The film Gravity: A Heavy Problem from the BBC's Horizons series will be broadcast this Sunday on Channel 8 and will try to answer this question
Newton's laws allow us to reach the moon, even if in the forty years that have passed since then, the moon has moved a full 10 meters from where it was predicted due to unseen effects of gravity. These effects were formulated by Einstein who stated that the earth, the moon, the sun and every body in space causes a curvature in the space-time space which we translate as gravity. If Einstein's equations had not been taken into account, it is doubtful whether we would have reached the destination using the GPS, but we would have been bragging about 11-12 kilometers from the destination.
Particle physicist Dr. Brian Cox travels all over the US to understand what gravity is. First he looks for it in space - in the form of distant galaxies that appear twice to our eyes due to the gravitational lensing effect. Later, he visited, among other things, the site from which laser beams are fired at the moon and try to damage the reflection systems planted there by the Apollo 11 astronauts, in order to measure the moon's distance from the earth. He then travels to an American military unit that operates the GPS satellites and illustrates how gravity on the surface of the earth and in orbit at an altitude of 800 km reveal differences that need to be taken into account, but as particle physicists, these two phenomena also do not provide an explanation for the question of why Einstein was also not accurate in the description of gravity, and that we still need to go deeper.
He did arrive at a particle accelerator in the US, but he admitted that he and the entire team of physicists with him would move to Geneva and continue the research at the large hardon accelerator.
The film is not new, but in this respect the news in the field will have to wait a little, this coming September the operators of the accelerator will be in Geneva, including the Israelis working on the Atlas experiment - one of the largest experiments in it, to start testing the systems on a small scale, and only next year, after the faults that are discovered have been fixed By running the experiment, it will be possible to start producing real science.
What will we find there? It's hard to know. There are at least a dozen competing physics, but only one of them will prove to be correct, or maybe none of them? At least one thing is certain, the film gives a reasonable background to the general public, who is not familiar with formulas, and this has always been the greatness of the BBC and especially - the greatness of Horizon.
Since the untimely passing of Carl Sagan about a dozen years ago, we have had to make do with less charismatic, but at least more up-to-date, and equipped with equally impressive effects, which today naturally require a less complex production.
The film will be broadcast on Sunday, 24/8/2008 at 21:40 on Channel 8 in Hot
40 תגובות
A small question from Galileo could have prevented the emergence of Newtonian gravity.
Galileo Galilei dealt with the phenomenon of free fall, and he determined that all bodies
that are released at a certain moment will fall with the same increasing speed, and a body will not catch up with a body.
If Galili were to ask - why does speed increase and not a constant speed? He would discover the law of conservation of energy,
To discover the law of conservation of energy, Galili would take a large stone, go up to the 3rd floor of the Tower of Pisa, and release the stone. Its fall with increasing speed would have crushed a dry tree trunk that was lying on the ground.
Interesting, he would say, I went up the stairs to the 3rd floor of the tower and got tired.
If I had to crush the stem of time with the blows of an ax, I would get tired.
Now I understand why the stone falls with increasing speed.
The fall with increasing speed is intended to achieve equality in the amounts of fatigue, of raising a stone to the 3rd floor, and crushing a tree trunk.
If I went up with that stone to the 7th floor I would be much more tired, but the impact of it hitting the ground could crush a large tree trunk lying on the ground, and this tree trunk would require a large amount of fatigue from me to crush it.
Here Galili discovered the law of conservation of energy.
The energy of the height of a stone is replaced by the mechanical energy of its impact on the ground.
Newton, who did not know the law of conservation of energy, invented a mysterious force that erupts
from the earth, and his occupation is to drop stones with increasing speed.
If such a force does exist, then the law of conservation of energy does not exist.
Since the law of conservation of energy does exist, then Newton's gravitational force does not exist.
And if gravity doesn't exist, the history of science needs to be rewritten.
