Jump to content
Science Forums

Dependence Of The Macro- And The Microworld Of The Earth On The Geocentric Gravitational Constant


Recommended Posts

For several years I have been developing the idea of the relationship of the micro- and the macroworld with fundamental physical constants. As a result, I got some interesting formulas that seem to confirm this idea. The first formula calculates the average radius of the Earth:

 

formula11.GIF

 

The second formula calculates the average distance (not AU!) from the Earth to the Sun:

 

formula12.GIF

 

The third formula calculates the highest-intensity harmonic of the Schumann resonance:

 

formula23.GIF

 

where µ is the Earth's gravitational parameter (the geocentric gravitational constant), me is the electron rest mass, ħ  is the reduced Planck constant, h is the Planck constant, c  is the speed of light in vacuum, Rc is the Rydberg constant (in Hz), α ≈ 1/137.04  is the fine-structure constant, C = 1 m/s is a matching coefficient.

 

(I also have other formulas using gravitational parameters that I have not yet published.)

 

I have already discussed the first two formulas in other forums. I was told that these formulas are a coincidence. Now, considering the third formula I got (about 7.85 Hz), it would be interesting for me to hear opinions of other researchers - Is it really just three formulas that give the correct results can be a coincidence? Maybe we just do not understand that the reality of different planets depends on their gravitational parameters and may be various? Maybe the information about the Universe, which we obtain with our senses and instruments, is an illusion that requires correction?

 

Thanks for your opinion.

Edited by Hamster
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

My opinion is this is just numerology. Basically, by choosing what powers to apply and to which constants and also multiplying and/or dividing by whatever numbers you choose, you can make the result come out whatever way you want.

It may be a fun and even an interesting way to spend your time, but otherwise meaningless.

This is the first time Ive agreed with you!

Now apply that same logic to Einstein's theories.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Einstein's theories are based on sound science, not by just playing around with numbers. No, we do not agree.

You are mistaken that the theories of Einstein are based on rational claims. You THINK that, but this does not make it correct. I dispute all claims of supporting observational evidence for SR if thats what you are going to say next.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...