Until I adopted Geoff's advanced
"It is precisely because it is fashionable for Americans to know no science, even though they may be well educated otherwise, that they so easily fall prey to nonsense." - Isacc Asimov
I now understand what MATH stands for - Mental Abuse To Humans!
Arguably the most prestigious award in mathematics is the Fields Medal, established in 1936, and now awarded every four years. The Fields Medal is often considered a mathematical equivalent to the Nobel Prize, mainly because nobody at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences thinks mathematics is prize-worthy.
Arguably the most prestigious award in mathematics is the Fields Medal, established in 1936, and now awarded every four years. The Fields Medal is often considered a mathematical equivalent to the Nobel Prize, mainly because nobody at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences thinks mathematics is prize-worthy.
Do they really think that? I presume they're just following Mr. Nobel's wishes.
I do have to wonder, what if a sufficient advance in "computer science" were discovered? Various AI things have discovered a faster sorting algorithm and more efficient matrix operations. The field has science in its name, yet it's arguably mathematics ...
I do have to wonder, what if a sufficient advance in "computer science" were discovered? Various AI things have discovered a faster sorting algorithm and more efficient matrix operations. The field has science in its name, yet it's arguably mathematics ...
The James Webb Space Telescopes has spotted elephants JuMBOs drifting through the Orion nebula star forming region!
https://www.livescience.com/space/a...rogue-objects-floating-through-space-in-pairs
There are 42 pairs of these Jupiter-Mass Binary Objects. Each JuMBO orbits its partner at up to 390 times the distance between Earth and the Sun.
The existence of these Jupiter-mass wide binaries is highly unexpected and challenges current theories of both star and planet formation.
https://www.livescience.com/space/a...rogue-objects-floating-through-space-in-pairs
There are 42 pairs of these Jupiter-Mass Binary Objects. Each JuMBO orbits its partner at up to 390 times the distance between Earth and the Sun.
The existence of these Jupiter-mass wide binaries is highly unexpected and challenges current theories of both star and planet formation.
Factoid: The dude who was the executive director of the Rogers Commission investigating the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster didn’t allow Feynman to add his chapter to the Commission’s final report because it added nothing new. His chapter was later added as an Appendix to the report. Does that surprise you?
As my Boss Bob Beatty at NASA was fond of saying, never get behind anyone 100%.
As my Boss Bob Beatty at NASA was fond of saying, never get behind anyone 100%.
Last edited:
Richard Feynman at his best! He always said: "If it doesn't work when you do the experiment, it's WRONG!"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Commission_Report#Role_of_Richard_Feynman
I think the bottom line was Feynman was outraged that NASA persuaded civilian Christa McAuliffe the thing was perfectly safe, when it really wasn't.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Commission_Report#Role_of_Richard_Feynman
I think the bottom line was Feynman was outraged that NASA persuaded civilian Christa McAuliffe the thing was perfectly safe, when it really wasn't.
Anywhoo, back to Gravity.
These look like models of the world made by Children of Ten in school!
The Play-Doh table seems to have made an effort:
The Papier-mâché and Poster Paint table's effort:
I think all get Gold Stars, especially or knowledge of Geography. The misshapes look a like what you expect from children, but NO. They have got that right too!
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-is-not-round/
What I am trying to figure out is: "If the Earth has this local variation of Gravity, and is not even perfectly rotating oblate spheroid, does Time flow at the same rate at sea level everywhere on Earth?"
Professor Jim Al-Khalili explained earlier in the thread that it does. And he is top man.
@mchambin is usually good on these sort of problems. I am scratching my head. Will all the variables cancel out?
Some help may be in Chapter 9 on Gravity in Spacetime Physics here:
https://www.eftaylor.com/spacetimephysics/
Anybody know?
These look like models of the world made by Children of Ten in school!
The Play-Doh table seems to have made an effort:
The Papier-mâché and Poster Paint table's effort:
I think all get Gold Stars, especially or knowledge of Geography. The misshapes look a like what you expect from children, but NO. They have got that right too!
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-is-not-round/
What I am trying to figure out is: "If the Earth has this local variation of Gravity, and is not even perfectly rotating oblate spheroid, does Time flow at the same rate at sea level everywhere on Earth?"
Professor Jim Al-Khalili explained earlier in the thread that it does. And he is top man.
@mchambin is usually good on these sort of problems. I am scratching my head. Will all the variables cancel out?
Some help may be in Chapter 9 on Gravity in Spacetime Physics here:
https://www.eftaylor.com/spacetimephysics/
Anybody know?
Last edited:
Every experiment is only a highly excerpted representation of a highly excerpted observation, description and interpretation of a highly complex world. It can never be claimed that an experiment reproduces "reality": the "theses work". That would not be science.
And as even Feynman confessed too: ALREADY our equations don't correspond to the observations (-: we don't do science;-).
Exacter: Feynman too was not a scientist;-)-;
And as even Feynman confessed too: ALREADY our equations don't correspond to the observations (-: we don't do science;-).
Exacter: Feynman too was not a scientist;-)-;
“Richard Feynman at his best! He always said: "If it doesn't work when you do the experiment, it's WRONG!"”
It’s only fair to point out that for any AUDIO test - including the “gold standard” controlled double blind test - if the results are not what was expected or are negative it doesn‘t necessary mean there was a failure of the item under test. That’s because there are a number of things that can and do go WRONG with the experiment itself.
It’s only fair to point out that for any AUDIO test - including the “gold standard” controlled double blind test - if the results are not what was expected or are negative it doesn‘t necessary mean there was a failure of the item under test. That’s because there are a number of things that can and do go WRONG with the experiment itself.
Last edited:
It's interesting to note that sea level is not the same everywhere on Earth:
"Most people are surprised to learn that, just as the surface of the Earth is not flat, the surface of the ocean is not flat, and that the surface of the sea changes at different rates around the globe. For instance, the absolute water level height is higher along the West Coast of the United States than the East Coast."
https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/globalsl.html
I notice a bit of a Word Salad there @cumbb,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word_salad
Frankly I worry about you sometimes.
I assure you and @geoffkait that Richard Feynman was a top scientist.
Apropos testing the theory Feynman said: "If it disagrees with experiment, it is WRONG. In that simple statement is the key to science."
@Galu, I haven't figured out all the variables yet. It might depend on Atmospheric pressure, local salinity of the ocean, tides, well it goes on forever really...
What we need here is the Spherical Cow in a vacuum approach IMO:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow
My idea, and it may be entirely wrong, is to calculate for a simple round Earth, and then apply a topological transform.
Now I really must get some stuff done. I have wasted enough time here today, even delving into the wretched Multiway forum, and feeling that I have wasted precious Time. I have a lot of Physics and Maths to be getting on with. 🙁
From the 1993 biography, The Best Mind Since Einstein:
"In general, we look for a new law by the following process: First we guess it; then we compute the consequences of the guess to see what would be implied if this law that we guessed is right; then we compare the result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience, compare it directly with observation, to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment, it is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is - if it disagrees with experiment, it is wrong."
P.S. I think you may be onto something with your Spherical Cow approach!