It's interesting that every time I raise the interesting question about some of his conclusions to Hanan, he suddenly disappears.
For details - skip to comment #22 in this article.
Hugin:
No need to exaggerate.
Perlman is a serious, academically trained mathematician who also has some personal problems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Perelman
There is no lack of people who have reached equally great achievements without being eccentric.
I do not underestimate him.
If I were to underestimate him, I would say that he is without an academy and without scrawled degrees.
A.
First of all, you are welcome to explore on your own in any direction you see fit.
Other than that I don't think a scientific theory will ever be disqualified just because it has too much "tion".
I'm talking, of course, about "Tia" as a suffix and not about "Tia" as a desert.
A. I will try to be as refined as possible in my response,
Everything you wrote to me you internalized.
You are far, far, far away.... Say thank you, that I gave you a hint, you could do something with it
More fruitful than you expressed in your responses, and I will not add.
Michael
I especially emphasized two aspects and it is possible that there was an exaggeration in the other aspects.
My intention was to criticize the particle physicist's tireless quest to quantize gravitation just as much as to square the circle as a practitioner in the field I'm afraid they are looking for in the comfortable and warm swamp that has developed over the last century. But not in the right place.
The second and decisive aspect is the practical practical physical aspect, that is, there is not even a prediction for the type of laboratory interaction in relation to future results of the quantization experiments of gravitation.
There is too much "Tia Tia" here that you must have noticed.
Apologies again if I offended talented hard working physicists.
And Hogin from Mogin...
Your phrasing is a bit convoluted due to gravity I guess.
But to simplify the matter, this is not exactly what is done most of the time.
That is, wandering in the dark.
One can always say that it takes thousands of years of darkness for one ray of light at the end.
On the other hand, there is also a need for a purposeful adjustment, not just to shuffle all the time in the same circles.
Just do in the right direction and intend to do and solve not just get a salary for posting articles and hashing words. Which is indeed very nice financially and also brings a lot of respect and appreciation in Beranza, but it doesn't really bring results.
Here you will see a guy like Gregory Perlman without an academy and without scrawled degrees.
He solved the Poincaré conjecture because he adjusted and wanted to simply solve the problem.
I think he even refused to accept the Fields Award.
Need more of these to solve problems.
No. And a point.
Sometimes, when you really want to understand something: such as this "heavy-weight" question, you have to get there
To her from the path of negation, and then you understand.
A:
I'm not saying that we understand everything or even a lot, but to claim that "the actual knowledge is no more accurate than the knowledge in the hands of alternative healers, astrologers and mystics and maybe much less" is simply nonsense.
There is an abysmal difference between those who manage to predict the results of each experiment with the accuracy of dozens of digits after the point and those who fail to predict anything.
to the point
You are absolutely right, but it can also be said that the experts have less knowledge than the percentage you mentioned.
Apart from speculations and dozens of different interpretations, none of the experts pretends to claim an actual understanding that has any practical implications in relation to gravity.
The actual knowledge is no more accurate than the knowledge held by alternative healers, astrologers and mystics and perhaps much less.
The attempt to build gravitation in the image of quantum physics, the very expensive attempt of 10 billion euros to realize such a possibility was doomed in advance to failure. Scientists are human beings with inherent human weaknesses, such as looking for solutions where the legs are where you were successful under the spotlight.
The whole matter of the quantization of gravitation originates from habits and convenience.
Physicists know very well that despite the enormous success of the standard model quantum chromodynamics and quantum electrodynamics no one really understands why and why all the puzzling questions presented by these models even though they work.
Just as no one knows why certain mathematical models describe physical processes so well. such as bruises to me.
Omer:
30/8/08 בשעה 09:25
There were rebroadcasts today as well, but to watch them you will have to solve a problem that may be heavier than gravity 🙂
The truth is that I did not really enjoy the article.
Is there a replay?
Well done, Dor.
I agree with you completely.
