I think out of the box Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 Hello, I was wondering something that I have pondered on for some time now it is here: Pi Ratio Simply Squared As G 3.14^2 = 9.8596 9.8596 degree = 0.172082483 radian 9.8596 degree = 0.027387778 revolution Could pi ratio squared really be confused as gravity?? Could this be what that Higgs Fields is all about, in relation to pi ratio empty space and the Higgs Bosson?? And mostly, can this explain the constant of proportionality in relation to Issac Newtons' F= G*m1 m1/r squared? I never really did understand why pi ratio is used in some of the most rigorousness of equations used in this study, and maybe this can bring some light on many questions we (even myself) come to question.. Thanks in Advance!
Xittenn Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 (edited) G the gravitational constant found in the [math] F_g [/math] equation is a pretty stubborn [math] 6.67300 \times 10^{-11} \frac{N m^2}{kg^2} [/math]. Little g or the acceleration due to gravity near the earths surface is not a constant, and is also an approximation and varies depending just how close you are to the earths surface. You are also using only two significant figures with pi so the precision of their equivalence would be questionable. If your correlations between these two numbers had any verifiable truth, this would make Earth an unusually special place. Edited December 24, 2011 by Xittenn 1
swansont Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 I also do not see the connection to G; one must also note that G has units and will take on a different value if you change unit systems. So, any connection you find will be coincidental. 2
DrRocket Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 (edited) I also do not see the connection to G; one must also note that G has units and will take on a different value if you change unit systems. So, any connection you find will be coincidental. The only thing that I can imagine that is even vaguely relevant here is that gravity, like any vector field that is radially symmetrical, can be expected to decrease in "flux density" like [math]\frac{1}{r^2}[/math] in three dimensions and this is simply because the surface area of a 2-sphere is [math] 4 \pi r^2[/math]. Edited December 24, 2011 by DrRocket 1
Xittenn Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 To further contrast and make clear the difference between little g and big G: The force due to gravity between the center of mass of two objects is equal to [math] F_g = \frac{G m_1 m_2}{r^2}[/math] Any unbalanced force is equal to a mass multiplied by the experienced acceleration as such [math] F_{un} = m a[/math] Now often a gravitational system is representative of one large body and one small body e.g. a planet and a person. If we divide the [math] F_g [/math] of a planets mass acting on that of a person, by the mass of the person, we arrive at a general value for acceleration experienced by any mass whose center of mass is of the same distance where the original force is experienced. where [math] m_2 = m_{person} [/math] [math] F_g \div m_2 = \frac{G m_1 m_2}{r^2} \div m_2 = m_2 a \div m_2 = a = g [/math] and g near the the Earth's surface is apx. ~[math] 9.8 \frac{m}{s^2} [/math] 1
I think out of the box Posted December 25, 2011 Author Posted December 25, 2011 Hymm, I never did really think about that one, that is very true but if you think in terms of pi ratio and how it is used to find the circumference of a diameter then "maybe" this can hold true for pi squared and g because of its relation to a square and a circle I guess.. Also, I "think" that any number squared is basically just = to zero empty space of its own value... then maybe that value is what takes the form of that "change" in all time and space which from my understanding is zero empty space and maybe can give light as to space time geometry and the "curvature of space time" in relation to circles and the higgs field, I think.... Thanks.. ... I also do not see the connection to G; one must also note that G has units and will take on a different value if you change unit systems. So, any connection you find will be coincidental. What really confuses me is how this function of G works here, it is so similar to how pi ratio is used, and thus pi ratio gives the circumference of a circle in connection to a diameter [unit length], could it "really be" that gravity and pi ratio represent the center of zero gravity like empty 0 space? I mean when you think, it looks like pi ratio calculates the "center" of a diameter [unit length only], then mathematically turns this around to a 360 angle and thus becomes the circumference? For instance here is an example which uses 1 light second and the