View Single Post
Dec16-05, 03:34 PM
P: 1,544
Quote Quote by pervect
I don't want to beat you over the head, but as in the last thread
That the tread where you and your kept changing the question to fit your answer rather than address the question I re-explained twice Ė no problem Iím still working on it and will find a better explain then any given there.

But it also where even after explain how the Pythagorean was involved some still couldnít see it Ė not sure if you couldnít either.

At some point Iíll go back to it and draw a picture for those that still conceptual arenít "getting it", when it comes to seeing the Pythagorean inside a formula. But I understand how without using a little vision it can be hard for some to spot.

So we can leave that one be for now. But sticking with this one it doesn't relate that well to the other. You made the claim here that a non-linear spring in the Newtonian could match GR!
How is it you're talked out, you didn't put up I did. Iím the one that went to the trouble to design a non-linear spring to do something. Whereís your design that can match GR within the Newtonian?

All I said is that it cannot be done (provide precession and conserver energy in the spring at the same time). My statement is easily falsified Ė all you need to do is show the design that does the job, that all.
If youíve tried but were unsuccessful (which must is the case) say so, donít just say you donít want to talk about it and walk away.

As for my nonlinear spring that only puts energy in and out of the ellipse at the MINOR access in pulses. That was with a spring under tension. It has the eccentricity decreasing, no precession, no energy change in orbit or spring long term.
The same can be done by using a spring in compression only the eccentricity will increase still no change in precession, or energy long term.

But if we only apply the tension spring for the in bound side and the compression spring on the outbound side we will get precession, but energy comes out of both spring long term.
Reverse sides for the springs - energy goes into the springs and you have a negative precession change. But you cannot conserve the springs energies and change the precession (Like GR does) as you claim.

It only takes some quite thoughtfulness to be able to see your concept of a non-linear Newtonian spring wonít do the job. If you cannot design one with a function that will at least say you couldnít. If you canít take the time to do that, you never will ďget itĒ.