Is Bended Space = Contracted Space ?

[Bjarne]

The acceleration on a mass of 6E24 kg 3000km from the center of the Earth is:
a = 9.8 m/s2 * 3000000 m / 6358000m = 4.6 m/s^2

This is what I thought

"Mass contraction" does not exist.

So the pain you get when having a stone on 1000 kg on you big toe, is some kind of an illusion?
Because of mass contraction (between the earth and the stone) doesn’t exist?
Newton was simply wrong?
Is that what you are saying?
Tell me shall we forget the equation: MmG/r^2
I haven’t got a logic answer to that question?
What causes mass attraction?
Try to explain it so that also mother cow can understand it ………..

 

[Ziggurat]

OK
This mean that 3000km from the centre of the Earth you will have acc due to gravity:

6E24 * 9.8 * 3000000 m / 6358000m = 2.77 E 25 m/s^2

Waahhh faster than c, - Something is wrong …..(right?)

Indeed, something is wrong.

First off, the units on your answer are an acceleration, not a velocity. There is no upper limit I know of to acceleration, and since it doesn't have the same units as velocity, any limit couldn't be equal to c anyways.

Secondly, the fact that your answer is an acceleration and not a force should clue you in that you're doing something wrong. Indeed, as written, the equation should yield a force, NOT an acceleration.

Lastly, I will tell you what exactly your error was. You inserted the mass of the earth, but the mass of the earth is already included implicitly in g. The mass you SHOULD have been using is the mass of whatever test object it is that's being attracted to the earth. One would presumably use something much less massive than the earth itself for this purpose. But regardless, to get an acceleration, you would have to divide out by this mass, so as above, you don't have the right acceleration for any mass.

 

[Reality Check]

This is what I thought

It is not what you calculated though.

So the pain you get when having a stone on 1000 kg on you big toe, is some kind of an illusion?
Because of mass contraction (between the earth and the stone) doesn’t exist?
Newton was simply wrong?
Is that what you are saying?
Tell me shall we forget the equation: MmG/r^2
I haven’t got a logic answer to that question?
What causes mass attraction?
Try to explain it so that also mother cow can understand it ………..

What are you talking about?
If I hit my toe on a rock mass does not contract. I hit my toe on a rock and feel it.

Please define "mass contraction" so that a simple person like me can understand it.
Try to explain it so that also mother cow can understand it ...........

Newton never mentions "mass contraction". We have not forgotten F= MmG/r^2 (the gravitaional force exerted between 2 bodies of mass M and m a distance r apart). That equation is used to derive that the force on a mass of m inside the Earth is mgr/r_E.

You do not have a logic answer to any question.
You do not have a logic answer to the fact that contracting space can never produce gravity.

 

[sol invictus]

OK
This mean that 3000km from the centre of the Earth you will have acc due to gravity:

6E24 * 9.8 * 3000000 m / 6358000m = 2.77 E 25 m/s^2

Waahhh faster than c, - Something is wrong …..(right?)

For someone that claims that he has corrected a mistake that Newton, Gauss, Einstein, and every other physicist and mathematician that lived in the last 350 years made, isn't it a bit strange that you are incapable of performing this utterly trivial bit of algebra, incapable of substituting the correct values into that formula, and incapable of noticing that your result - an acceleration - cannot be compared to c - a speed?

Three possibilities suggest themselves: you're too stupid to recognize your own incompetence (Dunning-Kruger etc. etc.), you're insane, or you're seeking attention and don't believe what you're saying.

 

[LissaLysikan]

I vote for one, two, and three. Probably a double on the third, considering how often he pushes his own web page as reference.