gamma factor with pi ratio " I think that is what it is called "gamma factor" 186.000*3.14 = 584.0400000000001 584.0400000000001 meter = 6.173307671e-14 light year GAMMA FACTOR HERE: 584.0400000000001^2 = 341102.7216000001 1-341102.7216000001 = -341101.7216000001 341101.7216000001^(1/2) = 584.0391438936265 1/584.0391438936265 = 0.00171221400219 1-0.00171221400219 = 0.99828778599781 0.99828778599781 degree = 59.89726716 minute 299.792458/59.89726716 = 5.00511078742845 5.00511078742845 meter = 5.290406277e-16 light year Then when I use pi ratio squared the following shows a similar relation to gravity and maybe space time. 3.14^2 = 9.8596 9.8596 / 5.290406277e-16 = 18636753934881212 1 / 18636753934881212 = 5.36574128463629e-17<-- it is this value in relation to latter above: 299.792458/59.89726716 = 5.00511078742845 5.00511078742845 meter = 5.290406277e-16 light year Hymm, I could be wrong about this, but sometimes it is good to ask.... Hope this helps, thanks guys! To further contrast and make clear the difference between little g and big G: The force due to gravity between the center of mass of two objects is equal to [math] F_g = \frac{G m_1 m_2}{r^2}[/math] Any unbalanced force is equal to a mass multiplied by the experienced acceleration as such [math] F_{un} = m a[/math] Now often a gravitational system is representative of one large body and one small body e.g. a planet and a person. If we divide the [math] F_g [/math] of a planets mass acting on that of a person, by the mass of the person, we arrive at a general value for acceleration experienced by any mass whose center of mass is of the same distance where the original force is experienced. where [math] m_2 = m_{person} [/math] [math] F_g \div m_2 = \frac{G m_1 m_2}{r^2} \div m_2 = m_2 a \div m_2 = a = g [/math] and g near the the Earth's surface is apx. ~[math] 9.8 \frac{m}{s^2} [/math] -1
Fuzzwood Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 (edited) Good job comparing miles to meters. Not very consistent with units are we? Edited December 25, 2011 by Fuzzwood
I think out of the box Posted December 26, 2011 Author Posted December 26, 2011 """Good job comparing miles to meters."" ""Not very consistent with units are we?"" I am confused here, which one is it?? 1] Good job comparing miles to meters. or 2] Not very consistent with units are we? Oh--------->Who's we????? Can you please re-define your reply, I still do not know how to reply back and I certainly do not want to be "rude." Thanks! Good job comparing miles to meters. Not very consistent with units are we?
StringJunky Posted December 26, 2011 Posted December 26, 2011 186.000*3.14 = 584.0400000000001 (your units are in miles here going by the 186 000 figure for the speed of light you gave) 584.0400000000001 meter (should be miles here not meters) = 6.173307671e-14 light year 1
O'Nero Samuel Posted December 26, 2011 Posted December 26, 2011 I think you have a point here. Lets not get too conventional here not to see a new relation between our "already known" conceptions about gravitation and its laws. I believe this simply proves a concept I'm working on. I call it ORBITS. All conserved force goes in orbits. Pi helps to define and simplify this relation using an almost perfect figure; a circle; but thanks to the Uncertainty principle, it remains almost perfect. My point here is that gravitational acceleration is simplified in a constant g. In this sense, this constant becomes arbitrary, since all forces due to this acceleration is goes in orbits, though not as perfect as that of a conventional circle. The question then is if Pi and g works in ORBITS, how then are they related mathematically, and what is the significance of this relation? 1
O'Nero Samuel Posted December 26, 2011 Posted December 26, 2011 Sure....if this theory proves substantial then it does apply to the big G. And this would then describe and predict the nature of the of the acceleration of the space-time boundary of the universe. 1
michel123456 Posted December 26, 2011 Posted December 26, 2011 That would be wonderful if the physical constants could be derived from Pi. But most if not all physical constants have units, Pi has no unit. So at best it could be something like G=Pi X where X has the units...of G. 1
O'Nero Samuel Posted December 26, 2011 Posted December 26, 2011 You have a point. This constant then would depend strongly on the frame of reference of inference. 1
