Prev: Free Download Of Canonical Science Reports And Executive Summaries
Next: Photon Detector Paradox
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 24 Jul 2010 13:09
On Jul 23, 3:30 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Post there. Nobody will ever bother you if you don't want them to.-
>
------------------------------------

Your values for the mass of a galaxy and its central object are based
on the assumption that the Newtonian gravitational constant G is an
absolute constant.

Discrete Scale Relativity explores a different hypothesis: that G is
scale-dependent in a discrete manner.

In the DSR paradigm, G is higher than the conventional 6.67 x 10^-8
cgs by a factor of 10^38 WITHIN Atomic Scale systems, and G is lower
than the conventional value by a factor of 10^38 within Galactic Scale
systems.

Do you realize what that would do to your estimates of galactic
masses? You do realize that they ALL depend rigorously on the value of
G, don't you?

See how changing ones assumptuions leads to new ideas?

RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
From: eric gisse on 24 Jul 2010 15:29
Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:

> On Jul 23, 3:30 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Post there. Nobody will ever bother you if you don't want them to.-
>>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Your values for the mass of a galaxy and its central object are based
> on the assumption that the Newtonian gravitational constant G is an
> absolute constant.

More specifically, it assumes that Newtonian gravitation and thus general
relativity is valid at all length scales.

>
> Discrete Scale Relativity explores a different hypothesis: that G is
> scale-dependent in a discrete manner.
>
> In the DSR paradigm, G is higher than the conventional 6.67 x 10^-8
> cgs by a factor of 10^38 WITHIN Atomic Scale systems, and G is lower
> than the conventional value by a factor of 10^38 within Galactic Scale
> systems.

This makes absolutely no sense at any length scale.

>
> Do you realize what that would do to your estimates of galactic
> masses?

It does plenty of things.

First, it makes Earth 'special'. Because apparently we are the only place in
the universe where G is what it is measured to be.

Second, you'll have to explain the analysis of pulsar timing which show
deltaG / G is consistent with zero. And how the pulsar timing is consistent
with G as measured on Earth.

http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v61/i10/p1151_1

Fourth, you'll have to explain the radical inconsistency of using a theory
that assumes constant G while 'predicting' variable G.

Fifth, you'll have to explain why GR + dark matter correctly predict what is
observed without having to rely on ad-hoc factors of 10^38 in coupling
constants.

> You do realize that they ALL depend rigorously on the value of
> G, don't you?

Why no, Robert. I don't. I had never considered the link between mass and
the gravitational constant. *rolls eyes*

>
> See how changing ones assumptuions leads to new ideas?

Folks have considered variable G before. The only difference between you and
them is that you won't abandon the idea even though it has been shown to be
non-viable.

Will you abandon non-viable theories, Robert? Or will you keep going even
though you are wrong?

>
> RLO
> www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw

From: BURT on 24 Jul 2010 19:34
On Jul 24, 12:29 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:
> > On Jul 23, 3:30 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Post there. Nobody will ever bother you if you don't want them to.-
>
> > ------------------------------------
>
> > Your values for the mass of a galaxy and its central object are based
> > on the assumption that the Newtonian gravitational constant G is an
> > absolute constant.
>
> More specifically, it assumes that Newtonian gravitation and thus general
> relativity is valid at all length scales.
>
>
>
> > Discrete Scale Relativity explores a different hypothesis: that G is
> > scale-dependent in a discrete manner.
>
> > In the DSR paradigm, G is higher than the conventional 6.67 x 10^-8
> > cgs by a factor of 10^38 WITHIN Atomic Scale systems, and G is lower
> > than the conventional value by a factor of 10^38 within Galactic Scale
> > systems.
>
> This makes absolutely no sense at any length scale.
>
>
>
> > Do you realize what that would do to your estimates of galactic
> > masses?
>
> It does plenty of things.
>
> First, it makes Earth 'special'. Because apparently we are the only place in
> the universe where G is what it is measured to be.
>
> Second, you'll have to explain the analysis of pulsar timing which show
> deltaG / G is consistent with zero. And how the pulsar timing is consistent
> with G as measured on Earth.
>
> http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v61/i10/p1151_1
>
> Fourth, you'll have to explain the radical inconsistency of using a theory
> that assumes constant G while 'predicting' variable G.
>
> Fifth, you'll have to explain why GR + dark matter correctly predict what is
> observed without having to rely on ad-hoc factors of 10^38 in coupling
> constants.
>
> > You do realize that they ALL depend rigorously on the value of
> > G, don't you?
>
> Why no, Robert. I don't. I had never considered the link between mass and
> the gravitational constant. *rolls eyes*
>
>
>
> > See how changing ones assumptuions leads to new ideas?
>
> Folks have considered variable G before. The only difference between you and
> them is that you won't abandon the idea even though it has been shown to be
> non-viable.
>
> Will you abandon non-viable theories, Robert? Or will you keep going even
> though you are wrong?
>
>
>
>
>
> > RLO
> >www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Does your refrigerator magnet flip?

Mitch Raemsch
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 25 Jul 2010 00:11
On Jul 24, 3:29 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> First, it makes Earth 'special'. Because apparently we are the only place in
> the universe where G is what it is measured to be.
>
> Second, you'll have to explain the analysis of pulsar timing which show
> deltaG / G is consistent with zero. And how the pulsar timing is consistent
> with G as measured on Earth.
--------------------------------------------

Sigh! Woofy, the discrete self-similar scaling for gravitation that
is predicted by Discrete Scale Relativity bears no relation to your
barkings above.

(1) The conventional value of G = 6.67 x 10^-8 cgs applies anytime the
relevant domain of observation is entirely within a Stellar Scale
system, but exterior to Atomic Scale systems. This means anywhere in
the Solar System, or anywhere in any other stellar system, so long as
you exclude the interiors of the Atomic Scale subsystems in your
restricted range of observational scales.

Your bizarre comment about the conventional value only applying on
Earth is singularly incorrect and benighted.

It shows that your understanding of DSR is minimal. How can you
expect to judge something scientifically if you do not even have a
rudimentary understanding of it?

(2) Sigh! And double Sigh! No Woofy, DSR does not predict that G
varies with time. Discrete Scale Relativity predicts that G varies
with cosmological Scale.

I do not think you have ever really understood even the most basic
properties of the discrete self-similar paradigm.

Do I expect too much?

RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
From: eric gisse on 25 Jul 2010 01:38
Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:

> On Jul 24, 3:29 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> First, it makes Earth 'special'. Because apparently we are the only place
>> in the universe where G is what it is measured to be.
>>
>> Second, you'll have to explain the analysis of pulsar timing which show
>> deltaG / G is consistent with zero. And how the pulsar timing is
>> consistent with G as measured on Earth.
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Sigh! Woofy, the discrete self-similar scaling for gravitation that
> is predicted by Discrete Scale Relativity bears no relation to your
> barkings above.

Then you can't use GR in your derivations.

Fix your inconsistent mix-and-matching.

[snip rest]
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Free Download Of Canonical Science Reports And Executive Summaries
Next: Photon Detector Paradox