The reason why I did not come to the aid of Punkut in the first place was that I thought it was clear in advance that his words would upset certain people and I did not see the need for this anger because it only creates debate without advancing knowledge, but at no point was I sure that I was acting correctly because Hanan's ranting and the inconsistency in his words irritated me me too
🙂 Thanks Dor.
But a feeling that is quite well-founded about how many of the people he's met understand science and that it's a low number.
Hanan,
I don't want to defend a point that seems to annoy you very much, but the truth is that most of science is certainly known only to scientists, even people who are somewhat interested in science do not really understand the nuances known to people with degrees and practical experience in the subject, and even without the nuances, even the people who like the most Science does not understand things at all to the same extent as those who studied the things.
It is certainly easy to say that 90 percent of people and more do not understand science, and that is without expressing it as a scientific argument (I think there is no need to explain the ambiguities with the words "understand science").
Point said 99.99 percent while just to exaggerate. I don't think he has exact numbers or statistical tests that verify what he has to say, but rather a feeling that must be pretty well-founded about
Regarding the other accusations you made against him, is the belief that (almost) only the scientists possess the scientific knowledge a belief that the scientists are omniscient? After all, science is not perfect at this moment, why exaggerate what he said, the opposite of "knowing nothing about science" is not "knowing everything about science", but "knowing something about science".
"Men of science are the only ones who are omniscient and infallible."
I don't understand why you put words in this man's mouth that he didn't say.
In principle, I don't really like the way you attack the point, which is not only very rude, but you are making a clear ad hominem and, moreover, you are defaming him and inventing character traits for him that he did not claim.
Oh yes. Sounds interesting, I'll watch it.
It is also under the universe, which is part of space and astronomy, and also under quantum physics - exact sciences that, if there is no choice, it is under computing and technology.
to my dear father
In my opinion, the article "Do we fully understand gravity?" Should be under the value of space and astronomy and not "computing and technology". for your judgment.
good week
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Hanan visited them in a spaceship (by force).
By the way, Hanan; I'm still waiting for an answer to an old question. Where did your wonderful assertion, the scientific breakthrough, about which you told on the children's channel come from? (This is according to which aliens have aircraft that fly by means of an anti-gravity mechanism).
To Roy
Thanks for the explanation.
I'll try again.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda,
Shimi gave a file name, not a link name. You can download the file through a bitorrent software such as utorrent. Just for the record, this is an illegal download with all that implies....
You can download the file itself using the software, and go to the address below, there, and click on download torrent. You open the (small) file you download with the software and choose a place to save it.
Fun viewing (even if not the most legal)
Hanan, I wrote 99.9% and talked about the topic of gravity and not about other topics. And if I deviated by a percentage here and there it is not critical.
Why would I do a survey, whoever writes that we understand or don't understand gravity is the one who should do a survey. In the meantime, most of the people I know do not know what general relativity says (at the level of fundamental understanding, and certainly not at the level of equations).
If a physicist does not understand general relativity, he does not deserve to be called a physicist, and should be called by his name, for example, a thermodynamicist.
And in any case, you are only proving my point, because if even a physicist does not understand general relativity, then my 99.9% are absolutely correct.
By the way, I was also invited by Hanan to give a lecture on exobiology
Of course, the invitation to the conference includes all commenters and visitors to the site - whoever they are... I am convinced that we have a lot to learn from others (and maybe also teach).
Hanan Sabat
http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL
Come on, I knew that eventually we would get to the subject of UFOs...
All your responses can be summed up: if you cannot attack what is said, attack the speaker... and you are definitely loyal to this method. You didn't answer my questions in the carrier and you didn't show me studies that show that 99.99% of the public is completely ignorant.
1. I am ready to promise you that even a large number of physicists cannot explain the theories of relativity in detail. Everyone knows it and many cannot and do not know how to explain it.
