What's the h then, the only thing I can think of is its saying tan of planck's constant, but I can't see why that would be relevant
Quote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 02:57:09 PMQuote from: Junker on April 25, 2017, 02:44:21 PMQuote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 02:35:29 PMI am not familiar with SR but what part of it stops a basic function of maths working?Newtonian mechanics do not work at relativistic velocities. You have to use a SR equation for acceleration near light speed. Specifically:v = c tanh(aT/c)Can you tell me what each letter in that stands for pleaseV: velocityC: speed of lightA: accelerationT: dunno, but it'll be on a cursory google search.
Quote from: Junker on April 25, 2017, 02:44:21 PMQuote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 02:35:29 PMI am not familiar with SR but what part of it stops a basic function of maths working?Newtonian mechanics do not work at relativistic velocities. You have to use a SR equation for acceleration near light speed. Specifically:v = c tanh(aT/c)Can you tell me what each letter in that stands for please
Quote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 02:35:29 PMI am not familiar with SR but what part of it stops a basic function of maths working?Newtonian mechanics do not work at relativistic velocities. You have to use a SR equation for acceleration near light speed. Specifically:v = c tanh(aT/c)
I am not familiar with SR but what part of it stops a basic function of maths working?
It appears to be the hyperbolic tangent function denoted "tanh".
Quote from: ScintillaOfStars on April 25, 2017, 02:58:48 PMQuote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 02:57:09 PMQuote from: Junker on April 25, 2017, 02:44:21 PMQuote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 02:35:29 PMI am not familiar with SR but what part of it stops a basic function of maths working?Newtonian mechanics do not work at relativistic velocities. You have to use a SR equation for acceleration near light speed. Specifically:v = c tanh(aT/c)Can you tell me what each letter in that stands for pleaseV: velocityC: speed of lightA: accelerationT: dunno, but it'll be on a cursory google search.T is time. Quote from: Piesigma on April 25, 2017, 03:10:52 PM It appears to be the hyperbolic tangent function denoted "tanh".Correct.
I'd be interested in seeing how many FE proponents support the "density" model. It really is terrible. Not to fret, however, the density model and standard model for gravity can both be wrong.
Quote from: Canadabear on April 25, 2017, 01:53:47 PMhmmm why you use special relativity?Because it fits observation.
hmmm why you use special relativity?
Quote from: Canadabear on April 25, 2017, 01:53:47 PMthats what i found about the relation between special relativity and gravity.Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity is one of the towering achievements of 20th-century physics. Published in 1916, it explains that what we perceive as the force of gravity in fact arises from the curvature of space and time. Einstein proposed that objects such as the sun and the Earth change this geometry.SR works just fine.
thats what i found about the relation between special relativity and gravity.Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity is one of the towering achievements of 20th-century physics. Published in 1916, it explains that what we perceive as the force of gravity in fact arises from the curvature of space and time. Einstein proposed that objects such as the sun and the Earth change this geometry.
Quote from: Canadabear on April 25, 2017, 01:53:47 PMas you seem to claim that gravity does not exist than the special relativity can not be correct and therefore you can not use that in your explanation.I'd suggest you work on your logic a bit more, as you are incorrect. Quote from: inquisitive on April 25, 2017, 01:54:43 PMWhy 9.81? g varies across the earth.Celestial bodies can have a minor gravitational influence. It could also be improperly calibrated equipment yielding the small differences allegedly recorded.
as you seem to claim that gravity does not exist than the special relativity can not be correct and therefore you can not use that in your explanation.
Why 9.81? g varies across the earth.
You can do tangent here, but you can't figure out the angle of the sun in the other thread? Selective ignorance?
The standard model wrong! Now that's interesting...could you show us your workings, you being a grad physicist and all that....
do you have any evidence for this claim?
Quote from: Jonny B Smart on April 25, 2017, 10:06:27 PMYou can do tangent here, but you can't figure out the angle of the sun in the other thread? Selective ignorance?Who said I couldn't figure out angles? Quote from: Lonegranger on April 26, 2017, 12:04:28 AMThe standard model wrong! Now that's interesting...could you show us your workings, you being a grad physicist and all that....Where did I claim the standard model is wrong?I know I probably shouldn't reply, as you are a confirmed stalker and it will likely just feed your infatuation, but I will go ahead because you really need help with the basics.Quote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 05:21:34 AMdo you have any evidence for this claim?Yes.Quote from: Canadabear on April 25, 2017, 01:53:47 PMdo you have any evidence for this claim?Yes.Quote from: Canadabear on April 25, 2017, 01:53:47 PMdo you have any evidence for this claim?Yes.
than show us that evidence
Quote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 10:26:58 AMthan show us that evidenceEvidence for what?
the evidence for the claims that you made
Quote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 10:38:43 AMthe evidence for the claims that you made Sure thing. Which do you want evidence for?
Quote from: Junker on April 26, 2017, 10:48:23 AMSure thing. Which do you want evidence for?all of your claims
Sure thing. Which do you want evidence for?
Quote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 10:55:38 AMQuote from: Junker on April 26, 2017, 10:48:23 AMSure thing. Which do you want evidence for?all of your claimsCan you be more specific? I have made quite a few claims over the years and I'm afraid I don't remember all of them off the top of my head.
Do you have any evidence to support this claim?
Quote from: justaguy on April 26, 2017, 11:03:36 AMDo you have any evidence to support this claim?Yes.
Quote from: Junker on April 26, 2017, 11:04:34 AMQuote from: justaguy on April 26, 2017, 11:03:36 AMDo you have any evidence to support this claim?Yes.Well, do you have any evidence to support that claim?
