 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / June 2007A Formula for the Gravitational Constant G found
A formula for the gravitational constant G found: G = pi / (e * sqrt(3)) * 10^-10 that's (for the calculator): G = pi / (e * sqrt(3)) * 1e-10 using pi = 3.1415926535897932384626433832795 e = 2.7182818284590452353602874713526624 gives G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 "gravman" <gravman@gravmangravman.inv> schrieb: >A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 Ein unverzichtbares Werkzeug für den Numerologen ist der Inverse Symbolic Calculator. http://oldweb.cecm.sfu.ca/projects/ISC/ISCmain.html Grüße / Regards, Joachim Dear gravman: > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 G cannot be established to more than 5 significant figures (excluding the exponent). http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?bg|search_for=universal_in! So are you implying that pi, e, or the square root operator is unstable? I mean, since you have no theory, just some random correlation, you must have some agenda against basic number theory... David A. Smith >A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > gives > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 [hanson] .... ahahaha... that is all good and lovely and interesting but it's a bad tasting gravy you served here, gravyman. *** G ist NOT dimensionless! *** but L^3/(M*T^2) Improve your cooking and thanks for the laughs! ahahaha.... ahahahanson > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 The units are of course the well known units, ie: m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 N m^2 kg^-2 >"gravman" <gravman@gravmangravman.inv> wrote in message >> G = pi / (e * sqrt(3)) * 10^-10 >The units are of course the well known units, ie: > m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 > N m^2 kg^-2 Remarkable! Those guys who invented the metric system really knew what they were doing! -- Richard  Signature"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963. >>"gravman" <gravman@gravmangravman.inv> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >-- Richard Yes, obviously Nature is metric :-) w. >> A formula for the gravitational constant G found: >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > N m^2 kg^-2 > The units are an invention of man, whereas G exists independent of man. > > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > > > > G = pi / (e * sqrt(3)) * 10^-10 > > > > that's (for the calculator): > > G = pi / (e * sqrt(3)) * 1e-10 the 1e-10 means of course 1exp-10 > > using > > pi = 3.1415926535897932384626433832795 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 > N m^2 kg^-2 > the 1e-10 means of course 1exp-10 mmmm and the e? (that's what I want to know.) John > > the 1e-10 means of course 1exp-10 > mmmm > and the e? > (that's what I want to know.) e is of course the Euler number (the base of the natural logarithm). For more details see http://www.mu.org/~doug/exp/ or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_(mathematical_constant) . If your calculator or math lib doesn't have the e^n function you can use the given number 2.7182818284590452353602874713526624 But if it has a built-in e then most calculators do expect entering e^1 > > > the 1e-10 means of course 1exp-10 > > mmmm [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > 2.7182818284590452353602874713526624 > But if it has a built-in e then most calculators do expect entering e^1 I know 'what' it is. I want to know 'why' it should relate to gravity. John > > > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 > > N m^2 kg^-2 G = 6.6725949651160151e-011 I think now I can improve also Planck's constant h too, together with Dirac's hbar: IMO there is an integer relation between G and h, possibly also with other units, ie. G/h = 10^23 ( that's h/G = 1/10^23 ) leading to h_should_be = 6.6725949651160159e-034 hbar_should_be = 1.0619764719483069e-034 (but this is preliminary result only, ie. not extensively tested yet). ...we are getting closer to the quantum qubit (3) integer world... :-) > > > > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > ...we are getting closer to the quantum qubit (3) integer world... :-) I think you might want to take a look at Avogadro's Number (currently falsely thought to be 6.0221415 ? 10^23) and the radius of the earth (foolishly believed to be 6378.1 km) also. - Randy ahahaha... