Self Similarity --- was -- Re: Arrow of Time
in [Physics]
|
Prev: time as the circumference of the lobe inside the sphere: deriving speed of light from pure math Chapt 19 #217; ATOM TOTALITY
Next: Accounting information systems 2e robert hurt solutions manual
From: Thomas Heger on 15 Jul 2010 14:44 Robert L. Oldershaw schrieb: > On Jul 15, 7:44 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 7/14/10 9:21 PM, Robert L. Oldershaw wrote: >> >>> Like all great paradigm shifts, the shift from the Substandard >>> Paradigm to Discrete Scale Relativity will require a fundamental >>> revision in our assumptions about the geometry of spacetime, which is >>> rigorously equivalent to the geometry of the physical objects >>> comprising nature's infinite discrete fractal hierarchy. >> Who's going to promote the idea if you don't, Oldershaw? > -------------------------------------------------- > > The paradigm will promote itself, but it may take 1 year, or 10 years, > or 100 years, or... before it is "discovered" and becomes > "fashionable". This is a peculiarity of the collective behavior of > humans. > Hi Robert Distribution of knowledge follows an exponential law, usually. It can stay hidden for ages, but if you see something new, it is already in the 'explosion phase'. Anyhow.. I would like to write something about gravity and maybe you could do something with it. It goes like this: Question: Why do things drop? Or what 'is' actually gravity. Since I wanted to describe matter as kind of standing waves, I assume something called 'bifurcation' to be relevant. That is like branching and reuniting. This could be explained this way: take the left and the right hand in front of you. Than put thumb and forefinger in right angles. Now mimic a 'standing wave' by opening and closing the fingers with some frequency. Now put the hands in an angle to each other, by opening them a bit, than the 'standing wave' would move towards you (down). This is a purely geometric relation. (I hope you'd understand.) So, according to this 'model', gravity is not caused by mass, but by form, because the normals to the Earth point together (in downwards direction). The mass only coincidentally has the same relation, because it has an influence on the curvature of the Earth surface. TH
From: Thomas Heger on 15 Jul 2010 16:06
Thomas Heger schrieb: > Robert L. Oldershaw schrieb: >> On Jul 15, 7:44 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 7/14/10 9:21 PM, Robert L. Oldershaw wrote: >>> >>>> Like all great paradigm shifts, the shift from the Substandard >>>> Paradigm to Discrete Scale Relativity will require a fundamental >>>> revision in our assumptions about the geometry of spacetime, which is >>>> rigorously equivalent to the geometry of the physical objects >>>> comprising nature's infinite discrete fractal hierarchy. >>> Who's going to promote the idea if you don't, Oldershaw? >> -------------------------------------------------- >> >> The paradigm will promote itself, but it may take 1 year, or 10 years, >> or 100 years, or... before it is "discovered" and becomes >> "fashionable". This is a peculiarity of the collective behavior of >> humans. >> > > Hi Robert > > Distribution of knowledge follows an exponential law, usually. It can > stay hidden for ages, but if you see something new, it is already in the > 'explosion phase'. > Anyhow.. > > I would like to write something about gravity and maybe you could do > something with it. It goes like this: > Question: Why do things drop? > Or what 'is' actually gravity. > Since I wanted to describe matter as kind of standing waves, I assume > something called 'bifurcation' to be relevant. That is like branching > and reuniting. This could be explained this way: take the left and the > right hand in front of you. Than put thumb and forefinger in right > angles. Now mimic a 'standing wave' by opening and closing the fingers > with some frequency. > Now put the hands in an angle to each other, by opening them a bit, than > the 'standing wave' would move towards you (down). This is a purely > geometric relation. (I hope you'd understand.) > So, according to this 'model', gravity is not caused by mass, but by > form, because the normals to the Earth point together (in downwards > direction). The mass only coincidentally has the same relation, because > it has an influence on the curvature of the Earth surface. > Oops this is of course wrong, the influence of mass is different. Imagine the normals to be kind of elastic rods and a piece of matter to be a ring with a number of rods going through. Than the curvature pulls the rods apart and the ring down, while the ring is elastically deformed, too. Than the strength of the rods 'battles' the strength of the ring. Maybe the mass has actually a cubic influence on the strength, but decreasing(!) curvature with higher mass lowers this to a quadratic relation. Higher curvature of smaller structures, would increase the force - as you assume. Something like that, only in very rough terms.. Greetings TH |