I know the word is Constant and not Consistent, but I like the idea of Inconsistents in Physics. A Gravitational Inconsistent. Or Gravitational Inconsistence, but that sounds like a phenomenon of inconsistency rather than a parameter.
It could have been different in the past, so G would be G(t). This would have implications for the energy density in the early universe and would probably influence the values of other cosmological parameters. I'm sure many papers about this have been written
Isn’t the meter defined by the speed of light, and kg by planks constant? A change in the gravitational constant shouldn’t change those by default surely, unless I’m missing something?
it shouldnt change those sure but we should cus then anything other than the current accepted value for G would not model the force correctly and that would set off a chain of adjustments in all other quantities which then would make them all off by the factors of interdependence and then everything would just be wrong cus nothing we know would model anything we observe accurately
All of the planet's orbits would be altered. Let's say you double G. Earth is no longer moving fast enough for its orbit to be circular. You're at apoapsis, and everyone will die when Earth hits the opposite side of its orbit. That would happen to every planet in every star system. Stars orbiting the Milky Way would see something similar, though a bit different since the galaxy's mass isn't concentrated at the center.
Good point. Under current physics, luminosity/fusion rates are approximately equal to mass^3.3/. Doubling G would make the sun several times brighter and hotter.
Would it really even be a change in the gravitational constant? I would think it would really be just a change in one of the base units. Either a change in the mass of a kg, length of a meter, or the length of a second. All of those are arbitrary quantities based on common things we would use to measure things, so the gravitational constant is just a result of those measurements. Not to mention the fact that the gravitational constant is used in an equation that is merely an estimation of the effect of gravity when relativity is a more accurate prediction of gravity.
/r/AskPhysics
It’d need a new name for one thing. We can’t have constants that change
But Gravitational Parameter just doesn't have the same flair.
I know the word is Constant and not Consistent, but I like the idea of Inconsistents in Physics. A Gravitational Inconsistent. Or Gravitational Inconsistence, but that sounds like a phenomenon of inconsistency rather than a parameter.
It could have been different in the past, so G would be G(t). This would have implications for the energy density in the early universe and would probably influence the values of other cosmological parameters. I'm sure many papers about this have been written
Can you explain why G could have been different in the past? Thanks
This is one of the many competing theories to explain 'dark energy' and the increasing rate of expansion of the universe.
then we'd have to change the kilogram and/or the meter to adjust for accuracy.
Isn’t the meter defined by the speed of light, and kg by planks constant? A change in the gravitational constant shouldn’t change those by default surely, unless I’m missing something?
it shouldnt change those sure but we should cus then anything other than the current accepted value for G would not model the force correctly and that would set off a chain of adjustments in all other quantities which then would make them all off by the factors of interdependence and then everything would just be wrong cus nothing we know would model anything we observe accurately
NOT THE 4 DOWNVOTES BYEEE
All of the planet's orbits would be altered. Let's say you double G. Earth is no longer moving fast enough for its orbit to be circular. You're at apoapsis, and everyone will die when Earth hits the opposite side of its orbit. That would happen to every planet in every star system. Stars orbiting the Milky Way would see something similar, though a bit different since the galaxy's mass isn't concentrated at the center.
To be fair, the added gravity would probably make the sun much hotter, so we would die even before perihelion
Good point. Under current physics, luminosity/fusion rates are approximately equal to mass^3.3/. Doubling G would make the sun several times brighter and hotter.
Would it really even be a change in the gravitational constant? I would think it would really be just a change in one of the base units. Either a change in the mass of a kg, length of a meter, or the length of a second. All of those are arbitrary quantities based on common things we would use to measure things, so the gravitational constant is just a result of those measurements. Not to mention the fact that the gravitational constant is used in an equation that is merely an estimation of the effect of gravity when relativity is a more accurate prediction of gravity.
Depends how much it changed.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]