I think out of the box Posted December 27, 2011 Author Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) Yes this is very true, I am using a converging table for this find here it is: 584.0400000000001 miles converged to 9.934975661e-11 light years as you can see it still is very close to G with a precession to the 11th power.... I assume precession has something to do with relative planetary movements and gravity like earth's precession. Also, when I get this value and divide by 1, I get this: 1 / 9.934975661e-11 = 10065449922.796745 I then converged this number from miles to light years again: 10065449922.796745 miles converged to 0.001712211 light year Now when it comes to force or even grams or kilograms or newtons with this here, this is where I get confused, very confused.... Can you help? 186.000*3.14 = 584.0400000000001 (your units are in miles here going by the 186 000 figure for the speed of light you gave) 584.0400000000001 meter (should be miles here not meters) = 6.173307671e-14 light year YES! I think it has something to do with planetary precession , likes earth's vernal equinox position. Its strange because I think eccentricty of celestial body's motion around the sun has much to do with this presession..... I believe in theory that the poles on any planet with precession over an elapsed time of many many years shapes out a circle, and thus I believe this is what causes eccentricity in relation to orthogonal orbits... It is this perfect circle that I believe is gravity zero empty space which I strongly believe was pi ratio squared all along... This must be why the quantum world relies on spectral analysis in where physical evidence connote be seen. Just like precession is in increments of 1 year , 2 years, 1 era, 1 great cycle etc this mimics such like that of exponentiation, this must be what relativity is all about along with propagation of light, magnetic waves and so many other things we can discover if we find this to be true...... Understand that a perfect circle in relation to an eccentric orbit, is gravity's attempts to balance the circle, in this case we have pi ratio a diameter and a circumference, this must be right..... Also this may explain why many equations today use a method as m/s """"squared"""" It is this squaring that I have questioned for many years now, but of coarse we need to ask: squared to what???????????????????????? as in relative to what?????????????????? I think the answer must be: a circle and its precession better yet pi ratio squared.... thanks... You have a point. This constant then would depend strongly on the frame of reference of inference. Yes this is very true, I am using a converging table for this find here it is: 584.0400000000001 miles converged to 9.934975661e-11 light years as you can see it still is very close to G with a precession to the 11th power.... I assume precession has something to do with relative planetary movements and gravity like earth's precession. Also, when I get this value and divide by 1, I get this: 1 / 9.934975661e-11 = 10065449922.796745 I then converged this number from miles to light years again: 10065449922.796745 miles converged to 0.001712211 light year Now when it comes to force or even grams or kilograms or newtons with this here, this is where I get confused, very confused.... Can you help? YES! I think it has something to do with planetary precession , likes earth's vernal equinox position. Its strange because I think eccentricty of celestial body's motion around the sun has much to do with this presession..... I believe in theory that the poles on any planet with precession over an elapsed time of many many years shapes out a circle, and thus I believe this is what causes eccentricity in relation to orthogonal orbits... It is this perfect circle that I believe is gravity zero empty space which I strongly believe was pi ratio squared all along... This must be why the quantum world relies on spectral analysis in where physical evidence connote be seen. Just like precession is in increments of 1 year , 2 years, 1 era, 1 great cycle etc this mimics such like that of exponentiation, this must be what relativity is all about along with propagation of light, magnetic waves and so many other things we can discover if we find this to be true...... Understand that a perfect circle in relation to an eccentric orbit, is gravity's attempts to balance the circle, in this case we have pi ratio a diameter and a circumference, this must be right..... Also this may explain why many equations today use a method as m/s """"squared"""" It is this squaring that I have questioned for many years now, but of coarse we need to ask: squared to what???????????????????????? as in relative to what?????????????????? I think the answer must be: a circle and its precession better yet pi ratio squared.... thanks... Yes they do, it is found in precession of planetary motions as in special relativity and gravitational waves in their precession rather yet known as propagation of light as the quanta of photons in precession delays or phase shifts, much like precession of the equinoxes