The Universal Gravitational constant, Rydberg constant and Planck constant

The Universal Gravitational constant, Rydberg constant and Planck constant

The riddle of the enigma gravity of love is one of those strange riddles that, after offering the result of the formula that it represents no one seems to be convinced. And that the only thing that must be done to solve this basic physics problem is to multiply the speed of light *c* by the Planck constant *h*, times the Rydberg constant *R* and times one Molwick, knowing that one Molwick is equal to the speed of light *c* times the Universal Gravitational constant of Newton *G*.

ENIGMA GRAVITY OF LOVE

Among the most surprising comments about the riddle of the enigma gravity of love from science experts (Physics, Chemistry, Telecommunication), it is worth highlighting the following:

• It is a coincidence.

  It could be, but that would be like a proton winning the lottery, not just the first prize but the whole entire universe, since the quantities involved in the physics constants (including the Universal Gravitational constant) exceed the number of existing protons in the whole of the universe. According to non serious quantum estimates, it would be a quantity of the order of 1080 - also rather metaphysical without a doubt.

• The result of the riddle is not exact because it does not match with gravity acceleration *g* on the Earth’s surface.

  Of course a slight quantum slip up, since it is common knowledge that gravity acceleration on the earth’s surface is variable according to the radius, the composition of the earth and the altitude due to the effect of the centrifugal force of the Earth’s spin.

• Decimals of the physics constants of the formula that support the riddle of the enigma gravity of love should be verified.

  A similar problem has been contended in the new and much simpler explanation for the precession of the orbit of the planet Mercury, which tells me that the value that I had used for the sun’s mass could be wrong because I had not used the official charts, despite the fact that I use the same value as as Einstein when explaining the same precession stretching time and space.

  In the case of the riddle of the enigma gravity of love, I would actually say that it is the opposite in that the knowledge of this physics formula of the long-sought after unification can be useful for accurately calibrating the decimals of the physics constants that intervene in it.

• There are problems with the dimensions.

  If it is directly put forth, there can be a problem, but as has been seen on the previous page about gravity acceleration, this problem does not exist. Besides, the problem could be the dimensions of the current physics constants such as the units of the constant of gravitation, which do not precisely take into account the new effect demonstrating the Equation for Love as well as the Gravity Riddle.

  As strange as the origin of the Equation for Love and the Gravity Riddle may seem, it is independent in the details and both are quite fortuitous, so much so that from the point of view of their origin, they belong to the world of metaphysics.

• A basic error due to the magnitudes being a vector and not being included in the formula.

  It is true, but that would be solved by drawing a little arrow over the vector magnitudes, as done by the Modern Physics books.

After these observations, which I have evidence that they are well-meaning in the majority of the cases, since it would have been easier to say that perhaps the gravity riddle was important, I have come to the conclusion that the more educated a person is in science, the more reluctant he is to admit General Physics’ big mistakes and especially if they come from the field of metaphysics and not from experimentation.

Of course, they cannot come from experimentation because if the evidence of simple addition or multiplication is not accepted, how are they going to accept possible logical reinterpretations of experiments and known natural phenomena. In other words, the riddles and scientific experiments are reserved.

The Riddle involving the Universal Gravitational constant, Rydberg constant and Planck constant is dealt with in detail in the GigaChron experiment. Now then, I am going to indicate its main elements and its connection to the Equation for Love.

Actually, the Equation for Love does not add anything new mathematically, but it helps the mind to understand the possible relations between several basic constants in General Physics, such as the Universal Gravitational constant, Rydberg constant. Planck constant and speed of light.

However, from the subjective or metaphysical point of view, it allows the expression of some nice ideas. Likewise, the time of love is an inseparable element from life. Time is the fourth dimension and love can be seen as that desire or life feeling while traveling together in space and time.

