A metric current and sequel

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by TIMO MOILANEN, Oct 1, 2020.

?

Should they redefine the kg

  1. Real physics

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. I'm stubborn

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    The picture is a piece of my writing/calculations from Office , where I also have drawings of the integral . I am not able to explain 3D geometry without a drawing (picture) .

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,894
    Then you have some communication skills to practice to do before thinking about publishing.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    I'm to old a dog to have time for learning prose writing in English , so I'm much on the look for someone to write. A problem is find someone understanding the science and math , plus translating my bad output in this distinct jargon. Swedish and Finnish is waste of time (not in use anymore). For now I only spread out the info best I can over the net. Since I can not afford to pay for any extended time , the only thing I can offer is eventual revenue of publishing .
    And before we go to criticize my computer skills I can say that I'm good at computers, or at least I was in the 90:es

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2020
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,970
    Now that is very clear and easy to comprehend.

    So you can write in words and make yourself understood, even though English is not your first language. Please do more of this. It helps a lot.
     
  8. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    https://1drv.ms/u/s!ArSE2R4ReZrzii5323SoUhYx9Ifl
    Here I tested to send a piece of exel table.
    The bottom line is that I can not write physics and math without equations and numbers, pictures may help.
     
  9. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,970
    Yes of course, equations and maths are essential in physics, but they need some explanation, of both the symbols and the algebraic expressions you use, so that readers can understand what you are doing. Pictures are less crucial, usually.
     
  10. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,894
    I'm not talking about your English; I'm taking about your ability to express your idea coherently.
     
  11. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    To start Coulomb's ,electric E0i and magnetic constants µ0i are one and the same. With Coulomb's law I put in 1Ci ( with no definition) and via Faradays law I get Coulomb's const.Ki , elementary charge ei and Avogadro's const.NA tied together. Faradays constant F is included via the eq. to get out ei . Not surprisingly the fine structure constant ai is included in both ei and Planck constant hi . ei=2*ai/c^2 that upside down is clearer c^2/(2*ai) is both a kinetic energy and equally large potential energy. Planck constant is also 4 times the electric const. in nuclear units (/c^2). Then I just check the constants with eq. ei^2=2*ai*E0i*hi*c so all ad up . Here I also derived the mass of a proton Mpi since I used E0i=3*Mpi*c^2 /(16*pi) to begin with . Then just testing the constants on most equations I found and transforming half a dozen "minor" constants to apply metric ampere Ai. Ai have a similar definition as the SI A (=stupid) but can be compared to the SI ampere via the magnetic constant µ0i.
     
  12. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    Yes I know, I loose the thread while writing . I eat 3*150 mg tramadol and 3*1000 mg paracetamol (and a bunch others)a day so I have only 2-3 (sober) hrs a day if I'm not too tired.
     
  13. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,894
    OK. So don't rush it. But you can't submit this as-is for publication. First things first.
     
  14. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,970
    I don't understand this first sentence. What are these and what have they to do with Coulomb?

    Do you mean dielectric permittivity, ε, and magnetic permeability μ ? If so, they are obviously NOT "the same".

    If you mean something different, then what?

    And what have either of them to do with Coulomb?

    I won't attempt to comment on anything else until this is resolved.
     
  15. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,112
    Why does the electric constant have the units of kg m^2/s^2?
    Why is the mass of a proton multiplied by three?
    Why won't an electron instead of a proton yield the same constant?
    Why is pi multiplied by 16?
     
  16. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,970
    Good points. He is claiming that his electric constant has the dimensions of energy!

    Shome mishtake shurely?
     
  17. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    It have not, it have A^2 s^4/(m^3 kg)=F/m . Remember me writing about putting in 1C ,1m and 1kg that not show in formulas. Here that make putting in1 Ci^-2 at dist 1m => kg*m^3/(s^2*Ci^2)=N*m^2/Ci^2 This is exactly the opposite of what E0i need to be Ci^2/(N*m^2) So I get the opposite *needed =1 , whereas when measuring they just put in what is needed ( in simple measurement setups the needed is obvious, at least when you know what you want to have). 4/3 comes from the integral constant I put in to Ki =4/(3*Mp*c^2), and since E0i=1/(4pi*Ki) it make 3/(16pi). The constant is how much per total energy(E=mc^2) goes to the electron and from there to Fq. The mass is needed for reference to classical force kgm/s^2 per electric charge (n*ei) . They are both needed because it is a comparison between them.
     
  18. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    Of course it has (As)^2 per a force N , that leave one force(potential energy) that must be in the constant, and having the 1Ci^2 just multiplied 1^2 mean two energies (As) more . Sum= energy^2*distance^2/force
     
  19. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    I explained I can probably not publish myself (and f*** the academic procedures) , just hoping someone could write it properly . I'm making "science" not papers . Making this common knowledge is my aim , and I wrote any interested can make money of it (and give me small % ?). And there is much more where this came from.
     
  20. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    Coulombs const. Ki , electric const. E0i and magnetic const. µ0i are one and same constant just "turned over". E0i=1/(4pi*Ki) , µ0i=1/(E0i*c^2) , just fitted into different "geometry"
     
  21. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    To me they are the same , both have the exactly same information, and can be fitted (µ0i=1/(E0i*c^2) into each others "aplications" matching perfectly.
     
  22. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    Something different what ,I don't get it.
     
  23. TIMO MOILANEN Registered Member

    Messages:
    63
    Both are derived from Coulombs const. and first is "telling" a feature of the charge unit Ci (coulomb) , the second same*time(s)
     

Share This Page