MewSkitty Posted February 7, 2007 Report Posted February 7, 2007 I'm working to proove part of Einstein's theory of relativity wrong. In order to do this I need the following information to plug into my theory: The speed the earth rotatesThe speed the earth revolvesThe speed the Milky Way Galixy spins There is other speeds that would be very helpful, but I doubt they are known. I would like to refrain from giving out my theory because I fear someone might steal it. theblackalchemist 1 Quote
InfiniteNow Posted February 7, 2007 Report Posted February 7, 2007 In order to "prove part of Einstein's theory of relativity wrong," I might suggest that you discover relativity first. i.e. - speed relative to what? Quote
Buffy Posted February 7, 2007 Report Posted February 7, 2007 Lemme guess, you want to figure this in miles/km per second...The speed the earth rotatesAt the equator:3 miles per second5 kilometers per secondThe speed the earth revolves185 miles per second298 kilometers per secondThe speed the Milky Way Galixy spinsAt our location most of the way to the outer rim of the galaxy (I'm assuming you're trying to add all these numbers together to prove something):306 miles per second492 kilometers per second Add all them up and when the earth and you are aligned exactly right, you're going a whopping 494 miles per second or 795 kilometers per second! As you may know, the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second or 300,000 kilometers per second.There is other speeds that would be very helpful, but I doubt they are known.C'mon, give us a challenge!I would like to refrain from giving out my theory because I fear someone might steal it.Fair enough, don't want to let it out before it's peer-reviewed.... Zip,Buffy Quote
Chacmool Posted February 7, 2007 Report Posted February 7, 2007 The speed the earth rotatesThe speed the earth revolvesThe speed the Milky Way Galixy spinsI marvel at how you propose to disprove such a monumental theory from one of the world's greatest minds when you lack basic information (and, apparently, the ability to Google it) and also don't even know how to spell "galaxy". I wait with bated breath. The suspense is unbearable. Quote
Qfwfq Posted February 7, 2007 Report Posted February 7, 2007 3 miles per second5 kilometers per second 185 miles per second298 kilometers per second:warped: Errrr... these figures are some 10 times the actual values. Dunno 'bout the galaxy ones. :shrug: Quote
Boerseun Posted February 7, 2007 Report Posted February 7, 2007 At the equator:3 miles per second5 kilometers per secondBusted! ...that'll give you:5x60 = 300km/m300x60 = 18,000km/h18,000x24 = 432,000km per day!!! And with a circumference at the equator of about 40,000km's, that sounds to me like a tad much... Anal,Boerseun Quote
MewSkitty Posted February 7, 2007 Author Report Posted February 7, 2007 I apologize about my bad spelling. I have dyslexia and have tons of trouble with it. I know that the part of the theory is wrong. That your for the information. I'm now going to plug it into my theory and I'll inform y'all of the results. The person who worked with me on this theory may not be known to the human race, but she has a very powerful mind and can figure out anything she'd like. This is just a challenge she gave me back in 7th grade. XD (For those who don't know I'm now in 11th grade) Quote
Buffy Posted February 7, 2007 Report Posted February 7, 2007 :warped: Errrr... these figures are some 10 times the actual values. Dunno 'bout the galaxy ones. :shrug:Ah, one order of magnitude is "noise"... It was late and I have a cold! Its still going to be interesting to see why this affects SR/GR of course.... Not good at math, that's why I'm in computers,Buffy Quote
CraigD Posted February 7, 2007 Report Posted February 7, 2007 … I need the following information to plug into my theory: The speed the earth rotatesThe speed the earth revolvesYou’ll find these questions answer themselves if you chose the right units.The Earth rotates around its own axis about 1 rotation per dayThe Earth revolves around the Sun about 1 revolution per yearThe speed the Milky Way Galixy spinsThis question has problems. Objects like the solar system revolve around the center of the Milky Way galaxy at different rates, depending in a complicated way on their distance from it, and their nearness to the galaxy’s many other clumps of mass, making it hard to assign a single value to its “spin”. According to best current theory and observation, the Sun revolves around the center of the Milky Way about once per 225-250 million years. This last information is from the wikipedia article “Milky Way”. MewSkitty, I believe you would find wikipedia and other science encyclopedia cites helpful in digging up data you need in your investigations. Asking for easily found data in a science forum makes you appear lazy, and makes you a target of criticism. Finding and using data independently, then presenting your findings in a forum would make you appear industrious, make you a target of praise, and help get your reputation out of the red. There is other speeds that would be very helpful, but I doubt they are known. I would like to refrain from giving out my theory because I fear someone might steal it. Quote
imaplanck. Posted February 8, 2007 Report Posted February 8, 2007 I'm working to proove part of Einstein's theory of relativity wrong. Are you the (n)billionth person to attempt an outsmarting of Einstein on special? general? or both? Have you passed any exam to prove you atleast comprehend what Einstein was conveying in his 2 famous papers? sanctus 1 Quote