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha gravy man, now you are cooking... Do your gig/gag for/on each and every constant ... and if the whole set turns out to be internally consistent then you have created a new unit system.... the "Gravy Man"'s. Whether anyone but you will like its taste is gonna be YOUR sales problem.... ahahaha... ahahanson >> > > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: >> > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > ...we are getting closer to the quantum qubit (3) integer world... :-) > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 Wrong! measured gravitational constant = 6.67300 × 10-11 m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 in mks units. Try some other unit system! > > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > measured gravitational constant = 6.67300 × 10-11 m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 > in mks units. Try some other unit system! Yours is wrong (10-11 what ??? :-) See my update. > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 1) G has units: m^3/kg-sec^2 2) You aren't even close. Best empirical G = 6.674215x10^(-11) m^3/kg-sec^2 by quadrupole torsion pendulum, Science 288(5468) 944 (2000) Phys. Rev. Lett. 85(14) 2869 (2000) <http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Phys.+Rev.+Lett.+85(14)+2869+(2000)&hl=en&um =1&oi=scholart> 3) Given any two irrational numbers 'x' and 'y' it is always possible to find integers j, k, m, n such that |(j)(x^m) - (k)(y^n)| < epsilon, where "epsilon" is arbitrarily small. One should not be impressed by such a relationship since one could find an arbitrarily large number of relationships as good or better by picking any other irrational number, like the Napierian base 'e', Euler's constant gamma, the Golden Ratio, any irrational square root, etc. 4) Idiot. SignatureUncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 > > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > 1) G has units: m^3/kg-sec^2 Wrong. The correct units are: m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 N m^2 kg^-2 and at least one more (see wiki etc.). > 2) You aren't even close. Best empirical G = 6.674215x10^(-11) > m^3/kg-sec^2 by quadrupole torsion pendulum, Many experiments have many different results... I'm convinced the avove FORMULA gives the final and exact solution of G. > Science 288(5468) 944 (2000) > Phys. Rev. Lett. 85(14) 2869 (2000) > <http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Phys.+Rev.+Lett.+85(14)+2869+(2000)&hl=en&um =1&oi=scholart> This formula brings an end to the 300 years lasting search and the countless experiments. > 3) Given any two irrational numbers 'x' and 'y' it is always possible > to find integers j, k, m, n such that |(j)(x^m) - (k)(y^n)| < epsilon, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > number, like the Napierian base 'e', Euler's constant gamma, the > Golden Ratio, any irrational square root, etc. Yeah, in theory much is possible... :-) .... AHAHAHAHA... ahahaha... ahahaha.. AHAHAHA... >> > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: >> > G = pi / (e * sqrt(3)) * 10^-10 >> > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 > > This formula brings an end to the 300 years lasting search > and the countless experiments. [hanson] .... ahahaha... certainly, that seems to be that way in your own mind and furthermore since you are exactly at the center of the measurable universe you are correct... for yourself... It's great gravy though, gravy man... ahahaha.. Thansk for the laughs!.... ahahaha.... ahahahanson >> 1) G has units: m^3/kg-sec^2 >Wrong. The correct units are: > m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 > N m^2 kg^-2 >and at least one more (see wiki etc.). You should talk about units. Your so-called formula produces a dimensionless number, yet G has dimensions of m^3/(kg-sec^2). And m^3/kg-sec^2, m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 and N m^2 kg^-2 are all different ways of writing the same thing. (remember, kg^-1 = 1/kg) You need to retake high school physics, and to pay attention to the dimensional analysis topic. You made another dimensional analysis mistake several days ago when you claimed to find the speed of gravity. >> 2) You aren't even close. Best empirical G = 6.674215x10^(-11) >> m^3/kg-sec^2 by quadrupole torsion pendulum, >Many experiments have many different results... >I'm convinced the avove FORMULA gives the final and exact solution of G. That's not a formula. It's a bunch of numbers when multiplied together, just happen to be somewhat close to the mks value of G (but not close to the cgs value, nor to the English units value). And, of course, you give no explanation whatsoever of why your so-called 'formula' is valid. Being somewhat close is not proof of anything. 22/7 is reasonably close to pi. It is not a formula for computing pi. 355/113 is even closer to pi, much closer to pi than your so-called "formula" is to the mks value of G. 355/113 isn't a formula for calculating pi, either. > > > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > > > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > This formula brings an end to the 300 years lasting search > and the countless experiments. SCHMUCK - YOU PREDICT AN EMPIRICALLY WRONG NUMBER. You are an idiot. SignatureUncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 > This formula brings an end to the 300 years lasting search > and the countless experiments. > How easy it is for the uneducated to fool themselves! > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 All *real* numerologists manage to work the golden ratio in there somewhere. And perhaps the orbit of the earth or the