Notices
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: SPLIT : Discussion of Relativity Tests Sticky

  1. #1 SPLIT : Discussion of Relativity Tests Sticky 
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Hi Markus, I hope I didn't come off as "anti-relativity" from my recent thread. Was just asking questions (just kidding, heretic. you can't stop the Anti-Relativity Movement with your "empirical evidence" and what-not. relativity is wrong and you know it!)


    Dis muthufukka go hard. -Quote
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    Hi Markus, I hope I didn't come off as "anti-relativity" from my recent thread. Was just asking questions (just kidding, heretic. you can't stop the Anti-Relativity Movement with your "empirical evidence" and what-not. relativity is wrong and you know it!)
    No, don't worry, this wasn't aimed at anyone in particular.
    This is simply a general response to the large amount of anti-relativity threads we have had recently....


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Hmm... Maybe this should be a sticky?
    Dis muthufukka go hard. -Quote
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    Hmm... Maybe this should be a sticky?
    I think so too.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    63
    *Post Removed*
    Last edited by KALSTER; August 21st, 2012 at 07:09 AM. Reason: Use your own threads and the proper sections please.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    If you have ideas, post them in your own thread in the relevant section, i.e. New Hypothesis please. Don't try and push them in other people's threads. I am editing out your post. You can find the original text by clicking on "edited by" at the bottom of your post if you need it for your own thread.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    If you have ideas, post them in your own thread in the relevant section, i.e. New Hypothesis please. Don't try and push them in other people's threads. I am editing out your post. You can find the original text by clicking on "edited by" at the bottom of your post if you need it for your own thread.

    My own thread “informational physics” was closed by some unknown reason in the section Pseudoscience (!).

    Cheers
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    It was closed, since nothing was going on in it, except for you continually bumping it with posts from other forums. And it was nonsense. Since you now seem to have resolved to spamming other threads after my request not to do so, you are no longer welcome here.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Mach rule
    Einstein Theory

    we can use tool if we have any help if not
    we naturaly forget
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    I've split eaglepass's and related posts off into a separate thread in pseudoscience.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Thanks Harold14370.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by sunmingxing03 View Post
    Mach rule
    Einstein Theory
    Reported for sock puppetry.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Funny, I just did that for spam...
    so unforgiving
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2
    Neverfly: I believe you sent me a message today. Not sure what it meant but it seemed hostile. I'm a brand new "newbie" to the forum and I don't have a strong background in physics. If I mis-interpreted your message, I apologize. But it seemed a strange way to greet a newcomer. The only credentials I have is that I worked on the first deliverable thermonuclear weapon we put into inventory back in the early 50s'. I submitted a legitimate question about the force needed to move the earth significantly out of its orbit. I have seen old equations attempting to reach an answer and wondered if there are newer thoughts on this subject. I witnessed a "near tragedy" in the special weapons program at White Sands in the 50's and I have wondered about this question ever since.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by daedalus37 View Post
    Neverfly: I believe you sent me a message today. Not sure what it meant but it seemed hostile. I'm a brand new "newbie" to the forum and I don't have a strong background in physics. If I mis-interpreted your message, I apologize. But it seemed a strange way to greet a newcomer.
    For the readers, the following is the message and my response in question from Daedalus37's Introductory thread:
    Quote Originally Posted by daedalus37 View Post
    Answer has been of some debate over the past 60 years...
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Well... I hope you are not expecting an answer, then.
    My attempt at humor... As you pointed out that the answer has been a matter of debate for several decades; a definitive answer seems unlikely.

    I tend to be a bit deadpan in my humor and lack the experience to consider when it may not go over so well.

    Quote Originally Posted by daedalus37 View Post
    The only credentials I have is that I worked on the first deliverable thermonuclear weapon we put into inventory back in the early 50s'. I submitted a legitimate question about the force needed to move the earth significantly out of its orbit. I have seen old equations attempting to reach an answer and wondered if there are newer thoughts on this subject. I witnessed a "near tragedy" in the special weapons program at White Sands in the 50's and I have wondered about this question ever since.
    So, I will try again:
    Welcome to the board, Daedalus37. Please accept my apologies for poor humor and a warm welcome. I mean... the apology is for the humor, I am not apologizing for warmly welcoming... Damn. There I go, again...
    Trust me, if I get hostile, you will have zero doubt in your mind that I have become hostile.
    I think your career entitles you to quite a bit of recognition. Perhaps you're not an In The News Physicist, but neither are most of the rest of us. Your credentials are impressive.
    I have not seen the thread about the force required to move the Earth in its orbit. It may be currently awaiting Moderation as some new posts do (Which will pass soon and you will no longer be placed in a Moderator Queue once you have established yourself.)
    If the thread is available, can you link to it? If it's not yet appearing on the board, I'm sure it will appear soon.

    Off topic: The force required would be immense. The last time the Earth felt a significant orbit altering force was the Big Whack which is thought to have led to the formation of the Moon. The Earth probably did not move very far...
    Let's take a quick look...
    Looking up a quick figure for the Mass of the Earth on Google, I got:
    5.97x1024
    Our planet is orbiting the Sun at about 30,000 m/s.
    Kinetic energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    So, approximately 2.677x1033 joules.

    You would need to nearly double that to reach escape velocity from the Sun: 2.485 1033. That kind of energy would annihilate the Earth. While much of the Earth is pretty solid, the Earth in space is not solid like a billiard ball.
    Even counting for your question of significantly moving the Earth ("Significantly" would need to be defined) the amount of energy required to move the Earth would be far greater than the Earth can withstand (Edit to clarify: Withstand in a manner that we know it. Any destructive impact would eventually re-coalesce into a rocky planet within a very few billion years...) and even greater still than all the nuclear weapons we could ever build, far greater than all the accessible material for nuclear weapons than we can get.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,651
    On the other hand you could just apply a smaller force and let it work over time...
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    On the other hand you could just apply a smaller force and let it work over time...
    See- that will only lead to asking how much time it would take.

    Oh and note to the brains of the group- again- please offer any corrections to my mess of a post above.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    I don't get it. Don't our current DNA tests prove relativity just fine?

    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Correction; I said double earlier because I had a brain dead moment. Strike that (though, I won't alter the post I made for posterity).
    To clarify:
    Would a 100 megaton bomb provide enough force to bump the Earth from its orbit?
    100 megatons is equal to about 4.184 x 1017 joules.
    2.485 1033 joules (subtract) 4.184 x 1017 joules=2.485 1033 joules.

    Rounding is the problem, here. See, that 4.184 x 1017did not even make a dent in the force needed to move the Earth.
    That's
    2,485,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000-418,400,000,000,000,000
    =
    2,484,999,999,999,995,816,000,000,000,000,000.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Length Contraction in Heavy Ion Colliders : http://home.broadpark.no/~ccsernai/Csernai-textbook.pdf
    I am trying to find the exact page in the book, can you help, please?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. SPLIT : General Relativity Primer Discussion
    By Howard Roark in forum Physics
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: June 16th, 2013, 08:56 AM
  2. Special Relativity Primer discussion
    By Janus in forum Physics
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: November 5th, 2012, 01:21 PM
  3. Modern Tests of Relativity
    By Markus Hanke in forum Physics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 11th, 2012, 09:44 AM
  4. Meta-Discussion about a recent thread split
    By daytonturner in forum Site Feedback
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 1st, 2011, 03:40 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •