• In relativity "s" is for "spin"

    From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 28 18:29:02 2024
    In relativity "s" is for "spin"

    For everyone's edification, I hereby share relativity explaining how
    light is affected twice as much as everything else, flouting Galileo &
    Eotvos.

    "Are Photons Massless or Massive?"

    = "Since the photon is a spin-1 particle, according to this new
    equation, Eg^2= s^2p^2c^2 + mi^2c^4 , it follows that, s = 2 , for the
    photon. In Section 10, it will become clear when we analysis the motion
    of star light (electromagnetic waves) that this fact that for a photon
    we must have, s = 2 , if Newtonian gravitation is to stand-up to the
    eclipse measurements of the Solar gravitational bending of star light.
    This fact on its it own—i.e., the fact that for a photon we must have, s
    = 2 ; explains the missing factor “2” in the gravitational bending of
    light angle in Newtonian gravitation. We take this as a notable
    achievement of the theory of the Curved Spacetime Dirac Equations
    presented in the readings [14]-[16], in that this theory has been able
    to furnish a missing piece of a great puzzle. It is an achievement in
    much the same way that Professor Paul Dirac [17] [18]’s equation
    furnished the puzzle of the gyromagnetic ratio of the electron (see e.g.
    [16] on how the Dirac equation solved the
    gyromagnetic ratio of the electron)."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 28 18:34:27 2024
    https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=35799

    "General Spin Dirac Equation (II)
    Golden Gadzirayi Nyambuya
    Department of Applied Physics, National University of Science and
    Technology, Bulawayo, Republic of Zimbabwe.
    DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2013.48141 PDF HTML XML 4,554 Downloads
    6,522 Views Citations

    Abstract

    In an earlier reading [1], we did demonstrate that one can write down a
    general spin Dirac equation by modifying the usual Einstein
    energy-momentum equation via the insertion of the quantity “s” which is identified with the spin of the particle. That is to say, a Dirac
    equation that describes a particle of spin where is the normalised
    Planck constant, σ are the Pauli 2×2 matrices and s=(±1,±2,±3,…,etc.). What is not clear in the reading [1] is how such a modified
    energy-momentum relation would arise in Nature. At the end of the day,
    the insertion by the sleight of hand of the quantity “s” into the usual Einstein energy-momentum equation, would then appear to be nothing more
    than an idea belonging to the domains of speculation. In the present reading—by making use of the curved spacetime Dirac equations proposed
    in the work [2], we move the exercise of [1] from the realm of
    speculation to that of plausibility.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mikko@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Sat Jun 29 11:45:37 2024
    On 2024-06-28 18:29:02 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

    In relativity "s" is for "spin"

    For everyone's edification, I hereby share relativity explaining how
    light is affected twice as much as everything else, flouting Galileo & Eotvos.

    "Are Photons Massless or Massive?"

    = "Since the photon is a spin-1 particle, according to this new
    equation, Eg^2= s^2p^2c^2 + mi^2c^4 , it follows that, s = 2 , for the photon. In Section 10, it will become clear when we analysis the motion
    of star light (electromagnetic waves) that this fact that for a photon
    we must have, s = 2 , if Newtonian gravitation is to stand-up to the
    eclipse measurements of the Solar gravitational bending of star light.
    This fact on its it own—i.e., the fact that for a photon we must have, s
    = 2 ; explains the missing factor “2” in the gravitational bending of light angle in Newtonian gravitation. We take this as a notable
    achievement of the theory of the Curved Spacetime Dirac Equations
    presented in the readings [14]-[16], in that this theory has been able
    to furnish a missing piece of a great puzzle. It is an achievement in
    much the same way that Professor Paul Dirac [17] [18]’s equation
    furnished the puzzle of the gyromagnetic ratio of the electron (see e.g.
    [16] on how the Dirac equation solved the
    gyromagnetic ratio of the electron)."

    Relativity is a theory about nature. It does not define language conventions such as meaning of "s". Spin is a quantum mechanical concept that is not relevant to most of relativity.

    --
    Mikko

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jun 29 11:53:38 2024
    W dniu 29.06.2024 o 10:45, Mikko pisze:
    On 2024-06-28 18:29:02 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

    In relativity "s" is for "spin"

    For everyone's edification, I hereby share relativity explaining how
    light is affected twice as much as everything else, flouting Galileo &
    Eotvos.

    "Are Photons Massless or Massive?"

    = "Since the photon is a spin-1 particle, according to this new
    equation, Eg^2= s^2p^2c^2 + mi^2c^4 , it follows that, s = 2 , for the
    photon. In Section 10, it will become clear when we analysis the motion
    of star light (electromagnetic waves) that this fact that for a photon
    we must have, s = 2 , if Newtonian gravitation is to stand-up to the
    eclipse measurements of the Solar gravitational bending of star light.
    This fact on its it own—i.e., the fact that for a photon we must have, s >> = 2 ; explains the missing factor “2” in the gravitational bending of
    light angle in Newtonian gravitation. We take this as a notable
    achievement of the theory of the Curved Spacetime Dirac Equations
    presented in the readings [14]-[16], in that this theory has been able
    to furnish a missing piece of a great puzzle. It is an achievement in
    much the same way that Professor Paul Dirac [17] [18]’s equation
    furnished the puzzle of the gyromagnetic ratio of the electron (see e.g.
    [16] on how the Dirac equation solved the
    gyromagnetic ratio of the electron)."

    Relativity is a theory about nature.


    It's mostly about clocks and observers, which
    are out of your "nature" tale, poor halfbrain.



    It does not define language
    conventions
    such as meaning of "s".

    Instead it's mumbling mystically.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul B. Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jun 29 13:49:15 2024
    Den 28.06.2024 20:29, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:
    In relativity "s" is for "spin"

    For everyone's edification, I hereby share relativity explaining how
    light is affected twice as much as everything else, flouting Galileo & Eotvos.

    I suppose "relativity" in this context means
    "the General Theory of Relativity" [GR].

    According to GR, the gravitational deflection of a particle is:
    θₜ = 4GM/b⋅v²
    According to Newton the gravitational deflection of a particle is:
    θₜ = 2GM/b⋅v²
    where:
    G = gravitational constant
    M = gravitating mass (e.g. Sun)
    b = impact parameter (shortest distance path-center of M)
    v = speed of particle relative to M

    Note that both the mass and spin of the particle are irrelevant.
    The speed of the particle _only_ determines the deflection.
    The only relevant difference between a photon and a massive particle
    is that the speed of the photon is c while the speed of a massive
    particle is always less than c.

    https://paulba.no/pdf/GravitationalDeflection.pdf https://paulba.no/Deflection.html

    For _any_ particle including photon will GR predict twice
    the deflection predicted by Newton.

    Experimental evidence confirms GR while Newton's gravitation
    is falsified.

    https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Hipparcos.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/GravDeflection.pdf
    https://paulba.no/paper/Fomalont.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini_2.pdf

    -----------------------------------

    PLEASE QUOTE WHAT YOU ARE RESPONDING TO!
    Comments with no context are worthless.

    --
    Paul

    https://paulba.no/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jun 29 14:19:40 2024
    W dniu 29.06.2024 o 13:49, Paul B. Andersen pisze:


    Experimental evidence confirms GR while Newton's gravitation
    is falsified.

    Or maybe it is Newton's optics, abandoned
    already in 18th century. For a relativistic
    piece of shit it doesn't matter, what matters
    is that his moronic religion demands linking
    "Newton" and "falsified" as often as possible.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jun 29 18:10:03 2024
    How is light affected twice as much by gravity as everything else,
    according to relativity? According to Galileo and Eotvos, everything is affected the same by gravity regardless of mass or material. How does relativity "spin" this discrepancy (to use a colloquialism)?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kennedy =?iso-8859-1?q?Barab=E1s?=@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Sun Jun 30 00:05:57 2024
    LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    How is light affected twice as much by gravity as everything else,
    according to relativity? According to Galileo and Eotvos, everything is affected the same by gravity regardless of mass or material. How does relativity "spin" this discrepancy (to use a colloquialism)?

    appalling incompetence. It can't be clearer, as it is obvious. Just add "relativity" to it.

    𝗧𝗵𝗲_𝘀𝗼𝗻_𝗼𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗣𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁_𝗼𝗳_𝗨𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮_𝘀𝗮𝘆𝘀_𝗧𝗵𝗲_𝗨.𝗦._𝗱𝗲𝗲𝗽_𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲_𝗶𝘀_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹
    https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/M5LFdF8L8hq4

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mikko@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Sun Jun 30 12:43:03 2024
    On 2024-06-29 18:10:03 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

    How is light affected twice as much by gravity as everything else,
    according to relativity? According to Galileo and Eotvos, everything is affected the same by gravity regardless of mass or material. How does relativity "spin" this discrepancy (to use a colloquialism)?

    The speed of an object determines how long the object is close enough
    to a more massive object that it is significantly deflected. Light is
    faster that anything else so it is deflected less than anything else
    (if passing the massive object at the same distance).

    A small object like a single atom can be accelerated to a speed that
    is only slightly less than the speed of light. Unfortunately a single
    atom is so easily lost that it has not yet been pssible to observe how
    much it is deflected by a massibe body. General Relativity predicts
    that it is deflected nearly as much as light.

    --
    Mikko

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Mikko on Sun Jun 30 22:15:59 2024
    Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

    On 2024-06-29 18:10:03 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

    How is light affected twice as much by gravity as everything else, according to relativity? According to Galileo and Eotvos, everything is affected the same by gravity regardless of mass or material. How does relativity "spin" this discrepancy (to use a colloquialism)?

    The speed of an object determines how long the object is close enough
    to a more massive object that it is significantly deflected. Light is
    faster that anything else so it is deflected less than anything else
    (if passing the massive object at the same distance).

    A small object like a single atom can be accelerated to a speed that
    is only slightly less than the speed of light. Unfortunately a single
    atom is so easily lost that it has not yet been pssible to observe how
    much it is deflected by a massibe body. General Relativity predicts
    that it is deflected nearly as much as light.

    Indeed. It is very unkind of the universe
    not to provide steady point sources of relativistic particles,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 30 22:44:24 2024
    Incorrect. Relativity says light is affected twice as much as anything
    else going the same speed, that is, twice Newtonian.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jul 1 07:21:51 2024
    W dniu 30.06.2024 o 22:15, J. J. Lodder pisze:
    Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

    On 2024-06-29 18:10:03 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

    How is light affected twice as much by gravity as everything else,
    according to relativity? According to Galileo and Eotvos, everything is
    affected the same by gravity regardless of mass or material. How does
    relativity "spin" this discrepancy (to use a colloquialism)?

    The speed of an object determines how long the object is close enough
    to a more massive object that it is significantly deflected. Light is
    faster that anything else so it is deflected less than anything else
    (if passing the massive object at the same distance).

    A small object like a single atom can be accelerated to a speed that
    is only slightly less than the speed of light. Unfortunately a single
    atom is so easily lost that it has not yet been pssible to observe how
    much it is deflected by a massibe body. General Relativity predicts
    that it is deflected nearly as much as light.

    Indeed. It is very unkind of the universe
    not to provide steady point sources of relativistic particles,

    And even worse - keeping clocks of GPS in sync, i.e
    indicating t'=t. The reality really can not be
    trusted. It's simply improper and nonstandard.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul B. Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jul 1 21:40:00 2024
    Den 01.07.2024 00:44, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:
    Incorrect. Relativity says light is affected twice as much as anything
    else going the same speed, that is, twice Newtonian.

    Let's see how the General Theory of Relativity [GR] predicts
    how "light and anything else" is affected by gravitation:

    See equation (2) in:
    https://paulba.no/pdf/GravitationalDeflection.pdf

    This equation shows GR's prediction for how a particle
    (photon or massive particle) is accelerated by a mass M (e.g. Sun).

    So GR predicts that "light and anything else" is affected
    in exactly the same way. But the gravitational acceleration
    depends on the particle's velocity relative to the gravitating mass M.

    If the velocity is transverse to the radius vector (r in the equation)
    then we have the transverse acceleration of the particle:

    lim (dv/dt) ≈ -2GM/r² when v -> c (twice Newtonian prediction)

    This means that when a photon or a cosmic ray moving
    close to c passes a massive object (like the Sun), then
    the gravitational deflection predicted by GR is twice
    the deflection predicted by Newton.

    lim (dv/dt) ≈ -GM/r² when v -> 0 (equal Newtonian prediction)

    This means that when a particle (or other small object like
    a space vehicle), is passing a massive object (like a planet)
    at a speed much lower than c, then the gravitational deflection
    predicted by GR is equal to the deflection predicted by Newton.

    Experimental evidence confirms GR while Newton's gravitation
    is falsified.

    https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Hipparcos.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/GravDeflection.pdf
    https://paulba.no/paper/Fomalont.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini_2.pdf

    -----------------------------------

    PLEASE QUOTE WHAT YOU ARE RESPONDING TO!
    Comments with no context are worthless.

    https://paulba.no/Deflection.html

    --
    Paul

    https://paulba.no/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Mon Jul 1 22:10:30 2024
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    Incorrect. Relativity says light is affected twice as much as anything
    else going the same speed, that is, twice Newtonian.

    Relatvity tells us that nothing else is going at the same speed,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jul 2 00:28:58 2024
    W dniu 01.07.2024 o 21:40, Paul B. Andersen pisze:
    Den 01.07.2024 00:44, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:
    Incorrect. Relativity says light is affected twice as much as anything
    else going the same speed, that is, twice Newtonian.

    Let's see how the General Theory of Relativity [GR] predicts
    how "light and anything else" is affected by gravitation:

    See equation (2) in:
    https://paulba.no/pdf/GravitationalDeflection.pdf

    This equation shows GR's prediction for how a particle
    (photon or massive particle) is accelerated by a mass M (e.g. Sun).

    So GR predicts that "light and anything else" is affected
    in exactly the same way. But the gravitational acceleration
    depends on the particle's velocity relative to the gravitating mass M.