A trip that, transferred to a mathematical formula, brings us to that love *L* is equal to:

The most important conclusions of this equation are the following:

• The Equation for Love could represent the subjective and objective points of view of the physical reality, if one of them actually exists.
• Love, as an objective meaning of the proposed equation, is formed as a property or physics law that relates the force per unit of mass with the total force along a unit of space or energy.

In relation to gravity acceleration and the Equation for Love, we have to substitute time squared in the Equation for Love with its value in the equation of the relation between energy and mass in Einstein’s E = m c², and in the operation we end up with the Newton’s equation for gravity acceleration, which would be equal to love times energy.

g = L * E

On the contrary, this formula is the same that we would get if in Newton’s equation for gravity acceleration we substitute mass with its value by clearing Einstein’s E= m c² equation.

g = G * (t² / e4) * E

Putting it another way, a relation between acceleration and energy and, in this sense, can be understood as gravity of energy.

The Equation for Love has been the source of metaphysical inspiration or the impulse for seeking the relations between the basic physics constants that puts forth the Gravity Riddle, leading to the new physics experiment GigaChron in order to confirm the essential equality of the Theory of Global Equivalence, since it states the equivalences and relations between the basic magnitudes of Modern Physics.

We have already seen that the unit of Love of one Molwick was equal to *c/G*, and if we keep in mind that *chR* is equal to the energy of the photon given off by the hydrogen atom on the Earth’s surface we are left with the solution of the Gravity Riddle, once the appropriate multiplication is carried out, which is the following:

At least one of the constants involved in the riddle contains the information relative to the relation between the Earth’s mass and its radius squared, a rather variable magnitude. Which could it be?

As speed of light and the Universal Gravitational constant seem quite constant in the Solar system, the Planck constant, the Rydberg constant or both should have a different value on the moon in direct proportion to the difference of gravity, that is, 0.165 times that of the Earth.

In short, the gravity riddle shows the existing relation between gravity and the basic configuration of energy that together with the well-known equivalence between mass and energy, E = m c², and the less understood equivalence between the existence of kinetic energy in the form of mass (pulsine), which places us directly in the heart of the Theory of Global Equivalence whose most popular aspects will be, in its case, that time is not relative and space is not squashed nor stretched.

The especial effects caused by gravity within Astronomy will be analyzed in the aforementioned book dedicated to the new Theory of Global Equivalence.

Read More

Physics, wrinkles of time and timeline

Physics, wrinkles of time and timeline

Here, the timeline corresponds to the subjective concept that we have seen in the beginning while discussing the theory of time. It is about a timeline of the philosophical nature but trying to situate it within its real dimension and making a possible approximation with the language of mathematical formulas from the relations with love in the generic or universal sense.

Space, time and love are the basic elements of life.

Time is the fourth dimension and of a different nature than the three spatial dimensions being that it makes up the concept of life in the broad sense by being added together with the love for any one of them. I am lost and I do not know where, it must be I am on the right track.

Speaking of poetic licenses and poetry time…

Space and time could be observed as abstract concepts or mental constructions and, in turn, the mind as a construction of love or the final reality.

Love is that desire or feeling of life while traveling together in space and time.

From the Equation for Love it comes about that, when the distance in space is zero or time is infinite, Love is infinite. Seen in reverse, when Love is infinite, then life is eternal.

I believe that love affects subjective time and makes wrinkles in personal timeline, or better said, its speed, or with even more precision, the changes in its speed or acceleration; this is not new in History since Albert Einstein had declared it in order to explain its concept of relativity and relativistic time in Modern Physics. The difference is that it seems that he said it as a metaphor, and I think of it as a reality. I do not see love in any of his equations!

Going back to the prose of science…

We have all noticed the effect of love on the timeline wrinkles, even children have noticed it, or perhaps they notice it with greater intensity. In my opinion, they are not changes in the perception of absolute time but rather real variations or wrinkles of time or of subjective time that make up the personal timeline.