 

[Skamandros]

6E24 * 9.8 * 3000000 m / 6358000m = 2.77 E 25 m/s^2

This is treu only when the 3 is subjusted. If you take g = Gm₁m₂/r² if G is 3 fixtated of the spin of the gravitions. When big rock is on little toe the sis made into ellispses and makes pain. Ellispses only two foci so that is one is what lacks one for the 3. The moon is obriting beacause 3 spins of the hadrons make space like the 2, so it pulls up not down. The wisdom of Gligor Makedonska. Einstein is approximation for special spaces and mases of hadrons in transitation. If the 3 is not in the cooridites of space then gravity is repulsing not contracting. So the hdrons could be of the rule of 4 wich is duble of the 2 not if the three. See all is expained by the three.

 

[Toke]

Where did Pixie of Key go?

 

[Mashuna]

Where did Pixie of Key go?

I was wondering the same thing. I was hoping for more of a crank show-down between Pixie claiming everything is expanding, and Bjarne saying it's all contracting.

 

[Toke]

I was wondering the same thing. I was hoping for more of a crank show-down between Pixie claiming everything is expanding, and Bjarne saying it's all contracting.

Yes, and Skamandros summing it up for clarity.

 

[Bjarne]

-----------

First off, the units on your answer are acceleration, not a velocity.

Bravo I never asked for F but for a

Secondly, the fact that your answer is acceleration and not a force should clue you in that you're doing something wrong. Indeed, as written, the equation should yield a force, NOT acceleration.

Take it easy comrade
I was asking;
I am preparing measurement to test “central gravity”
Now tell me what is g approximately 1000 km inside the earth 2000 km 3000 km 4000 km and 5000km. I am a bit confused since I have hear a lot different.

I will tell you what exactly your error was. You inserted the mass of the earth, but the mass of the earth is already included implicitly in g

Not my error
I just have shown the equation was wrong (and still is)

What are you talking about?

What causes mass attraction?
What is mass attraction?
What do you know about it?
What do you believe it is?
Explain it please so clear that mother cow also can understand.

For someone that claims that he has corrected a mistake that Newton, Gauss, Einstein, and every other physicist and mathematician that lived in the last 350 years made, isn't it a bit strange that you are incapable of performing this utterly trivial bit of algebra, incapable of substituting the correct values into that formula, and incapable of noticing that your result - an acceleration - cannot be compared to c - a speed?

Easy comrade
I had just make it clear that the equation was wrong (and still is).

The acceleration on a mass of 6E24 kg 3000km from the centre of the Earth is:
a = 9.8 m/s2 * 3000000 m / 6358000m = 4.6 m/s^2

Are you sure
Never hear about that mass above the measurement point (according to our believe) “should” counteract that value you have found.
Still I think the equation is not complete / correct

And don’t forget

• What causes mass attraction?
• What is mass attraction?
• What do you know about it?
• What do you believe it is?

Explain it please so clear that mother cow also can understand.
-----------

 

[steenkh]

Explain it please so clear that mother cow also can understand.

As it has been mentioned before, Bjarne is a bovinophile, so do not be surprised if you explain it to his mother cow, and his reply is "moo"!

 

[Bjarne]

As it has been mentioned before, Bjarne is a bovinophile, so do not be surprised if you explain it to his mother cow, and his reply is "moo"!

I have just ask Caroline Cow, she are so sorry because she did not understood it.
Can someone be so kind to explain it so mother cow also can understand
What causes mass attraction

 

[Leviath]

I never asked for F but for a

Yet you calculated force, got the result in acceleration and compared it to velocity. With that in mind there is no wonder why you think every physicist who ever lived the last 350 years is/was wrong, you can't even perform a simple calculation.

I have seen your nonsense on a certain other forum where you also wanted to tell us that evolution is a silly theory, that the Lorenz factor should be considered a force, that the earth is expanding and that the plate tectonics theory is bunk (I'm still waiting for a calculation on that one btw).
I had hoped that you coming to a forum where there are many real physicists would spark a real discussion. But I see the effort was futile and the discussion has gone down the gutter, as usual.

 

[Bjarne]

Yet you calculated force, got the result in acceleration and compared it to velocity.

