Thread: zero and infinity

Greetings forum members,


Um, the atom and the universe. Wow. We apply our science of the atom to the science of the stars, like there is no variation of law of science, of stretch of constants, between there and here.

If there is, on the off chance, such a continuum of constants, does this open the way for a political science law of absolute understanding, in terms of the idea that of knowing what is right, and living by that, can amount to a right of speech, and thus forum gratitude? Would this make it easier for aliens to dominate free speech in forums like this?

Ok, that was silly. That last comment. The real comment is, not one of alien life, but variation of constants, and the potential flaw of applying atomic phenomena to the stars.

This thread should be binned. Its not physics, its not philosophy, its not politics, its not pseudoscience or a new hypoethesis. It's just bull.

Maybe I should re-word my post for those who didn't see the finer point.

My point is, that our "constants" in equations of gravity and E-M may in fact change, or should I say, "could" change in situations of space-time that to our own observation may seem quite incredible, like planets orbiting stars in only a few days, if not hours.

If I may, is there any credible scientist who has raised this possibility, who are they, and if there is no one, lets leave it at that shall we.

(no need to lose the plot boys)

Ultimately, with the equations of gravity and E-M, we have our values from our own reference in space-time, but if there were a grand equation linking gravity with E-M, could that possible suggest that in different contexts of space-time those constants could in fact vary like a a silver ball balanced in an overall equation linking the forces of gravity and E-M?

It's just a question......not trying to offend or intentionally be "binned" as you would term it......I guess this could be an improved question for you, "what structure of procedure of logic do you use to suggest such is not possible"?

Some of the "constants" aren't constant. Check out the fine-structure constant alpha re the strength of the electromagnetic force. Then look at NIST where you can read this:

"Thus α depends upon the energy at which it is measured, increasing with increasing energy, and is considered an effective or running coupling constant".

The fine structure constant runs from 1/137 to 1/128m and is a running constant. That means it isn't constant. Note that people have been talking about measuring alpha near the sun in solar-probe experiments for at least ten years now. See for example SpaceTime Mission: Clock Test of Relativity at Four Solar Radii.

And guess what? The speed of light isn't constant either. The locally measured speed of light is always measured to be the same old 299,792,458 m/s. But gravitational time dilation means the seconds are different, whilst the length contraction is only radial. So one 299,792,458 m/s isn't the same as another. Check out the coordinate speed of light, which makes this more obvious.

Yes, you provide stats. But what envelope of active and secured interest does physics operate within as per guidelines of what should be accepted as a eternal fact and as opposed to (or if not) what seems to change?

Is there a guideline of such allowances of change?

Originally Posted by Farsight

And guess what? The speed of light isn't constant either. The locally measured speed of light is always measured to be the same old 299,792,458 m/s. But gravitational time dilation means the seconds are different, whilst the length contraction is only radial. So one 299,792,458 m/s isn't the same as another. Check out the coordinate speed of light, which makes this more obvious.

This is misleading. The only thing that can be measured is local speed. Time dilation and length contraction refer to differences in what is measured between two different inertial reference frames. There is also a resulting transformation between speeds, but that transformation leaves c invariant. So, despite the fact that two observers will measure some speeds differently, they will measure the speed of light to be the same, in their local inertial coordinates.

You can, of course, get all kinds of strange effects if you use non-inertial reference frames. See "Sagnac Effect."

Originally Posted by DrRocket

Originally Posted by Farsight

And guess what? The speed of light isn't constant either. The locally measured speed of light is always measured to be the same old 299,792,458 m/s. But gravitational time dilation means the seconds are different, whilst the length contraction is only radial. So one 299,792,458 m/s isn't the same as another. Check out the coordinate speed of light, which makes this more obvious.

This is misleading. The only thing that can be measured is local speed. Time dilation and length contraction refer to differences in what is measured between two different inertial reference frames. There is also a resulting transformation between speeds, but that transformation leaves c invariant. So, despite the fact that two observers will measure some speeds differently, they will measure the speed of light to be the same, in their local inertial coordinates.

Well, well, DrRocket. That is the a very fine response in the least number of words I have seen it. And it supports ~Thequestisthebest too if I may elaborate.

There are theoretical circumstances where the forces affecting the environment, though not noticeably different from any other environment you might find yourself in, could differ significantly relative to that other environment. It would leave c invariant and transformations between the environments would adjust time and lenght appropriately to the other, but if you could be in both environments at once you would certainly notice the difference.