Let’s take a look at some examples that I believe show real and subjective variations of the speed of time and, therefore, the definition of proper timeline:

• Children
  
  Children are somewhat accelerated in relation to s, or in other words, their time goes much slower, or their timeline is more curved. To a greater or lesser extent, we all feel that time passes us by more and more quickly and, at simultaneously, we are more at ease with it. As children, occasionally time seems to last almost an eternity.

  I am referring to something that we feel but that we do not manage to comprehend logically because it is one of the mysteries of life, although we are getting closer little by little.

• Sports
  
  

  At times, while playing tennis or a similar sport, it seems as if the player will not get to the ball, but, suddenly, it is as if time stopped and miraculously the person manages to return the ball.

  In this case, the spectators have also perceived something, they do not know very well what, but they ponder: “I thought for sure he wouldn’t get it in the nick of time”; moreover, it is not about the fact that they do not know the player because they repeat the praise every occasion. This example is contrary to that which was mentioned previously, the physical activity does not create a reduced perception of time but the complete opposite.

  The explanation for the player’s situation should consist in that, by means of the change of his subjective time or of his timeline, he will obtain a much greater perspective of each movement of the ball as well as of his own muscles, which makes it so that the player optimizes all of them in an improbable way for a normal process.

  Another element to comment on is that the change in speed of the subjective time or wrinkle in time is accompanied by the unconscious taking control of the movements; the player’s consciousness is, to put it another way, like an observer outside from himself with a reduced power, given that the greater part of it is being directly used by automatic mechanisms.

THE WRINKLES OF TIME

The spectators’ ruminations is due to the same reason of improbability and that in their opinion the process has been normal, given that they have not experienced the variation of the subjective time or timeline of the player. That is, objective time is the same and it is an absolute concept by design.

The figure shows with the timelines how the absolute time or objective time is the same for everyone at all times and, on the contrary, the wrinkles of time or how the individual temporal scale is different. It is as if the subjective time were made up of folds throughout the objective or absolute time. What I want to say is that it is not possible to stretch or make the player’s line straight and thereby placing him in the future of the hit.

• A glass falls to the floor
  
  When a glass suddenly moves and begins to fall to the floor, it changes our concentration, our perception of the outside world, it seems that there is only one object moving in the air, we can observe how it moves, as if it were a slow motion movie, it is a beautiful thing! With luck, we can manage to stand up and avoid it breaking. And this, not like in the other example, is called glass love!

  It can be said that our life rhythm has been altered, our perception has been accelerated by the unit of time, time has been stopped or the timeline has been curved; actually, although it is not always equal, they are similar ways of saying the same thing.

  Another way of explaining what happens with concepts of General Physics is to imagine that we are driving a car at 100 km per hour, if we want to focus more on the houses or the trees that are on the side of the road, we can do it by going slower, that is, reducing the speed (space multiplied by unit of time), or increasing the speed of time (time multiplied by the unit of space), given that this last concept is the inverse of normal speed.

Read More

THEORY OF TIME

2.a) Classic time concepts

2.a.1. The subjective perception of time

Time concept is a very philosophical one since it is perceived differently by each person according to the activity that is taking place and even the state of mind. It reminds me of the basic dichotomy of perception-reality of philosophy that contributes so many discussions, many of which, in my opinion, are completely useless because they place themselves outside of natural logic or indicate a dead end in of themselves.

Moreover, time concept is very much joined to life itself - it is hard to imagine life without the existence of time. Where would we find the origin of life in such a case?

This concept of time could be defined as that which is understood by little children when they are so little that the world is “their world” and they orient time, which is why they think that when they sleep the world is immobile while it waits for them to wake, and that everything should be the same as when they went to bed.

It is obvious that the subjective perception of physical time radically changes. When we are sleeping it is practically inexistent, only when we dream are we at all conscious of the passage of time, but normally we have no idea of how much time we have been in a particular dream.

When we are awake, we also have a very variable perception of time. When we are really occupied it seems that time flies by; on the contrary, when we feel bored it feels as if time slows down.