here on earth and the seasons, eras, great cycles and etc........This may explain "negative" exponents found in today's constants, which I think connect to pi ratio squared in the first place. I think you have a point here. Lets not get too conventional here not to see a new relation between our "already known" conceptions about gravitation and its laws. I believe this simply proves a concept I'm working on. I call it ORBITS. All conserved force goes in orbits. Pi helps to define and simplify this relation using an almost perfect figure; a circle; but thanks to the Uncertainty principle, it remains almost perfect. My point here is that gravitational acceleration is simplified in a constant g. In this sense, this constant becomes arbitrary, since all forces due to this acceleration is goes in orbits, though not as perfect as that of a conventional circle. The question then is if Pi and g works in ORBITS, how then are they related mathematically, and what is the significance of this relation? This is very very true, however, I think pi ratio squared would lay outside of its perceived known limit, as like the higgs field " that is an example." I have since wondered if the "regular" pi ratio of infinitive numbers holds only true within the center of masses as it is believed to be = to zero empty space much like the photon light particles that are never at rest and travel at a constant speed. Perhaps pi squared is on the other relative side of known gravity...Which can spread some light on the singularities? The only thing that I can imagine that is even vaguely relevant here is that gravity, like any vector field that is radially symmetrical, can be expected to decrease in "flux density" like [math]\frac{1}{r^2}[/math] in three dimensions and this is simply because the surface area of a 2-sphere is [math] 4 \pi r^2[/math]. Yes....... Opps, 9.8 G....... You mean big G I suppose. Here is somthing me and my parter are working on, in this we use pi ratio, but! the """regular pi ratio""" has an exponent to the 11th. The reason for this is that I am trying to prove the singularity's movement of G within precession itself like a needle in a hay stack. I think I found it! This tells me gravity loops in bases of ten in relation to precession. Notice how the precession matches that of pi ratio sqaured = G at the very end.... I also think it is improtant to know that my theory is copyrighted, but I would love so much to get others involved as I think we need to have an entire team of good thinkers, two people is just not going to work to convivece the science world... Thanks! Oh, I hope my units are correct.....if not please let me know how to fix them, but the precession is right on. 1] 3.1415926535897932384626433832795e11*186.000 = 58433623356770.15 58433623356770.15 mile = 9.940014824 light year<----NO PRECESSION 2] 3.1415926535897932384626433832795*186.000 = 584.3362335677015 584.3362335677015 mile = 9.940014824e-11 light year<----- NOTICE THE PRECESSION? 3] regular[ G 9.8] *186.000 = 1822.8000000000002 1822.8000000000002 mile = 3.100724888e-10 light year<----- NOTICE THE PRECESSION? 4] 3.14^2 = 9.8596 9.8596*186.000 = 1833.8856 1833.8856 mile = 3.119582357e-10 light year<----- NOTICE THE PRECESSION? ALSO NOTICE THAT 3.119582357e-10 light year AND 9.940014824e-11 light year are in phase much like the doppler effect. This I belive is where gravity is quantized.....pi sqaured when used correctly seems to be doing much jumping in and out of phases.. What do you think??? That would be wonderful if the physical constants could be derived from Pi. But most if not all physical constants have units, Pi has no unit. So at best it could be something like G=Pi X where X has the units...of G. Edited December 26, 2011 by I think out of the box
Fuzzwood Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 Hmmz somehow all of those numbers give me the feeling light and gravity are linked in more ways than I first assumed. 1
I think out of the box Posted December 27, 2011 Author Posted December 27, 2011 YOU ARE MORE THAN CORRECT!!!!!!!!!!!! the question is how???? and to what though?... Remember that pi ratio is empty space, but I have found only precession relations here to be the case to -------> bases of ten... do you think that maybe what I have found here explains un-seen gravitational waves or precession???? And also, can you provide me with some "physical" numbers so I can test them. perhaps maybe some thing to do with movement, like a planet or photon or something in the physical world??? Therefore, I can work with something someone else gives gives me versus working with my own creative numbers here. d Hmmz somehow all of those numbers give me the feeling light and gravity are linked in more ways than I first assumed.