No I just demonstrate that I was asking in east and got a answer in west
This doesn’t demonstrate that I am stupid..

I have seen your nonsense on a certain other forum where you also wanted to tell us that evolution is a silly theory, that the Lorenz factor should be considered a force, that the earth is expanding and that the plate tectonics theory is bunk (I'm still waiting for a calculation on that one btw).

Yes I think Niel Adams could be more correct that the prevailing believes.
Let’s start from the beginning
Tell me the earth’s exact diameter

• In meter if you can
• Or in cm. if you can
• Or in mm if you can

And next: - is subduction proven ? Where is the evidence ?
Yes we know the the ocean bottums expands, but do we know why ?

I had hoped that you coming to a forum where there are many real physicists would spark a real discussion.

You mean like that:
I have (serveral times) ask about what causes mass attraction
One """answer""" follows: .

The explanation of that using curved space is as simple and beautiful as it gets. All objects follow "straight" lines, the shortest distance between two points (unless acted on by some other force). Since all objects follow the same trajectories, they all experience the same acceleration,

These parts have absolutely noting with the question to do.

and therefore the gravitational force is directly and exactly proportional to their inertial mass.

And this maybe a answer why UFOs can be observed on the moon. Hence it have also nothing with the question to do either?

The second answer was that mass attraction doesn’t exsist .
When I asked why I did not got any reply

Did you say : “”many real physicists would spark a real discussion”” ????

• What causes mass attraction
• What do we believe ?
• What do we know ?
• Still waiting…..
• Mother cow is also waiting

 

[dlorde]

As I said never believe the books
In my book evidence and proof is the same.

Freudian slip? As an example of logic that's ironic. Clearly your book should never be believed, as you so rightly say.

 

[Bjarne]

Freudian slip? As an example of logic that's ironic. Clearly your book should never be believed, as you so rightly say

And one more exsample:

Then you must be reading a bad Danish/English disctionary.
In science there is no such thing as proof. All trusted scientific theories are backed up by bodies of evidence that show that their predictions are correct.
(I hope this is Danish): Videnskabelig metode

This mean: directy translated : The Scientific Method not evidence.

Never believe the book

 

[martu]

Did you say : “”many real physicists would spark a real discussion”” ????

• What causes mass attraction
• What do we believe ?
• What do we know ?
• Still waiting…..
• Mother cow is also waiting

Here's a better list:

• I honestly do not think you are intelligent enough to understand any answer we could give you
• Your questions are nonsensical
• You can't do simple algebra
• You have an ego that is, frankly, an ugly trait
• Your English isn't good enough to communicate your ideas

Good bye Bjarne, when come back, bring maths.

 

[Leviath]

No I just demonstrate that I was asking in east and got a answer in west
This doesn’t demonstrate that I am stupid..

It demonstrates you are utterly incapable of expressing yourself precisely. At least east and west can be compared.

Let’s start from the beginning
Tell me the earth’s exact diameter

This thread is not about plate tectonics, so make another thread if you want to discuss that.
And you are very well aware of the fact that no one can give you an exact diameter of the earth. This has been pointed out to you before.

 

[Bjarne]

Here's a better list:

Bad Loser

It demonstrates you are utterly incapable of expressing yourself precisely. At least east and west can be compared.

Ooohhh yeahh also black and white

And you are very well aware of the fact that no one can give you an exact diameter of the earth. This has been pointed out to you before.

Exactly
and exactly therefore we must be carefully that ”religion”” fanaticism and concrete-believe not will dominate any conclusion. BUT we must be open to that the cause to that Adams claims could be unknown, exactly like Adams claims.
-------------------------------------------------------------
There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry. There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors.
-- J. Robert Oppenheimer

 

[LissaLysikan]

BUT we must be open to that the cause to that Adams claims could be unknown, exactly like Adams claims.

Some things can be attributed to not being conversant with English.
This isn't one of them.
This is just random words strung together, like the filter-bypass text in spam.