Possibility of star formation around black holes

origin said:
In exactly what universe is this equation true?
Click to expand...
It's his knucklehead interpretation of the relativistic energy equation.

In geometric units

E^2 = m^2 + p^2

In conventional units

E^2_conv = (mc^2)^2 + p^2_conv c^2

And no he can't add anything to the derivation as you already know. He could learn how the derivation is achieved but I'm thinking that's out of the question. When the momentum is 0 the invariant mass equals the invariant energy and this is what led to the Manhattan project. The mass is invariant by definition [some discussion required to formulate a proof] and the momentum and energy are constants of the motion. He could find the derivation in chapter 1, Speeding, of the text Exploring Black Holes.

http://www.eftaylor.com/download.html#general_relativity

Choose chapter 1 Speeding to download.
 
Beaconator said:
E= (MC^2)^2 + PC^2

Can Jerk not be equivocated einto the above equation to read.

(MC^2)^2 + PC^2 + Da(t)/dt =E into this perdicament so a hyperjerk condition can be satisfied?

The implications of which mean the second the photonsphere is entered Distance becomes infinite and time becomes zero because mass is zero and momentum is becoming infinite.
Click to expand...

Someone else to ignore. Bruce, it works like a charm! Thanks. :)
 
Beaconator said:
E= (MC^2)^2 + PC^2
Click to expand...

Careful! That equation is dimensionally incorrect. You forgot to square the P.

Can Jerk not be equivocated einto the above equation to read.

(MC^2)^2 + PC^2 + Da(t)/dt =E into this perdicament so a hyperjerk condition can be satisfied?
Click to expand...

Not like that it can't. That equation would be dimensionally incorrect even if you corrected the error on the P.

We don't even need to worry about what a hyperjerk is - though I think I have an idea.
 
James R said:
Careful! That equation is dimensionally incorrect. You forgot to square the P.
Click to expand...
an integrally costly mistake on my part.
Not like that it can't. That equation would be dimensionally incorrect even if you corrected the error on the P.

We don't even need to worry about what a hyperjerk is - though I think I have an idea.
Click to expand...
If you knew what it was you would have defined it. If it were acceleration^2 you would need an equation that was circular at best in its efforts to explain time. But this is the nature of time and history to be circular.
 
I can not rewrite history. Even in the most absent of minds. But I will contest in the most extreme values are the simplest design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top