O'Nero Samuel Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 Pi square is not the figure going out of phase, rather it seems like an absolute ablution through which all other phase variables finds their relativistic and correlation correction of, and finally, from exogenous variation. This is the quest of Planetary motion for its inherent precision. Think of this phase-in and phase-out as a periodic motion with a restoring force acting to bring the system back to equilibrium. In this case Pi square acts like an arbitrary constant. Now i say this constant would strongly depend on the frame of reference of inference because of the chaotic-like nature of these exogenous variables. The term "exogenous variables" seems too vague as to be able to aid computation of these relations as in relation to the prediction of this phase-in and phase-out of Pi and G, but then not surprising it proves relatively absolute given the arbitrary and unexpected acceleration of the rate of expansion of the universe. Now not much of a diversion here, for there is a concept, or rather call it a philosophy i believe in; I call it "SUPER-INTERACTIONS". In this sense, every slight nuance in the working of a conserved system affects every part of the system in a way, currently observable or not. The butterfly-effect kicks in and distort and amplify these nuance into exorbitant variation from the purity of the mathematically inferred precision. Orbits, like I believe, always try to find a way to bring all of its systems, no matter how exorbitant their flux variation is, back into harmony with time. The question then is; "What relative force-effect determines this precision restoring effect"? Now, that would lead us into a field I'd rather not delve into at the moment. The bottom line then is, Pi seems absolute, just as space is, and the observable variation are as a result of relative frame of inference caused by flux in exogenous variables amplified through the butterfly effect when observed from various frame of reference. Now all of these are just intuitive inference, nothing of experimental consolidations. But then the intuitive thinker knows that the ultimate truth and beauty of the nature of science are as a result of this intuitive inference. 1
I think out of the box Posted December 27, 2011 Author Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) It is great you mentioned "planetary motion" I can use planet time dates to pin point their exact physical "relative" location in the sky in relation to space time geometry. I have already found this to be true with the planet Uranus and Earth! in phase now. I use this same philosophy as you just explained but I match them to pi ratio squared as G and a function of which will take some time to explain later perhaps...However, much of it is already here in some previous example, I think you saw it not sure... Is there any way possible you can send me 2 time reference years of 2 planets that are in our solar system and I can give you the relative coordinates to their relative precession location. I just need their years but earth years on other planets needs to be converged... I have been using this for now, it is great! http://www.exploratorium.edu/ronh/age/ When I give you the relative coordinates after my calculations, you can then confirm this on your own entering them in Google earth or some other planetary program. I can even send you images of the program I use that confirms this. If both of us see this proof here in the physical world than all of what you are saying here is true and to the point, I believe you made sense here very good, would love to work together.....thanks! Pi square is not the figure going out of phase, rather it seems like an absolute ablution through which all other phase variables finds their relativistic and correlation correction of, and finally, from exogenous variation. This is the quest of Planetary motion for its inherent precision. Think of this phase-in and phase-out as a periodic motion with a restoring force acting to bring the system back to equilibrium. In this case Pi square acts like an arbitrary constant. Now i say this constant would strongly depend on the frame of reference of inference because of the chaotic-like nature of these exogenous variables. The term "exogenous variables" seems too vague as to be able to aid computation of these relations as in relation to the prediction of this phase-in and phase-out of Pi and G, but then not surprising it proves relatively absolute given the arbitrary and unexpected acceleration of the rate of expansion of the universe. Now not much of a diversion here, for there is a concept, or rather call it a philosophy i believe in; I call it "SUPER-INTERACTIONS". In this sense, every slight nuance in the working of a conserved system affects every part of the system in a way, currently observable or not. The butterfly-effect kicks in and distort and amplify these nuance into exorbitant variation from the purity of the mathematically inferred precision. Orbits, like I believe, always try to find a way to bring all of its systems, no matter how exorbitant their flux variation is, back into harmony with time. The question then is; "What relative force-effect determines this precision restoring effect"? Now, that would lead us into a field I'd rather not delve into at the moment. The bottom line then is, Pi seems absolute, just as space is, and the observable variation are as a result of relative frame of inference caused by flux in exogenous variables amplified through the butterfly effect when observed from various frame of reference. Now all of these are just intuitive inference, nothing of experimental consolidations. But then the intuitive thinker knows that the ultimate truth and beauty of the nature of science are as a result of this intuitive inference. Edited December 27, 2011 by I think out of the box
O'Nero Samuel Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 I don't have the time reference years of any two planets at the moment, but if you could show me you computing formulas, then we could start our "work together" from there. I never doubt what i believe, the only thing i need it time to bring it down to the apparent comprehension of science. Was surprised someone was even thinking in this direction, because the isolating thing about science is that when you think too far you get ignored, remember Galileo, Einstein, Newton and many others who had mad profound breakthrough in this world, so I'm not bothered. But to get someone to work with in this light would be fantastic.