Another similar effect in relation to the speed of time is produced by the state of mind. It also seems that times goes by quickly if we are really happy, meanwhile, if we have a strong desire for an event in the near future to take place, it seems as if time stops, as if it were trying to go against us.

In short, any activity, whether physical, mental or emotional, significantly affects the subjective perception of time, without us having the means to accurately measure its small variations.

2.a.2. Absolute time concept as an objective concept

All children go through a phase when they develop the objective time concept in order to understand why many events have occurred and they were not aware of them. They simply have been asleep.

In a more general sense, in order to avoid the subjectivity of the perception of time and to be able to communicate and recognize temporal aspects, an abstract concept has been created in which one tries to measure and determine time by means that are independent from the observer: the clock.

The main characteristic of this concept is being an absolute time. It does not depend on any external or internal variable to the individual. It is an abstract concept, perhaps it does not actually exist, but as a concept it is absolute and real like life itself.

For that reason, throughout history, humanity has been developing increasingly accurate mechanisms to measure objective time, ending up with impressive results in the reduction of the margins of error: the atomic clock.

The current definition of a second is the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of radiation corresponding to the transition between the two mega-thin levels of the ground state of the isotope 133 of the cesium atom, in specific state and conditions. And the definition of a meter is the distance that light travels in a vacuum during 1/299,792,458th of a second.

Consequently, the meter definition is derived from the second definition. If the duration of a second changes, the length of a meter must change to maintain the constant speed of the light as it is explained in the following section.

However, an exact measurement is not possible since all mechanisms will be inevitably conditioned by their own nature, including the atomic clocks. The only perfect clock would be an invisible and abstract clock.

2.b) Modern time concepts

2.b.1. The definition of relativistic time

Modern Physics with Albert Einstein’s Theory of Relativity provides a completely different time concept, being similar to neither objective nor subjective classic concepts of time.

There is only to know that gravity and speed affect the definition of a second by changing the palpitations of the Cesium atom to realize that the relativistic time is immersed in the very same current definition of its unit, which dates back to 1967.

Time is relative due to the Special Theory of Relativity of 1905 and, subsequently, by the General Relativity of 1916. However, the latter affects time by establishing an equivalence of gravity and acceleration, therefore, with the supposed temporal effects of motion in the Special Theory of Relativity

In order to summarize this section and to finish with the concept of relativistic time, I want to point out that, as it will be explained later on, the relative time that is detected, even in the atomic clocks, is due to a measurement error, corresponding to an error in the very same definition of a second that is perfectly adapted to the prevailing theory in 1967, but not to the concept of the overwhelming majority of the human population.

In other words, the cesian (from the cesium atom, not Julius Caesar) definition of a second of 1967 produces non-absolute time because the cesium is affected by changes in gravity and speed. In this definition, if one were to pay attention to the conditions of gravity and speed in relation to the gravitational field where we find the atomic clock, then the Theory of Relativity would no longer be formally correct. Easy! Isn’t it?

The new concept is fundamentally derived, like the whole Theory of Relativity, from the application of the mathematical formulas in the explanation that was developed about the failure of the anticipated goal of the Michelson-Morley experiment, specifically, from the Lorentz equations.

Mathematically, Special Relativity prolongs time and contracts space while General Relativity, moreover, bends both by affecting the axes of the dimensions.

A more detailed analysis of the Michelson-Morley experiment and the Lorentz equations, given their importance, can be found in the online book of Physics Experiments sustaining the Theory of Global Equivalence.

In this experiment, according to its hypothetical premises, light travels uneven spaces in the same time period. Because of the accepted axiom of the maximum and constant speed of light, the only alternative that remains is to make time relative.

This confirmation is called the postulate of the Special Theory of Relativity; I suppose that it is so that, beforehand, it can conceal its unmistakable concept of being an axiom. Indeed, its second proposition says: “The speed of light in open space has the same value for all of the observers, regardless of its state of movement.”