pgrmdave Posted February 8, 2007 Report Posted February 8, 2007 Hey guys come on, let him try - it's an important part of science to re-examine old theories and, when they cannot be disproved, they are made stronger. By having him examine Einstein's relativity, he will either disprove it (very unlikely, but will help science by eliminating a false theory) or he will discover that it is true(very likely, and will help him understand the theory more completely and will bolster the overall strength of the theory). Zythryn 1 Quote
imaplanck. Posted February 8, 2007 Report Posted February 8, 2007 Yes, but how would (say) a school kid that doesnt even understand relativity in the first place, have any hope of disproving it. Seeing as for a century a constant barrage from George( the corner shop owner) to the most gifted of physicists have tried and failed to substantiate a single flaw? Quote
InfiniteNow Posted February 8, 2007 Report Posted February 8, 2007 Yes, but how would (say) a school kid that doesnt even understand relativity in the first place, have any hope of disproving it. Seeing as for a century a constant barrage from George( the corner shop owner) to the most gifted of physicists have tried and failed to substantiate a single flaw? While I understand the lack of effort it takes to accept a strong theory as unfalsifiable, your comment above shows an absolute disregard for, disrespect, and misunderstanding of the scientific method. Quote
pgrmdave Posted February 9, 2007 Report Posted February 9, 2007 I disagree, INow, I think that imaplanck. is simply expressing justified skepticism at the expectation of somebody overthrowing any widely accepted scientific theory. And I share with ima's skepticism, and would expect there to be a lot of skepticism if I were Mewskitty. I would think that part of the scientific method would be to be able to recognize those scientific endeavors which have a good chance of succeeding vs. those which have a poor chance of succeeding. Trying to discover a new use for a common chemical - good chance. Trying to prove that the earth really is at the center of the solar system - bad chance. Quote
smartypant Posted February 9, 2007 Report Posted February 9, 2007 I would think that part of the scientific method would be to be able to recognize those scientific endeavors which have a good chance of succeeding vs. those which have a poor chance of succeeding. Trying to discover a new use for a common chemical - good chance. Trying to prove that the earth really is at the center of the solar system - bad chance. Aww common pgrmdave!!! You gotta let us kids try man! I'm a kid and I don't see how you can disprove Enstein's releativity theory but you have to at least let him try. Actually I'm ten and I don't see why in the world you would need to know the speeds of the earth's, Solar System's, and the Milky Way's revolving but I guess that would be the reason I'm not exactly the smartest 10 year-old on Earth! Please try to see my point but I do see YOUR point on that thing about not having the knowledge to do it or at least (Google it) but that's what life is about! Haven't you read that poem aboutlife??? It goes,"Life is a battle:fight it. Life is a puzzle:solve it. Life is a question answer it. Life is a bet:win it. Life is a challenge:take it on and let destiny lead you to victory!"... I hope you got the point because that's not the whole of it and I can't remember it. Even if you didn't get it I'll tell you:Life is life...you gotta accept that there are difficulties and hardships but isn't that what life is about??? Life is a game and if you lose then you die. And you dont have extra lives... Sorry if I mispresented you man, just trying to help... Smartypant... Quote
HIENVN Posted February 9, 2007 Report Posted February 9, 2007 I'm working to proove part of Einstein's theory of relativity wrong. In order to do this I need the following information to plug into my theory: The speed the earth rotatesThe speed the earth revolvesThe speed the Milky Way Galixy spins There is other speeds that would be very helpful, but I doubt they are known. I would like to refrain from giving out my theory because I fear someone might steal it. I think you are right when you said a part of Einstein’s relativity theory is wrong; however, your quote may prove you do not know how to prove a wrong of this theory. You have dealt to a lot of speeds while you forgot the speed of gravitational waves, which these waves will prove the wrong of relativity theory.Relativity theory is right when it dealt to space-time, but it is wrong when dealt to the energy that Einstein’s equation is a sample.Please do not fear somebody steel your idea then you cannot display your idea in our forums. We can debate your idea in a tendency that is useful for our knowledge and we will serve better for science if your idea is value.All the best. Quote
HIENVN Posted February 9, 2007 Report Posted February 9, 2007 Are you the (n)billionth person to attempt an outsmarting of Einstein on special? general? or both? Have you passed any exam to prove you atleast comprehend what Einstein was conveying in his 2 famous papers? Please patience, imaplanck.The progress of science is depended on the resistances that will build a better world in science.I think MewSkitty is gathering a right way when he thinks relativity theory is wrong, which this wrong will open for the next revolution in science.“Relativity theory is wrong” is first known by Einstein’s lecture, when he came to Sweden in 1923 to receive the 1921’s Nobel Prizes for Physics that did not awarded for his famous relativity theory.Einstein’s relativity theory is right just 50%, this is why it is useful for 20th century but it will be harmful for the 21st century.Anyone who is trying to prove for the wrong of relativity theory would have a change to become a scientific hero of our 21st century! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.