I think out of the box Posted December 28, 2011 Author Posted December 28, 2011 (edited) yes the precession should be questionable, here are the precessions with the following mentioned here some time earlier, thanks! PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.... 1] 3.1415926535897932384626433832795e11*186.000 = 58433623356770.15 58433623356770.15 mile = 9.940014824 light year<----NO PRECESSION 2] 3.1415926535897932384626433832795*186.000 = 584.3362335677015 584.3362335677015 mile = 9.940014824e-11 light year<----- NOTICE THE PRECESSION? 3] regular[ G 9.8] *186.000 = 1822.8000000000002 1822.8000000000002 mile = 3.100724888e-10 light year<----- NOTICE THE PRECESSION? 4] 3.14^2 = 9.8596 9.8596*186.000 = 1833.8856 1833.8856 mile = 3.119582357e-10 light year<----- NOTICE THE PRECESSION? G the gravitational constant found in the [math] F_g [/math] equation is a pretty stubborn [math] 6.67300 \times 10^{-11} \frac{N m^2}{kg^2} [/math]. Little g or the acceleration due to gravity near the earths surface is not a constant, and is also an approximation and varies depending just how close you are to the earths surface. You are also using only two significant figures with pi so the precision of their equivalence would be questionable. If your correlations between these two numbers had any verifiable truth, this would make Earth an unusually special place. I have the relative time references here for the planet Uranus and Earth Winter Solstices, I used a simple online planet time converter. 1776 winter solstice Earth 2012 next winter solstice Earth 2029 next winter solstice Uranus I will be calculating planet Uranus using my own space time geometry method of pi squared = G theory. The Coordinates Concur that pi sqaured is = to G below, the physical proof is the position now of the planet Uranus of 2011. You will need to go to the blog and see the images of where Uranus is located at because I have no way of showing them to you here. I will send you the link.... These are the converged year numbers. Your current birth date on Planet Earth Winter Solstice Dec, 21, 1776. Your next relative birth date on Planet Earth Winter Solstice Tues Dec 25, 2012 Your next relative birth date on Planet Uranus Winter Solstice Thur, Jan 4, 2029 In comparison with pi ratio squared special relativity and space time geometry the following function concludes: Earth [x 7.3317963996351e+36 [y 7.42181077600034e+28 Coordinates: Latitude 7° 19' 54.465" Longitude: 7° 25' 18.519" Location Tropic of Cancer, in the star constellation of Cancer: Time Summer! However, using Right Ascension [J2000] 7.3° And Declination [J2000] 7.4° places this exact location where the planet Uranus relative To Earth motion is stationed as of now… Uranus 2029 [x 6.28691053377232e+36 [y 1.99724713993792e+36 Coordinates: Latitude 6° 17' 12.879" Longitude: 1° 59' 50.0892" Location equator in the star constellation of Gemini: Time Summer! Again, using Right Ascension [J2000] 6.2° And Declination [J2000] 1.9° places this exact location where the planet Uranus's relative To Earth's motion is stationed as of now… Relative movements from earth within precession of the equinoxes in relation to relative precession with the planet Uranus: (-0.10112798718473) mile = -1.720265892e-14 light year 1/-1.720265892e-14 = -58130548576847.56 58130548576847.56 mile = 9.888459442 light year<--- G! No doubt about it PLEASE LET ME KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS....THANKS! I don't have the time reference years of any two planets at the moment, but if you could show me you computing formulas, then we could start our "work together" from there. I never doubt what i believe, the only thing i need it time to bring it down to the apparent comprehension of science. Was surprised someone was even thinking in this direction, because the isolating thing about science is that when you think too far you get ignored, remember Galileo, Einstein, Newton and many others who had mad profound breakthrough in this world, so I'm not bothered. But to get someone to work with in this light would be fantastic. Edited December 28, 2011 by I think out of the box
Xittenn Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 (edited) @I think out of the box I'm sorry but your posts are not organized well enough for me to follow. I did however understand your statements with respect to the conversion of light speed in miles to light speed in lightyears per second. conversion of light speed in miles to light speed in lightyears per second There is obviously no direct correlation with pi using correct values for all properties. If you are suggesting that there is a convergence on pi, I would think this would be the case with a converging permeability and/or permittivity of a reference space. I think if this permeability and/or permittivity were converging on zero, the lightyears/second velocity of light would increase and diverge from pi. You are also focusing on numbers that are units associative and the values change with units chosen. Who uses miles in science? Maybe, instead of focusing on the importance of this ratio's value, maybe adjust your focus on finding the importance of the circle and its ratio of the radius to the circumference, in understanding gravity. That is if it exists! And again you keep referencing little g like it was special. It is so not special and it is not some referencing constant . . . . Edited December 28, 2011 by Xittenn 1