height of the pyramids. - Randy >A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 According to http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?bg|search_for=universal_in! we have now 6.67361 e-11 =< G =< 6.67495 e-11 Back to the drawing board :-) Dirk Vdm >A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 According to http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?bg|search_for=universal_in! we have now 6.67361 e-11 =< G =< 6.67495 e-11 Back to the drawing board :-) Dirk Vdm > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 Fine. But now explain why it has that form. It's not sufficient to come up with fundamental physical constants from basic arithmetical operations on arbitrary numbers. Any idiot can do that and has. Until you can explain how it came about, it's so much mathemtical masturbation. > > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Until you can explain how it came about, it's so much mathemtical > masturbation. A paper is on the way... > > > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > A paper is on the way Just make sure it's at least 2-ply. "gravman" >A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 In my system of units you have G = 1 Andersen Aage > "gravman" > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > In my system of units you have G = 1 Andersen Good one :-) Dirk Vdm "Dirk Van de moortel" >> "gravman" >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Dirk Vdm The unit is named after the storyteller Hans Christian Andersen and I have discovered the relation G = pi/pi Andersen. Whether this relation is exact is yet to be determined. Aage > "Dirk Van de moortel" >>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > discovered the relation G = pi/pi Andersen. Whether this relation is exact > is yet to be determined. Even better - keep coming :-)) Dirk Vdm > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 Sorry, there isn't any "gravitational constant", nor qualified "mass attraction" or such absurdities, simply because gravitation is bipolar, substance relevant, & therefore variable, as proven by natural history & by the GFMI, following the EVU. So we don't need any formula for something that doesn't exist. Quite appart from the additional fact that nature doesn't know mathematics, it being far too dangerous to attempt describing it quantifyingly: cf Quantification > Mathematics > Modelling > Scientific Method The most Central Problem of Global Civilization ++++ EVU = Electric Vortex Universe; cf www.paf.li/perceptions.htm. GFMI = Gravitational Field Measuring Instrument: www.qualifying-science.com/downloads/qualifyingproofofgfmi.pdf www.qualifying-science.com/downloads/qsatphysicalcongress2006a4.pdf (Engl paper Physical Congress 2006 St Petersburg) cf www.paf.li/gfmi-e.pdf; output of experiment in http://evu.paf.li, substance relevant in http://evu.paf.li/rrd/hg.html - Mercury http://evu.paf.li/rrd/cu.html - Copper http://evu.paf.li/rrd/sn.html - Tin http://evu.paf.li/rrd/pb.html - Lead Moin, gravman schrub: > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > > G = pi / (e * sqrt(3)) * 10^-10 ^^^^^^ Woher weiß die Natur, dass wir im Dezimalsystem rechnen? G = pi / (e * sqrt(3)) * 1001010100000010111110010000000000 sähe für Binärsystemwesen wohl schon nicht mehr so verlockend aus... CU Rollo > Aformulafor thegravitationalconstantGfound: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > G= 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 Here's another: g = PI * PI Which is neither co-incidence nor exact. >A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 The numerical value of G depends entirely on our defined reference standards of length, mass and time, all of which are arbitrary. On the other hand, e and pi are mathematical constants with absolute numerical values. So stop wasting your time trying to do the impossible. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Einstein's Relativity - the greatest HOAX since jesus christ's virgin mother. gravman schrieb: > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 Unfortunately, G = 5.7733e-8 (I prefer dyn, feet & ounces). SCNR, Jürgen "Jürgen Clade" > Unfortunately, G = 5.7733e-8 (I prefer dyn, feet & ounces). Wrong. You forgot your units. G = 1 andersen = 5.7733e-8 dyn/ounce^2 = 6.68e-11 feet^3/(ounce*sec^2) "Aage Andersen" > "Jürgen Clade" > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > G = 1 andersen = 5.7733e-8 dyn/ounce^2 = 6.68e-11 feet^3/(ounce*sec^2) sorry G = 1 andersen = 5.773e-8 feet^2*dyn/ounce^2 = 6.68-11 feet^3/(ounce*sec^2) Aage > A formula for the gravitational constant G found: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > G = 6.6725949651160142986157035896252e-11 You might find this entertaining gravman: x = 1/(G*c) = 49.987126 x ~ 50 G ~ 1/(c*50) G ~ 1/(2*c*(2*phi - 1)^4) G ~ 6.671282e-11 Where phi is the golden ratio: phi = (1 + sqrt(5)) / 2 = 1.618033 Not exactly a full-blown "first principles" derivation, but amusing nonetheless. - Shawn |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.