Shakespeare: Supreme Masterpiece and Proof Definitive by Pierre Henrion
http://serifofnottingham.blogspot.com/2013/04/shakespeare-supreme-masterpiece-and.html?m=1
I don’t see any conflict in saying an object has an IFOR or saying it changes (relative to other objects) if an accelerating force is applied to it. It’s a useful concept IMV when considering the relative motion of two of more objects. Per Disco Petes question (which I thought was very good btw) about if there was only one object in the universe, the concept of an IFOR in that case is meaningless - better to just talk about inertia.
Is there a better term than IFOR to describe the case of multiple objects coasting through space in which some may have accelerative forces applied to them for some of the time?
I dunno!
He was trying to align his cartridge and had lost the tool, so he had to design his own.
At first, he was playing with General Relativity and the Unified Force to calculate the deflection of the stylus as the turntable rotates on the intertial field of the surface of the rotating Earth. Einstein was trying to create frame reference Hermitian matrices to make a coordinate transfer that would take into account gravitons and the Coriolis Force when faced with speeds above Warp 8.
Eventually though, after much cognac and cigars, he realized that Classical Physics was sufficient... and then the new alignment tool arrived in the mail.
So, he stopped his work on the Unified Field Theory of Cartridge Alignment, calibrated the darn thing, served himself a cigar and cognac, queued up some Rossini and sat back to enjoy the music.
It's really unfortunate because he might have solved the problems of Quad as well... Unified Theory that tied QS, SQ, CD-4 and Dolby. 😛
OTOH, his work required a tonearm with an effective length of 23.45 inches.
Ha! Ha!
Actually, Einstein had his own vinyl record collection which has been put on display at an exhibition.
When Einstein was asked how he conjured up his theory of relativity he replied, "It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception."
In mono!
Imagine what he could have done in Stereo!
Or perhaps lost his mind and become a lawyer if confronted with Quad?
Einstein worked a simplification... he reasoned that at tonearm effective lengths of over 20 inches, the ratio of the offset (O) to the length (EL), ie🙁ROEL). was less than the Orthogonal Promiscuous Angular Gradient ( OPAG ) which is the primary distortion driver in arms of less than 6 inches.
That is,
where ROEL = F( OL, EL)
{ EL > 20" : ROEL << OPAG }
Simple, huh?
OK, we assume an OL of less than half an inch. But then since the mass of the tonearm had to very small.... the cartridge proper had to be tiny.
BTW, one of the main issues that Einstein ran into is the angular velocity of his alignment originally was so fast that relativistic effects were noted ( the record had to be 20 inches in order to play 30 seconds of music... enough for most Italian Baroque but not good for German Romantics)... he solved this by slowing it down to a mere 1235 RPM. As you can imagine, his antiskating mechanisms had to be eroic... but he was German, so he could handle that.
Einstein may have been anti-skating, but he sure could ride a bicycle!
Attachments
Einstein, Schmeinstein! 😀
Cleverest Mathematician who ever lived was Ramanujan:
Entirely self taught, largely using the limited schoolbooks available to him. Just a natural talent. Weak on Proof, strong on Intuition.
Nearly solved Fermat as in 1729, the taxicab number. Opened up the field of elliptic functions. A peculiar obsession.
He would have been as interested in Conformal Geometry as I am:
Never spent too much time on the Riemann Hypothesis, but I reckon he could have cracked it.
My current takeaway is that spin works very differently with massive and massless particles. This is where we should focus.
Cleverest Mathematician who ever lived was Ramanujan:
Entirely self taught, largely using the limited schoolbooks available to him. Just a natural talent. Weak on Proof, strong on Intuition.
Nearly solved Fermat as in 1729, the taxicab number. Opened up the field of elliptic functions. A peculiar obsession.
He would have been as interested in Conformal Geometry as I am:
Never spent too much time on the Riemann Hypothesis, but I reckon he could have cracked it.
My current takeaway is that spin works very differently with massive and massless particles. This is where we should focus.
Attachments
Last edited:
So iyo, to what extent did Einstein enable current hypotheses/school of thought regarding "spin"?
Ramanujan would have made his turntable rotate at 1729 rpm.
With a right hand spin, of course, being sort of British.
With a right hand spin, of course, being sort of British.
Let's test you, Disco-Pete! 🙂
Two mathematicians are in a bar.
The first one says to the second that the average person knows very little about basic mathematics. The second one disagrees, and claims that most people can cope with a reasonable amount of math.
The first mathematician wanders off to the bathroom, so the second guy calls over their waitress. He tells her that in a few minutes, when his friend has returned, he is going to call her over and ask her a question. All she has to do is answer "one third x cubed." She repeats "one thir -- dex cue"? He repeats "one third x cubed". She asks, "one thir dex cuebd?" "Yes, that's right," he says. So she agrees, and goes off mumbling to herself, "one thir dex cuebd...".
The first guy returns and the second proposes a bet to prove his point, that most people do know something about basic math. He says he will ask the blonde waitress an integral, and the first laughingly agrees. The second man calls over the waitress and asks "what is the integral of x squared?". The waitress says "one third x cubed" and while walking away, turns back and says over her shoulder "plus a constant C!"
- Status
- Not open for further replies.