I think out of the box Posted December 28, 2011 Author Posted December 28, 2011 pi ratio also has units such as G that are dependent on length relative to diameters which references a spherical magnitude. Both G and Pi ratio are still constants in relation to their vectors, in this case time and a circle of precession. Can this be legal to say that pi "not squared" and G squared perhaps is the missing link to the unification theory?? I also do not see the connection to G; one must also note that G has units and will take on a different value if you change unit systems. So, any connection you find will be coincidental. YES, sorry about the way responses are organized, I do find it much difficult myself to follow. This has to do with classical relativity and how it brakes down in relation to c from James Clerk Maxwell, " I believe" it states that 1 light sec is relative to everything. 186,000 miles per second is mostly used, "I think" by cosmologist in relation to planetary motion in precession. I assume this motion has something to do with precession on earth as per our only referred point in all time and space. The circle and gravity "I know" is in relation to how let say for example earth precesses with "Polaris" in roughly 26,000 years of precession on this planet then repeats. It is the wobble we are talking about here. I am sure this is what causes the eccentric orbit of earth around the sun. And this is what keeps gravity proportional in this perfect circle or precession at the poles, not the celestial equator nor the equator itself as believed. It is the wobble we are talking about here. This explain space time geometry and black holes. It also explains the proportionality OF seasons on earth regardless of its distance from the sun....GOOD EXAMPLE THERE. The Doppler effects can explain this along with Lorentz Transformations "AND" fractions of the speed of light. But they only use "from what I know" two positions only not three nor four. It also is very connected with time dilation. I know per fact however, that 186,000 miles of 1 light second is very correct much in relation to pi ratio squared and the circle of precision. This is so because the only real physical evidence we have to date in relation to a circle is pi ratio not square times a diameter = circumference, again much like earth's precession from the poles. It is the wobble we are talking about here. When looking at G in connection to "vectors" and looking at pi with many diameters to many circumferences, there is a relationship here with vectors of all sort pertaining to both. Where a loop in any number squared, loops that same number to itself in a perfect circle, again it is the wobble we are talking about here of precessions. The same holds true for pi radians. I assume only that this was why pi radians was developed in order to understand the similarities. This I know is why nothing can travel faster than the speed of light... It is because of this unknown relation behind pi ratio squared and gravity. "I think" they may be one in the same.... For example, pi "only" to the 11th power "not squared" has a precession of 30 which to me is 60/2 = - 30 degrees. And hence James Clerk Maxwell states that 186,00 miles of 1 light second is relative to everything = time. Also "please note" notice how after a critical degrees of 45 degrees time becomes fractions here: 360/2 = 180 180/2 = 90 90/2 = 45 45/2 = 22.5 22.5/2 = 11.25 11.25/2 = 5.625 5.625/2 = 2.8125 and etc.... Here is the precession to pi^11 not squared: 3.1415926535897932384626433832795e11*186.000 = 58433623356770.15 58433623356770.15 mile = 9.940014824 light year 1/5.528247611e+29 = 1.80889147948116e-30 @I think out of the box I'm sorry but your posts are not organized well enough for me to follow. I did however understand your statements with respect to the conversion of light speed in miles to light speed in lightyears per second. conversion of light speed in miles to light speed in lightyears per second There is obviously no direct correlation with pi using correct values for all properties. If you are suggesting that there is a convergence on pi, I would think this would be the case with a converging permeability of a reference space. I think if this permeability were converging on zero, the lightyears/second velocity of light would increase and diverge from pi. You are also focusing on numbers that are units associative and the values change with units chosen. Who uses miles in science? Maybe, instead of focusing on the importance of this ratio's value, maybe adjust your focus on finding the importance of the circle and its ratio of the radius to the circumference, in understanding gravity. That is if it exists! And again you keep referencing little g like it was special. It is so not special and it is not some referencing constant . . . .
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now