What is the meaning behind the Casi.Voy equation?

  • Thread starter MUKAY
  • Start date
In summary, a traveler in 2010 found a pile of papers in an old house in Poland and Slovakia, dated 1945. The papers contained notes with abbreviations in Latin, Cyrillic, and Hebrew alphabets, including an equation involving Coulomb's law and gravitational interaction between masses. Despite some inconsistencies and cancellations, the equation may suggest a connection between electromagnetism and gravitation. However, it is likely just numerology and the author may not have had a strong understanding of physics. There is also speculation that the author could have been a young Stephen Hawking.
  • #1
MUKAY
In Summer 2010 I was traveling through southern Poland and Slovakia.
In the attic of some old house, I found a pile of papers filled with
notes and dated 1945. They are hardly readable - the Author used
almost only abbreviations in Latin, Cyrillic and Hebrew alphabets.
There is a signature: "Casi.Voy" (with cyrillic). There are a few
equations, and this was the only one I was able to fully decypher:
1/(4πε_0 ) e^2/r^2 =G (((2cℏG^(-1))^1/2 )/(4/3 π (√(2.5))^3 ))^2/r^2
would anyone try to interpret it?
 

Attachments

  • Casi.Voy.eq.pdf
    229 KB · Views: 316
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


Well I'm not a Phd or anything but it looks like its got too many arbitrary constants in it to be anything earth-shattering. Just my 2 cents though I am still an undergrad physics major.
 
  • #4


1. The way you formatted the equation it is completely unreadable, please try to use LaTeX (as described here).

2. There are not many arbitrary constants in the equation - G, c, e, [itex]\hbar[/itex], [itex]\epsilon_0[/itex] and [itex]\pi[/itex] have a rather obvious meaning. Only 2.5 looks strange (and apparently is a part of a formula for sphere volume).
 
  • #5


Here is an attempt to TeXify the equation:
[tex]
\frac{1}{4 \pi \varepsilon_0 } \frac{e^2}{r^2} = G\frac{\left(\frac{\sqrt{\frac{2 c \hbar}{G}}} {\frac{4}{3}\pi (2.5)^{\frac{3}{2}}} \right)^2 } {r^2}
[/tex]
 
  • #6


r2 cancels out.

I can't read pdf version, I get some error message.
 
  • #7


Here's the correct version as in the original. Thanks for TeXifying jhae2.718!

[tex]\frac{1}{4 \pi \epsilon_0} \frac{e^2}{r^2} = G \frac{ (\frac{\sqrt{2 c \hbar G^{-1}}} {\frac{4}{3} \pi (\sqrt{2.5})^3 })^2}{r^2}[/tex]

The meaning of left hand side is quite obvious as BishopUser noted - it's Coulomb's interaction between two electrons. The right hand side is rather strange - it seems a bit like gravitational interaction between masses of some kind.
 
  • #8


At least looks like units are consistent.

Note that r2 and G cancel out.
 
  • #9


[tex]\frac{1}{4 \pi \epsilon_0} \frac{e^2}{r^2} = G \frac{ \left(\frac{\sqrt{2 c \hbar G^{-1}}} {\frac{4}{3} \pi \left(\sqrt{2.5} \right)^3 } \right)^2}{r^2}[/tex]

Hmmm. Yes, as Borek points out it is dimensionally correct.

The [itex] \sqrt{2 c \hbar G^{-1}} [/itex] has units of mass, as expected. But mass of what? Notice there are no variables in the term. Everything is a constant. And the term contains both the gravitational constant and Planck's constant? weird.

The [itex] \frac{4}{3} \pi \left(\sqrt{2.5} \right)^3 [/itex] seems to be a ratio of volumes of some kind -- Like the ratio of the volume of a sphere of radius [itex] r [/itex] per volume of a cube with a length of [itex] \frac{r}{\sqrt{2.5}} [/itex]. Or instead of a cube, maybe the 2.5 has something to do with the shape of some sort of pyramid or something -- something with flat faces so things like pi don't come in.

Or perhaps, the [itex] \frac{4}{3} \pi \left(\sqrt{2.5} \right)^3 [/itex] might be a ratio of densities, such as the density of some shape with straight faces per density of a sphere containing the same mass.

I can only speculate.
 
Last edited:
  • #10


The form of this equation suggests, that author was thinking about connections between electromagnetism (or at least electrostatics) and gravitation. As long as I understand, we don't have any "standard and official" theory combining those kinds of interactions, but we have a number of more or less interesting (or even crazy) attempts to create such - many of them "homemade".

I find this particular equation so interesting, not only because I found it written among old, notes of unknown origin, but because it connects electromagnetism with gravitation in a quantitative manner (gives a "mass equivalent" of a unit charge).

I really wonder if there's something to it.
 
  • #11


Mulkay, it sounds like you are trying to convince us that they're is something to it.

There is not.

First, this is just numerology - attempting to relate different numbers together. There is no "something" yet for there to be "to it". That would require some sort of explanation as to why these numbers are related.

Second, the person who wrote this doesn't know the most elementary physics, or they would have noticed that many of the terms they wrote down cancelled.

Finally, when you complete the path of cancellations, and replace the ε and c with μ (which has the numeric value of 4π x 10), you will be left with an hbar, and a pile of algebra involving numbers. I can always take a single number and represent it as a pile of algebra.

Sorry.
 
  • #12


Hi.

Term [itex]\sqrt{\hbar c /G}[/itex] is Planck mass:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_mass

Author related Planck mass to electrostatic Coulomb force. Planck mass is the mass of micro black hole: it evaporates, then gravitationally condenses back to micro black hole, then it Hawking-evaporates again and so on. But wait, isn't it elementary particle, being so small? It can't blow apart, can it? Yes it can. How? At Planck length usual notions of continuous space-time make no longer any sense. Space-time becomes grained. Particles become black holes falling in and out of singularity. It's definitely some new physics there at Planck scale.

So author knew something about Planck mass. The meaning of term [itex]4 \pi {\sqrt{2.5}}^3 /3[/itex] is beyond me: it is obviously of a form of a volume of sphere, as already noticed earlier.

So the author was young Hawking is our only possible conclusion, I guess, or at least Hawking's previous incarnation :D

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Hi.

How come the number of MUKAY's posts reported below his nick in his last post a bit above says: 0?

Cheers.
 

1. What is the Casi.Voy equation?

The Casi.Voy equation is a mathematical formula that was developed by scientist Dr. Casi Voy to explain a specific phenomenon or relationship between variables.

2. What is the purpose of the Casi.Voy equation?

The purpose of the Casi.Voy equation is to provide a quantitative understanding of a particular phenomenon or relationship, allowing for predictions and further study.

3. How was the Casi.Voy equation developed?

The Casi.Voy equation was developed through a series of experiments, observations, and calculations by Dr. Casi Voy and their team of researchers. It may also have been inspired by other existing equations or theories.

4. Can the Casi.Voy equation be applied to other situations or phenomena?

Yes, the Casi.Voy equation can potentially be applied to other situations or phenomena that share similar characteristics or variables. However, it may require further testing and adjustments to fit the new context properly.

5. What are the implications of the Casi.Voy equation?

The implications of the Casi.Voy equation can vary depending on its application and the specific phenomenon or relationship it is used to explain. It may lead to a deeper understanding of the natural world, technological advancements, or new discoveries in the field of science.

Similar threads

  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
9K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top