Quote from: Junker on April 26, 2017, 11:02:06 AMQuote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 10:55:38 AMQuote from: Junker on April 26, 2017, 10:48:23 AMSure thing. Which do you want evidence for?all of your claimsCan you be more specific? I have made quite a few claims over the years and I'm afraid I don't remember all of them off the top of my head.you could start with the claims in this thread.
Quote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 11:17:51 AMQuote from: Junker on April 26, 2017, 11:02:06 AMQuote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 10:55:38 AMQuote from: Junker on April 26, 2017, 10:48:23 AMSure thing. Which do you want evidence for?all of your claimsCan you be more specific? I have made quite a few claims over the years and I'm afraid I don't remember all of them off the top of my head.you could start with the claims in this thread.Sure thing. The evidence is Special Relativity.
ok than you also accept the global earth because flat earth as described by the FEIB here is not possible with the Special Relativity.
Quote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 11:40:37 AMok than you also accept the global earth because flat earth as described by the FEIB here is not possible with the Special Relativity.What?
you accept that the Special Relativity confirms gravity.
Quote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 11:54:26 AMyou accept that the Special Relativity confirms gravity.Where did I say that?
Quote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 12:41:25 PMI saw a large debate on it kicked off the other week so I thought I'd help put it to bed, what model of Gravity do you believe in?I prefer the UA/EA model when it comes to FET. Not without its flaws, but it is better than what I am seeing over here recently. I am not sure when the shift happened, but I haven't been around much lately so whatevs.
I saw a large debate on it kicked off the other week so I thought I'd help put it to bed, what model of Gravity do you believe in?
Quote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 01:05:21 PMIs that the everything is accelerating upwards or another model I haven't heard of?Yes, the acceleration model.
Is that the everything is accelerating upwards or another model I haven't heard of?
Quote from: Junker on April 26, 2017, 12:03:57 PMQuote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 11:54:26 AMyou accept that the Special Relativity confirms gravity.Where did I say that?you should see a doctor, seams like you getting alsheimer:Quote from: Junker on April 25, 2017, 12:49:33 PMQuote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 12:41:25 PMI saw a large debate on it kicked off the other week so I thought I'd help put it to bed, what model of Gravity do you believe in?I prefer the UA/EA model when it comes to FET. Not without its flaws, but it is better than what I am seeing over here recently. I am not sure when the shift happened, but I haven't been around much lately so whatevs.Quote from: Junker on April 25, 2017, 01:07:47 PMQuote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 01:05:21 PMIs that the everything is accelerating upwards or another model I haven't heard of?Yes, the acceleration model.remember?
Quote from: Canadabear on April 25, 2017, 01:28:24 PMQuote from: Junker on April 25, 2017, 01:26:10 PMQuote from: mysticalcreature on April 25, 2017, 01:18:36 PMIf FE don't believe in space, it accelerate upwards in what?I don't know any FE proponents that do not believe in space.Quote from: Canadabear on April 25, 2017, 01:20:36 PMat what speed do we travel upwards at the moment?A percentage of c. I could give you a more precise number if we knew T. The motion is relative anyway, so it isn't like the current speed is particularly important.yes, because what happen if we reach lightspeed?Just need a little info. I am not a physics expert, so I don't quite understand. Why would the UA theory require that we are heading towards light-speed. I have seen many posts regarding that, but I don't understand. In RE, we are traveling through the universe at a certain speed, but not accelerating towards light-speed...
Quote from: Junker on April 25, 2017, 01:26:10 PMQuote from: mysticalcreature on April 25, 2017, 01:18:36 PMIf FE don't believe in space, it accelerate upwards in what?I don't know any FE proponents that do not believe in space.Quote from: Canadabear on April 25, 2017, 01:20:36 PMat what speed do we travel upwards at the moment?A percentage of c. I could give you a more precise number if we knew T. The motion is relative anyway, so it isn't like the current speed is particularly important.yes, because what happen if we reach lightspeed?
Quote from: mysticalcreature on April 25, 2017, 01:18:36 PMIf FE don't believe in space, it accelerate upwards in what?I don't know any FE proponents that do not believe in space.Quote from: Canadabear on April 25, 2017, 01:20:36 PMat what speed do we travel upwards at the moment?A percentage of c. I could give you a more precise number if we knew T. The motion is relative anyway, so it isn't like the current speed is particularly important.
If FE don't believe in space, it accelerate upwards in what?
at what speed do we travel upwards at the moment?
Quote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 12:14:24 PMQuote from: Junker on April 26, 2017, 12:03:57 PMQuote from: Canadabear on April 26, 2017, 11:54:26 AMyou accept that the Special Relativity confirms gravity.Where did I say that?you should see a doctor, seams like you getting alsheimer:Quote from: Junker on April 25, 2017, 12:49:33 PMQuote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 12:41:25 PMI saw a large debate on it kicked off the other week so I thought I'd help put it to bed, what model of Gravity do you believe in?I prefer the UA/EA model when it comes to FET. Not without its flaws, but it is better than what I am seeing over here recently. I am not sure when the shift happened, but I haven't been around much lately so whatevs.Quote from: Junker on April 25, 2017, 01:07:47 PMQuote from: JackSchitt on April 25, 2017, 01:05:21 PMIs that the everything is accelerating upwards or another model I haven't heard of?Yes, the acceleration model.remember?Are you confused? While I prefer the acceleration model, at no point did I say SR confirms gravity. I would suggest you go back and read the thread again. Maybe a little slower this time.