the earth, or from planets orbiting 
> our sun, or from stars orbiting the galactic center, or whatever 
> gravitational system you care to choose. This is why G is considered 
> universal. This is not new (except maybe to you) and has been known for 
> literally centuries.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610828

On 29/12/2016 11:21 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 2:21:38 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else
> wrote:
>> On 29/12/2016 1:13 AM, Peter Riedt wrote:
>>> Calculating G
>>>
>>> The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately
>>> determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has
>>> the value G=6.674E-11m3kg−1s−2 (cubic meters per kilogram second
>>> squared).
>>>
>>> G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula
>>> G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
>>>
>>> gstar	   rstar	   Mstar	    G Sun	 273.97	696,000,000	 1.99E+30
>>> 6.674E-11 ACa	 200.18	853,992,000	 2.19E+30	6.674E-11 ACb	 332.10
>>> 602,040,000	 1.80E+30	6.674E-11 AC c	1695.00	 98,136,000
>>> 2.45E+29	6.674E-11
>>>
>>> gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec rstar = radius in m Mstar =
>>> mass in kg
>>
>> How are you going to get the mass and surface acceleration of the
>> star?
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> I got the mass of the sun and Alpha Centauri A, B, C from sources
> available on the Internet:

Are you for real? How do you think they ended up on the Internet?

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610850

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 10:22:43 AM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 29/12/2016 11:21 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 2:21:38 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else
> > wrote:
> >> On 29/12/2016 1:13 AM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> >>> Calculating G
> >>>
> >>> The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately
> >>> determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has
> >>> the value G=6.674E-11m3kg−1s−2 (cubic meters per kilogram second
> >>> squared).
> >>>
> >>> G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula
> >>> G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
> >>>
> >>> gstar	   rstar	   Mstar	    G Sun	 273.97	696,000,000	 1.99E+30
> >>> 6.674E-11 ACa	 200.18	853,992,000	 2.19E+30	6.674E-11 ACb	 332.10
> >>> 602,040,000	 1.80E+30	6.674E-11 AC c	1695.00	 98,136,000
> >>> 2.45E+29	6.674E-11
> >>>
> >>> gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec rstar = radius in m Mstar =
> >>> mass in kg
> >>
> >> How are you going to get the mass and surface acceleration of the
> >> star?
> >>
> >> Sylvia.
> >
> > I got the mass of the sun and Alpha Centauri A, B, C from sources
> > available on the Internet:
> 
> Are you for real? How do you think they ended up on the Internet?
> 
> Sylvia.

What is your point?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610855

On 30/12/2016 8:11 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
> On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 10:22:43 AM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 29/12/2016 11:21 PM, Peter Riedt wrote:
>>> On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 2:21:38 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 29/12/2016 1:13 AM, Peter Riedt wrote:
>>>>> Calculating G
>>>>>
>>>>> The constant G was anticipated by Newton but first accurately
>>>>> determined in the laboratory by Henry Cavendish in 1798. It has
>>>>> the value G=6.674E-11m3kg−1s−2 (cubic meters per kilogram second
>>>>> squared).
>>>>>
>>>>> G can be derived from elements of a star by the formula
>>>>> G=gstar*rstar^2/Mstar
>>>>>
>>>>> gstar	   rstar	   Mstar	    G Sun	 273.97	696,000,000	 1.99E+30
>>>>> 6.674E-11 ACa	 200.18	853,992,000	 2.19E+30	6.674E-11 ACb	 332.10
>>>>> 602,040,000	 1.80E+30	6.674E-11 AC c	1695.00	 98,136,000
>>>>> 2.45E+29	6.674E-11
>>>>>
>>>>> gstar = surface acceleration in m/sec rstar = radius in m Mstar =
>>>>> mass in kg
>>>>
>>>> How are you going to get the mass and surface acceleration of the
>>>> star?
>>>>
>>>> Sylvia.
>>>
>>> I got the mass of the sun and Alpha Centauri A, B, C from sources
>>> available on the Internet:
>>
>> Are you for real? How do you think they ended up on the Internet?
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> What is your point?
>

The mass of the sun that's on the Internet was calculated by applying 
the measured value of G to the orbits of the planets.

So calculating G using the mass of the sun obtained from the Internet is 
actually calculating G from G.

The other masses are either derived similarly from orbital speeds, or 
are derived from brightness based on stellar physics.

Surface accelerations are calculated from the mass and G and measured 
radius.

As always, your attempts to calculate G are completely circular.

There is no known way of calculating it, other than from the measured 
attraction between masses that are known accurately by means other than 
orbital mechanics.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web