What determines matter's position in space?
-
The space which it has occupied, with relative to the space occupied by other things at the time of observation (given that both the objects are observed from the same frame of reference and space-time co-ordinates).
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
-
... and looking for a "real" solution?
Don't attribute to stupidity what can be equally well explained by buerocracy.
My latest article | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighistpeterchen wrote:
Can't find car keys again?
:laugh:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
-
... and looking for a "real" solution?
Don't attribute to stupidity what can be equally well explained by buerocracy.
My latest article | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist -
-
-
A friend couldn't find her car keys and spent 30 minutes trying to work out where they were. She was sitting on them! :doh:
Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.
You mean she was searching for something sitting in one place for 30 minutes? :wtf:
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
-
After several hours of though, I'd say the big bang.
You really gotta try harder to keep up with everyone that's not on the short bus with you. - John Simmons / outlaw programmer.
-
Chris Austin wrote:
gravity extends to infinity
I have a problem with theories like that. I recently attended a class on using current transformers for measuring currents in power distribution lines, and asked a question of the instructor. I thought it was a simple question, "What is the maximum diameter of a current transformer, with respect to the conductor diameter passing through it, to yield an accurate measurement?" Apparently it wasn't an easy question. The instructor wrote down my question and went back to his company to ask the engineers, then he phoned me weeks later with the answer, "It doesn't matter." I don't buy it. In case you don't know, a current transformer is a multi-turn loop of wire on a toroid, placed around a single conductor carrying the current to be measured. According to theory, all current passing through the hole in the toroid will couple with the conductors around the toroid in an inverse proportion to the number of turns. So, theoretically, if I have a CT with 10 turns, with a conductor carrying 1 amp in the middle, the CT output should be 1/10 amp. That actually works in practice, but one normally uses a CT that isn't more than a few times the diameter of the primary conductor. But what if I'm measuring a current of 1 amp on a 20 gauge wire, but the only CT I have in stock is 10' in diameter? Theoretically, it "doesn't matter." In practice, though, I don't believe that all the flux generated by that tiny wire will ever reach the CT core, let alone correctly register the measured value. It has to do with the value of M - the mutual inductance - of the physical setup, and I'm surprised that no one in the industry has explored it. Some day I'm going to test it, since it seems that no one else ever has in the power industry. Infinity is a great concept for mathematicians, but in the real world it gets a little vague. I'm thinking there's something equivalent to M in the arena of gravitation, and some physical properties control how far gravity can extend its influence. I haven't a clue how to check that, but somebody ought to. I'll bet my physics professors breathed a collective sigh of relief when I changed my major to electrical engineering... :-O
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
Of course there is multi-body issues. However, the two primary theories of gravitation have been proven and demonstrated many times.
Roger Wright wrote:
I'm thinking there's something equivalent to M in the arena of gravitation, and some physical properties control how far gravity can extend its influence.
In a sense there is. Not all particles interact with all matter in the same manner. Also, I don't think it is practical to think of a particle just sitting around with a zero velocity vector so it does complicate things as well.
Roger Wright wrote:
I'll bet my physics professors breathed a collective sigh of relief when I changed my major to electrical engineering...
It was his loss then. My favorite students are the ones who really try to understand things.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --Ralph Charell
-
Of course there is multi-body issues. However, the two primary theories of gravitation have been proven and demonstrated many times.
Roger Wright wrote:
I'm thinking there's something equivalent to M in the arena of gravitation, and some physical properties control how far gravity can extend its influence.
In a sense there is. Not all particles interact with all matter in the same manner. Also, I don't think it is practical to think of a particle just sitting around with a zero velocity vector so it does complicate things as well.
Roger Wright wrote:
I'll bet my physics professors breathed a collective sigh of relief when I changed my major to electrical engineering...
It was his loss then. My favorite students are the ones who really try to understand things.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --Ralph Charell
Chris Austin wrote:
My favorite students are the ones who really try to understand things.
I still do, but the older I get, the harder it becomes. I've always wanted to understand tensor calculus, and I still pick up the book and try to grasp it every few years, but still understanding evades me. Such a powerful technique... :sigh:
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
-
Chris Austin wrote:
My favorite students are the ones who really try to understand things.
I still do, but the older I get, the harder it becomes. I've always wanted to understand tensor calculus, and I still pick up the book and try to grasp it every few years, but still understanding evades me. Such a powerful technique... :sigh:
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
Roger Wright wrote:
I've always wanted to understand tensor calculus, and I still pick up the book and try to grasp it every few years, but still understanding evades me. Such a powerful technique... Sigh
Have you tried it in the context of General Relativity? The field equations are pretty damned incredible and make extensive of tensors. Or if you are into fluid dynamics the Navier Stokes equations make real use of tensors as well in a very real world manner. I know many mathematicians who violently disagree with me but I tend to view math as the language of science and for me to really get the math, I have to be looking at the physical implications.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --Ralph Charell
-
Mass determines its size and gravitational relationship with other objects, and velocity determines its relative position to objects it's moving toward/away from/along with/past. The cool thing to do would be to set a universal "Home" point, and map everything's position and movement relative to that. I vote for either Greenwich Observatory or my belly button.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
The question is meaningless - it assumes that space has some external reference. Space itself is "elestic", so the answer is probably "When?"
ormonds wrote:
The question is meaningless - it assumes that space has some external reference. Space itself is "elestic", so the answer is probably "When?"
Okidoki. My belly button, next Thursday at 11:00 GMT.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!