kendalla@orca.UUCP (Kendall Auel) (03/26/86)
In article <875@lanl.ARPA> jlg@a.UUCP (Jim Giles) writes: >While it is certainly convenient to do one's calculations in a non-rotating >coordinate system, there also seems to be something physically significant >about such systems as well. > >J. Giles >Los Alamos I think the original poster of "bogus physics" revealed why there is something significant about non-rotating coordinate systems. In a rotating coordinate system, distant objects are traveling several times the speed of light. The centrifugal force on all matter not at the center of the coordinate system would cause the universe to rapidly blow apart. Math does not necessarily reflect reality. Newton's Laws work very nicely for most of us, but they don't describe the real universe. Kendall Auel Tektronix An engineer, a mathematician, and a physicist were asked to prove that all odd integers are prime: Engineer: "1 is prime. So are 3, 5, and 7. All odd numbers must be prime." Mathematician: "1 is prime. 11 and 13 are prime. By induction, all odd numbers are prime." Physicist: "1 is prime. 3, 5, and 7 are prime. 9... Experimental error. 11 is prime, 13 is prime...."
weemba@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Matthew P. Wiener) (03/27/86)
In article <2036@orca.UUCP> kendalla@orca.UUCP (Kendall Auel) writes: >I think the original poster of "bogus physics" revealed why there is >something significant about non-rotating coordinate systems. In a rotating >coordinate system, distant objects are traveling several times the >speed of light. The centrifugal force on all matter not at the center of >the coordinate system would cause the universe to rapidly blow apart. You do not know what you are talking about. Please reread my past postings. > An engineer, a mathematician, and a physicist were asked to > prove that all odd integers are prime: > Engineer: "1 is prime. So are 3, 5, and 7. All odd numbers > must be prime." > Mathematician: "1 is prime. 11 and 13 are prime. By induction, > all odd numbers are prime." > Physicist: "1 is prime. 3, 5, and 7 are prime. 9... Experimental > error. 11 is prime, 13 is prime...." You even got the JOKE wrong! When asked to consider the question of whether all odd numbers other than 1 are prime, the mathematician said 3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is not, whoops, statement is false. The physicist said 3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is not, 11 is, 13 is, so within experimental error the statement is true. The engineer went 3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is prime, 11 is prime, ..., duh, yeah the statement is true. ucbvax!brahms!weemba Matthew P Wiener/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720
gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP (03/28/86)
In article <2036@orca.UUCP> kendalla@orca.UUCP (Kendall Auel) writes: >I think the original poster of "bogus physics" revealed why there is >something significant about non-rotating coordinate systems. In a rotating >coordinate system, distant objects are traveling several times the >speed of light. The centrifugal force on all matter not at the center of >the coordinate system would cause the universe to rapidly blow apart. Oh, foo! That is not a correct application of currently accepted physical law. There are already an infinite number of rotating coordinate systems centered at every possible place; you just haven't noticed them yet. Am I moving faster than light in any meaningful sense? Has the universe blown apart yet? Of course not. Coordinates are an artifact, having no direct physical meaning.