Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: speed of light derived purely from math #1644 Atom Totality 5th ed
Replies: 6   Last Post: Aug 2, 2013 5:41 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Earle Jones Posts: 235 Registered: 12/6/04
Re: speed of light derived purely from math #1647 Atom Totality 5th ed
Posted: Jul 30, 2013 7:30 PM

Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, July 30, 2013 12:41:39 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 28, 2013 2:49:45 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >

> > > On Sunday, July 28, 2013 2:31:18 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > In this old post of 2010 below, I am going to invigorate it, by new
> > > > material, learned from doing True Calculus. I am keeping the idea of a
> > > > "stripe covering of a sphere surface" but I am going to inject it with
> > > > the limitations of Calculus. The limitations that distance results from
> > > > the fact of "empty space" between two neighboring points. So that if
> > > > distance is empty space and that speed is distance divided by time,
> > > > what is time? Well, time is nothing physical but merely the counting of
> > > > points traversed.

> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > So in 10 Grid where 10 is pretend infinity borderline and all the
> > > > numbers that exist are 0, .1, .2, .3, . . 9.8, 9.9 and then finally the
> > > > last finite number 10, that distance is the empty space between points
> > > > and that time is just the number of points covered. So speed in New
> > > > Calculus is dy/dx, where the dx is time and that time is a number of
> > > > points traversed.

> >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > Now the chapter on John Bell's inequality with superdeterminism is coming
> > up soon. But here I am anticipating that chapter. Remember "spooky action
> > at a distance", that when we send two connected light beams to the opposite
> > side of the Cosmos and alter one of them, then the other beam automatically
> > changes itself, even though it is far away and a faster than light speed
> > would have to signal the change. Remember that? Well, here I may have a
> > common sense explanation.
> >
> >
> >
> > Have you ever wondered why the speed of light is so puny small of a speed?
> > Of course, to those not in science, such a question would never dawn on
> > them and to many in science, the speed of 3*10^5 km/sec is awfully fast to
> > them. But to those of us in science that thinks of science everyday, the
> > thought comes to us, of how terribly slow is 3*10^5 when the cosmos has
> > galaxies separated by millions of light years. If we were the Builder's of
> > Cosmoses, and had to build a speed of light as the maximum speed within the
> > cosmos, would we end up with such a tiny speed of 3*10^5 km/sec? No, we
> > would not. We would look at the borderline of finite to infinite and model
> > our speed upon that huge number which is 1*10^603. So the Speed of Light
> > should be something of 10^200 km/sec.
> >
> >
> >
> > However, unless we never understood what the meaning of Space and Time was
> > in a coordinate system.
> >
> >
> >
> > The number pi needs not be a large number because it is a ratio of the
> > circumference divided by diameter. So that the Speed of Light can also be a
> > small number if it were a ratio between two parameters, the one of distance
> > and the one of time.
> >
> >
> >
> > So, when we have a Grid system such as the 10 Grid and if we take the empty
> > space between number points as distance and we take the counting of number
> > points traversed in that distance we have a dy/dx which is a speed. And in
> > 10 Grid if we were the speed of light going from coordinate points (0,0) to
> > (.1,0) we would have traveled a distance of .1, and covered two points in
> > the grid for a time of 2, so our speed is .1/2 = 0.05 which is not even a
> > number in 10 Grid. However if we traveled from (0,0) to the point (.1,10),
> > then our distance is slightly more than 10 and our time of travel is still
> > 2 since we covered two number points. And so our speed would be 10/2 = 5,
> > and both speeds having the same time involved.
> >
> >
> >
> > So, in this sense, we can have the Bell Inequality with a speed of light so
> > tiny in a large universe of huge distances, yet where light can be here or
> > there instantaneously, even though its local value is the puny 3*10^5
> > km/sec.
> >
> >
> >
> > AP

>
> Alright, in the above I think I have enough information to give a reasoning
> of what the speed of light is, in physics as a ratio between distance and
> time. Just as pi is a ratio between circumference and diameter regardless of
> the size of the circle. This would make sense for why the speed of light is a
> constant, just as pi is a constant regardless of size of circle. And light is
> always the same value regardless of what frame of reference you measure it
> in, because you measure the ratio of two physical entities.
>
> So what is that ratio of distance divided by time for the speed of light.
>
> There is a math textbook titled "Mathematics: A Human Endeavor" by Harold
> Jacobs, 1970.
> Now in that Jacobs text on page 291 is a picture of a logarithmic spiral
> inside a rectangle of whirling squares. It is probably on the Internet
> somewhere, but I want the student or reader to photocopy that page of Jacobs
> and then get a piece of flexible wire, and cut the wire of a length that
> matches the radius as shown on that page of length 55. Now, three and a tiny
> bit more of those 55 lengths should be as long as two of those arcs in the 55
> square shown, (that is a semicircle). Now, however, using that same wire
> track down the length of the wire that it takes to cover the 55 square and
> the 34 square and finally the 8 square, note that the 8 square has to be
> extended over to the right inside the 21 square.
>
> What the student or reader should find is that it takes roughly 2.71 of the
> wire to cover that arc.
>
> So here we learn best meaning of the number "e". The number "e" is pi in
> hyperbolic geometry where circles are not closed but are open and spiraling
> outwards. In Elliptic geometry, a circle is closed and its circumference is
> pi times diameter. In Hyperbolic geometry, circles are log spirals that are
> open, and it is "e" that relates the diameter of the log spiral with the
> circumference.
>
> Now that is a technical understanding, but the deeper meaning, that takes
> time to settle in, is that Geometry is just Euclidean Geometry and that
> Elliptic and Hyperbolic geometry are not independent, stand alone geometries.
> Much like in physics, a particle is a wave and you cannot separate the two.
>
>
> So the pi constant is the ratio of circumference divided by diameter....

*
Did you know that pi is also the ratio of log(-1) to sqrt(-1)?

Log(-1) and sqrt(-1) are both imaginary, and yet their ratio is pi.

earle
*
(Discovered by Augustus deMorgan in about 1850.)