Timeline for In binary systems, does the speed of the objects vary as they adjust to the movement of the other object?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 14, 2019 at 21:25 | comment | added | Kornelia | not just gravitation, I mean, action and reaction, the momentum of object reacting to other object moving. | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 21:15 | comment | added | Slarty | At the smallest possible scale there might or might not be some wave-like pattern to gravitation but we don't know what happens to gravity with certainty at the smallest possible scale. It’s unlikely that we will until quantum mechanics and relativity are fully reconciled | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 20:46 | comment | added | Kornelia | I am looking for that there should be a "tug of war" pattern, even if it is very small, and that is sometimes a bias. It still seems to be that even a smooth and continuous manner, when taken down to the smallest possible scale, must have some wave-like pattern to it, action and reaction. | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 20:42 | comment | added | Slarty | I think we are drifting off topic here | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 19:00 | comment | added | Kornelia | yes, all of that, for the purpose of finding the accurate model. neutrality. "peer review" has nothing to do with scientific method, it is just a resource allocation mechanism for record-keeping. but, not surprised that you conflate practicalities and trends for how to solve them with the actual protocol science. | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 18:49 | comment | added | user31179 | Nowhere in natural science appears the term "truth". In contrary, we have verifiability, reproducability, peer review and for the hard core freaks falsifiability. I only hope this is not about a form of geocentrism, the sketch reminds me of ptolemy's attempts to explain opposition loops. As has been stated, nothing jerks in orbits. It is a smooth continuous motion if undisturbed. Perturbations can be induced from outside on a body, but are taken into account when orbits are being calculated, e.g. for times and heights of tides and much more. This is daywork, really. | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 18:05 | comment | added | Kornelia | Yes objective truth. The definition of science, and natural science. Good that you have a "we" who do that, but, science is neutral, and a protocol. Here this question is in theoretical context. Even a smooth and continuous adjustment when reduced down to the smallest possible scale must have some wave-like pattern to it. | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 18:00 | comment | added | user31179 | Truth is not a concept of natural science. Here, we collect evidence, formulate a hypotheses, test it, and either put it to the archives or refine it into a theory (i am not an astronomer or physicist, i must add). If you want to participate, be invited. If you find evidence for such a pattern, bring it on. But before you do, see if someone else has observed such a thing before and offerend a solution. | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 17:47 | comment | added | Kornelia | Whether or not it is negotiable is irrelevant, what is relevant is what is objectively true. Those calculations deal with generalizations of binary orbits. If there is any periodicity to adjustments in orbits, is not what it addresses. Even a smooth and continuous manner down to smallest possible scale (like that article does but with different focus) must have some wave-like pattern to it. | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 17:44 | comment | added | user31179 | It is not negociable :-) But it can be calculated with arbitrary precision. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_two-body_problem | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 17:24 | comment | added | Kornelia | What about a very very tiny periodicity, but still noticeable? Even a smooth and continuous manner down to smallest possible scale must have some wave-like pattern to it. And, based on clockwork harmony, that pattern should repeat itself. I'm thinking something like hundreds of periods per orbit. Not sudden jerks, but still if looking with enough detail "tugs". | |
| Dec 14, 2019 at 17:14 | history | answered | Slarty | CC BY-SA 4.0 |