All of this means a contradiction in terms in which there exists the idea of “at the same time” and multiple “times” depending on the speed (space/time) of the observer. I would say that each observer uses a different measurement of time, but it may be that I do not understand this theory very well.

Of course, with space the exact same thing happens as with time, given that mathematically it is also necessary to alter it in order to be able to maintain the axiom of the constant speed.

If there are any doubts about the previous, they should be resolved in the nick of time if one carefully reads the definition of a meter.

It is just as well that it only has two postulates and that at least something is constant!

Now then, there were other elements used by Einstein in order to establish the Special Theory of Relativity.

Among them, the following can be mentioned:

• The Maxwell equations of electromagnetism that provide a more accurate calculation of the speed of light and pointed to a maximum speed of light.
  
  
• The Lorentz equations that added certain mathematical complexity and declared that the speed of light was always the same.
  
  
• The relative mass together with the mass-energy transformation of the famous equation E = mc² which are real effects.
  
  
• Interesting references to the subjectivity of time, such as the case of the lovers.
  
  
• Artificial examples about impossible situations, such as the twin paradox, a mirror clock in a spacecraft and limits to simultaneousness by perception such as the case of the train wagon.

Jumping ahead a little of the present confusion, we can say that the time and speed of a small ball or particle no longer depend on the point of reference as long as the measurements are carried out but rather on the speed of the point of observation. That is, a ball can travel with different temporal speed simultaneously and all of them so calmly!

In short, a fair number of bizarre things can occur, and they occur as a result of the excessive philosophical and mathematical influence in relativistic physics.

From an objective point of view, as far as I know not even one object has yet to travel in time nor suddenly appear or disappear due to having a distinct temporal speed.

A significant weakness of relativistic physics is that it does not explain what mechanisms affect the atomic clocks in a spacecraft that result in them becoming desynchronized in relation to their brothers on Earth and, of course, it does not recognize that it is dealing with a measurement error.

What is certain is that the change in the measurement of relativistic time coincides with the mathematical predictions, but that does not take away the fact that according to Modern Physics the clocks are altered by the art of magic.

Interesting! A measurement error that coincides with the theory. Or, actually, a theory that coincides with reality because it has been designed ad hoc - skipping common sense and adjusting philosophy in order to be able to be blessed by the scientific method.

Read More

Moral of the Movie..................Funny

THAKUR KI DHOTA KAUN tha ??????

2) What is moral of film JAB WE MET???

.a) ..AKELI LADKI KHULI HUE TIJORI K TARAH HOTI HAI...

b) aur akela ladka khuli hui tijori ki chabi hota hai

c) on screen chemistry can b bad off screen physics

3) moral of saawariya .....

film industry me youngsters ka koi scope nahi !!!!

4) Moral of jodha.....Akbar

Akbar ko 6 ungliyaan thi..

5) Moral of Race..?????

One can have Se* on Hay also....

6) moral of "chakk de india "

..


preeti sabharwal is still single :))

7) SHOLAY ka ek aur moral
ANGREJKO KEI JAMAANE MEIN JAILER ASRAANI JAISE HOTE THE

8) moral of hum dil de chuke sanam:-

bahana banao aur italy ghoom aao

9) moral from Lagaan,
match jitni hai to England ke Captain ki sister ko Patao

10) What must b the moral of...Jodha - Akbar..

Jodha(Aishwarya)..k khaane me NAMAAK KAAM.....

bilkul aapne sasur ji pe gaye hai..
fark sirf itna hai ...wo CHEENI- KAAM HAI..

11) wht is d moral of Baghban?
Valentine's day comes after holi..

Mat khol mere makan ke udas darwaze

Hawa ka shor meri uljhane bada dega

Main khub wakiq hu mere pyaar ki fitrat se

Wo jab dega dard rula dega

Read More