    If the velocity is transverse to the radius vector (r in the equation)
    then we have the transverse acceleration of the particle:

    lim (dv/dt) ≈ -2GM/r² when v -> c  (twice Newtonian prediction)

    This means that when a photon or a cosmic ray moving
    close to c passes a massive object (like the Sun), then
    the gravitational deflection predicted by GR is twice
    the deflection predicted by Newton.

    lim (dv/dt) ≈ -GM/r² when v -> 0   (equal Newtonian prediction)

    This means that when a particle (or other small object like
    a space vehicle), is passing a massive object (like a planet)
    at a speed much lower than c, then the gravitational deflection
    predicted by GR is equal to the deflection predicted by Newton.

    Experimental evidence confirms GR while Newton's gravitation
    is falsified.

    Both lies, as expected from relativistic scum.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jul 2 07:36:13 2024
    W dniu 02.07.2024 o 01:49, Ross Finlayson pisze:
    On 07/01/2024 01:10 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    Incorrect. Relativity says light is affected twice as much as anything
    else going the same speed, that is, twice Newtonian.

    Relatvity tells us that nothing else is going at the same speed,

    Jan


    Relativity says that SR is local.

    The idea that information cannot go faster than light, basically
    has that the light-like is free information itself.

    Yet, light is local, and an extra-local configuration of experiment,
    can make it so that in theories where a "guide lode" is arranged
    in the middle of two distant bodies, and either distant body
    moves, the guide lode moves, because the geodesy is always
    current everywhere, which can be detected the image of the
    guide lode, before the image of the distant body.


    Everybody knows that in the Solar System, the "System of the World",
    that the gradient of the force of gravity points at the source,
    not the image. Its constant (constantly current) evaluation of
    the geodesy is reflected in the entire geodesy, not as limited
    by the light-like, which is just free propagation of information,
    of images, or films.

    The geodesy and its governance of GR, is always current.


    Relativity and Quantum Mechanics both need better understanding
    of superclassical models of flow and flux and continuum mechanics.


    And in the meantime in the real world - forbidden by your
    bunch of idiots "improper" GPS and TAI clocks keep measuring
    t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Ross Finlayson on Tue Jul 2 09:35:46 2024
    Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 07/01/2024 01:10 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    Incorrect. Relativity says light is affected twice as much as anything
    else going the same speed, that is, twice Newtonian.

    Relatvity tells us that nothing else is going at the same speed,

    Jan


    Relativity says that SR is local.

    The idea that information cannot go faster than light, basically
    has that the light-like is free information itself.

    Yet, light is local,

    Where did you pick up that piece of misinformation?

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From bertietaylor@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jul 2 11:28:34 2024
    Gobbledygook ++

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jul 3 07:02:16 2024
    W dniu 02.07.2024 o 22:22, Ross Finlayson pisze:
    On 07/02/2024 12:35 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 07/01/2024 01:10 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    Incorrect. Relativity says light is affected twice as much as anything >>>>> else going the same speed, that is, twice Newtonian.

    Relatvity tells us that nothing else is going at the same speed,

    Jan


    Relativity says that SR is local.

    The idea that information cannot go faster than light, basically
    has that the light-like is free information itself.

    Yet, light is local,

    Where did you pick up that piece of misinformation?

    Jan


    Einstein says so, and, "Relativity of Simultaneity is non-local",
    and, "SR is local" is something at least I've arrived at since
    quite a few years ago.

    Einstein defines two different milieus for "Space-Time",
    the "spatial" for GR and "spacial" for SR.

    The mumble of the idiot was not even
    consistent.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Ross Finlayson on Wed Jul 3 21:03:44 2024
    Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 07/02/2024 12:35 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 07/01/2024 01:10 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    Incorrect. Relativity says light is affected twice as much as anything >>>> else going the same speed, that is, twice Newtonian.

    Relatvity tells us that nothing else is going at the same speed,

    Jan


    Relativity says that SR is local.

    The idea that information cannot go faster than light, basically
    has that the light-like is free information itself.

    Yet, light is local,

    Where did you pick up that piece of misinformation?

    Jan


    Einstein says so, and, "Relativity of Simultaneity is non-local",
    and, "SR is local" is something at least I've arrived at since
    quite a few years ago.

    Einstein defines two different milieus for "Space-Time",
    the "spatial" for GR and "spacial" for SR.

    relativity != light,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Volney@21:1/5 to bertietaylor on Sun Jul 7 04:01:49 2024
    On 7/2/2024 7:28 AM, bertietaylor wrote:
    Gobbledygook ++
    Kookfight!!!!!!

    In this corner is LawrenceClarkCrossen!

    And in this corner, wearing the puppy dog mask, is Arindam Banerjee!!!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)