2. I state that your argument is based only on your private belief. So don't say "99.99% don't understand anything...", but say the following: "In my private opinion, which is based on my private belief and not on anything else, 99.99% of the public, etc...."
3. Shall we return to the topic of UFOs, or shall we wait for the next article in which you will present us with wonderful new data that we did not know about humanity?
Hanan Sabat
http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL
and N.B. - I would be very, very happy if you would come to the conference that will be held next week. Yes, yes, on the subject of UFOs and also on the subject of exobiology... I'm sure we had a lot to talk about...
to shimi
I went to the site you provided but I could not get to the article. Are you ready to be more precise in the link?
good evening
Sabdarmish Yehuda
And it will read in the next record book:
"The Gebitational Point"
No one, our Judah, understood the gist of it. Haha
Tackle: about the slaves = about the UFOs of course...
and to Hanan Sabat,
The scientific knowledge is with the scientists, and each in his own field, just as the mystical knowledge is with the mystics, and just as the knowledge about the slaves is with the abomins.
Sabdarmish Yehuda,
Wait for the science readers about you, do you know how to solve the equations of general relativity?
Lachna Sabat.
Are you saying that there are more than 99.9% who understand general relativity?
But, notice what happened:-
Almost all commenters referred in their words only to the provocative things of a point and inflated the ego of this point.
But the article is much more serious than just a provocative response. Try to ignore this kind of response if possible.
The only one who addressed the issue is Shimi, and I will refer to the site he sent us to.
good evening
Sabdarmish Yehuda
point:
As an avid reader of the science site, I had the chance to read several comments from your pen. I asked you - when will you start writing substantive comments?
to the point -
1. Underestimating human intelligence sometimes does not help. Did you do a study that proved that 99.99% of the public does not understand anything? Show me what you're basing it on? Show me the studies and surveys that prove it. Do you know the percentage of academic people only in Israel or the Western world, that you state that 99.99% do not understand anything?
2. If you cannot present to me the studies related to section 1 in my question, then it raises doubts about your own knowledge. Are you the 0.01% who think they know everything???
3. Where do you place yourself in relation to the public?
4. The statement that scientific knowledge is found only in the scientists, only proves how captive you are in a religious world view, that scientists are the only ones who know everything, and are not wrong, and there are no disputes between them, and certainly do not say nonsense sometimes. The ability to judge should be present in every situation and it should not be said about any sector that it is the only one who knows or the only one who is right - this is in accordance with RL and our believing friends. Don't you think that you are no less religious than any other religious person??? You are a prisoner of the religion known as "the real science", In which people are convinced that everything is known, only scientists know and the rest of humanity is ignorant...
And besides, to the point..the problematic..the Torah..how can you even associate yourself
For science, if you don't understand anything about real geometry.. eh..???????
When will you turn yourself into a real question mark, for a change...uh...?!
To the point, which is the most fake point, to this moment.. on what date do you celebrate your birthday??? Oh.. maybe it's not important at all.. Bushi and the Klami go to Bishin..
All good...maybe you are..right or right...probably from your point of view, there is no time in space.
And if we talk about gravitation - opposing forces, indeed create, attractive forces and gravity.
And the wise, indeed, will roll the smooth trigger further, and will already understand the legality of this...and more.
Besides, I will also watch the program, which was recommended here..bye..thanks.
Those who don't want to wait until Sunday can see it on Emiol or Mitorent
BBC.Horizon.2008.What.on.Earth.is.Wrong.with.Gravity.DVBC.XviD.MP3.MVGroup.org.avi
I wouldn't get carried away (even we still don't understand the reasons for this drifting) period.
😉
The title is misleading.
"we"?
99.9% don't understand anything. Scientific knowledge is the property of the scientists, and not, as is commonly thought, the property of the public (who for their part believes in astrology and the rest are shying away).
Regarding the title of the article "Do we fully understand gravity?", the answer is surely negative. There are a lot of things we don't understand there.
I look forward to this show.
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda