Split from Would the electron fall into the nucleus if there was an infinite attraction between them?

[Rajiv Naik]

13 minutes ago, Strange said:

That doesn't change the value of pi though. which is what you implied.

It isn't 1 metre.

 

There is an approximate relationship because of the way the metre is defined. But there is no direct connection.

The acceleration due to gravity can't be proportional to pi, because pi is a constant: if you go to the Moon or Mars, you will not find the same relationship.

I think I am misunderstood? or not understood- I m using it (π)to define rate .-

not a constant.

but a constant rate of aaccelleration.

 

 

[Strange]

Just now, Rajiv Naik said:

I think I am misunderstood? or not understood- I m using it (π)to define rate .-

not a constant.

but a constant rate of aaccelleration.

Pi appears in the equation for a pendulum because it is an example of simple harmonic motion.

It does NOT appear in the equation for the acceleration due to gravity.

[Rajiv Naik]

29 minutes ago, Strange said:

That doesn't change the value of pi though. which is what you implied.

It isn't 1 metre.

 

There is an approximate relationship because of the way the metre is defined. But there is no direct connection.

The acceleration due to gravity can't be proportional to pi, because pi is a constant: if you go to the Moon or Mars, you will not find the same relationship.

I think I am misunderstood? or not understood- I m using it (π)to define rate .-

not a constant.

but a constant rate of aaccelleration.

 

 

12 minutes ago, Strange said:

Pi appears in the equation for a pendulum because it is an example of simple harmonic motion.

It does NOT appear in the equation for the acceleration due to gravity.

I think the basic principle remains the same and and can be transerred to other motions also.

 

[Strange]

40 minutes ago, Rajiv Naik said:

I think the basic principle remains the same and and can be transerred to other motions also.

What basic principle?

[Rajiv Naik]

1 hour ago, Strange said:

What basic principle?

I think equivalence principle says that gravity is  acceleration. .

I think obviously pendulem fundamentally works on this principle.

three dimensional universe is distortion of two dimentional spacetime.

so everything is basically can be explained by two dimentional  geometry of triage or circle.

its ultimately that place where answers could be found.

 

 

 

 

[Strange]

20 minutes ago, Rajiv Naik said:

I think equivalence principle says that gravity is  acceleration. .

It says they are indistinguishable.

21 minutes ago, Rajiv Naik said:

I think obviously pendulem fundamentally works on this principle.

Well, it needs a restoring force. Which could be gravity or something else.

21 minutes ago, Rajiv Naik said:

three dimensional universe is distortion of two dimentional spacetime.

What is two dimensional spacetime? Spacetime has four dimensions, not two.

22 minutes ago, Rajiv Naik said:

so everything is basically can be explained by two dimentional  geometry of triage or circle.

If there was any truth in your previous statements, you might be able to draw that conclusion but you seem to be seriously confused.

 

[Rajiv Naik]

l think spacetime is creation of quantum singularity. its completely virtual.all dimensions we notice are sust convinientconcepts -

8 hours ago, Strange said:

It says they are indistinguishable.

Well, it needs a restoring force. Which could be gravity or something else.

What is two dimensional spacetime? Spacetime has four dimensions, not two.

If there was any truth in your previous statements, you might be able to draw that conclusion but you seem to be seriously confused.

 

This is what I have read recently:

The Nature of Space and Time
A pair of researchers have uncovered a potential bridge between general relativity and quantum mechanics — the two preeminent physics theories — and it could force physicists to rethink the very nature of space and time.

Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity describes gravity as a geometric property of space and time. The more massive an object, the greater its distortion of spacetime, and that distortion is felt as gravity.

In the 1970s, physicists Stephen Hawking and Jacob Bekenstein noted a link between the surface area of black holes and their microscopic quantum structure, which determines their entropy. This marked the first realization that a connection existed between Einstein’s theory of general relativity and quantum mechanics.

Less than three decades later, theoretical physicist Juan Maldacena observed another link between between gravity and the quantum world. That connection led to the creation of a model that proposes that spacetime can be created or destroyed by changing the amount of entanglement between different surface regions of an object.

In other words, this implies that spacetime itself, at least as it is defined in models, is a product of the entanglement between objects. ITo further explore this line of thinking, ChunJun Cao and Sean Carroll of the California Institute of Technology (CalTech) set out to see if they could actually derive the dynamical properties of gravity (as familiar from general relativity) using the framework in which spacetime arises out of quantum entanglement. Their research was recently published in arXiv.

Using an abstract mathematical concept called Hilbert space, Cao and Carroll were able to find similarities between the equations that govern quantum entanglement and Einstein’s equations of general relativity. This supports the idea that spacetime and gravity do emerge from entanglement.

the next step in the research is to determine the accuracy of the assumptions they made for this study.

“One of the most obvious ones is to check whether the symmetries of relativity are recovered in this framework, in particular, the idea that the laws of physics don’t depend on how fast you are moving through space

[swansont]

11 hours ago, Rajiv Naik said:

This is what I have read recently:

Where? You need to cite your sources.

[Phi for All]

!

Moderator Note

Closing this while we wait for citation. Please contact staff to re-open it.