A New Clue to Explain Existence (More matter than antimatter

Post Reply New Topic

Since the high road is already being traveled, indulge me in this:

< sarcasm >
My bad, you referred to the last 100 years and our "stagnated" technology during that time, while stating physics had produced zilch. I erroneously referred to this same time period as the 20th century, when in fact you only reference the time period between 1910 and 2010, encompassing a mere 90% of that century.

I sincerely apologize, and can only attempt to justify my error by my recent immersion in the study of fuzzy HSMs, where a 90% observed membership is significant.
< /sarcasm >

Am I the only person whose noticed that the mods here are tolerant to a fault? I realize this is a website for people with something a bit odd in their brain (and I say this being diagnosed myself), so a fair bit of eccentricity is to be expected, but the mods really need to acquaint themselves with trolling elsewhere to learn how to spot it here. Far, far from the first time this has come up.

PS: Go nuts.

The Big Bang produced many things, most did not last, and the real question of what started something from nothing is still unanswered. Post Bang, Newton works to explain how gravity forms stars, and some ten billion years later they explode and spew matter of a higher order about.

Newton also covers how that formed planets, and a lot of space junk.

As soon as the elements needed were cooled enough, there is DNA. Some five billion years ago.

After a period of development, five billion years, we start to ask how this came to be.

Some reasonable people came up with the Scientific Method, and it has worked well to publish experiments that could be checked by others.

Questioning the meaning of the results shown has been the greatest means of advance.

What we have at any given time is what we use, until new facts lead to more questions.

The new facts in this case are time slows in a jet, a geostationary orbit, and our Mars probes and deep space probes also showed slow clocks. Nothing was moving fast enough for light speed to be a factor, the facts point to Time slowing under reduced gravity.

Einstein claimed time as a universal constant. Any math will work when you are wrong.

Newton's law of gravitation has been falsified empirically. It does not account for the anomalous precession of the perihelion of Mercury. Take a look at the law of mutual gravitation. It assumes that gravitational interaction is instantaneous. Gravitational interaction is bounded in speed and not instantaneous. Also the gravitational field itself gravitates, something that Newton's theory did not predict. The best practical demonstration of the inadequacy of Newton's law of gravitation occurs when the relativistic corrects of the GPS are turned off. The location data then becomes very inaccurate, off by kilometers.

ruveyn

Do you have a reference for the "kilometers" error?! If the effect was that large, then the apple would have missed.

The apple hit the ground, just like it was supposed to.

the daily relativistic `correction of the GPS is 38 microseconds per day. 38 millionth of 186,000 mi (speed of light) is a bit over seven miles which will be the error at the end of the day (GPS clocks are reset once a day).

ruveyn

GPS clocks run at 1 part in 10 billion slower than Earth clocks to account for relativistic effects. The compound error between 3 or more satellites would amount to a positional error of just under 1 cm if uncorrected.

And of course it is the application of Newtonian dynamics that puts (and keeps) the satellites in orbit. For a discredited theory, it really serves very well.

Classical mechanics does fine for low energy regimes and systems where velocities are a small fraction of the speed of light. Classical mechanics and classical electrodynamics does not account for atomic processes or even the stability of atoms. For that, one needs quantum physics. However, classical physics is now a first class heuristic. It is no long a fundamental theory of the physical world. It is a first class rule of thumb.

ruveyn