Discussions on classical and modern physics, quantum mechanics, particle physics, thermodynamics, general and special relativity, etc.

The gravitational constant G, is a scaling factor used in all modern and classical theories of gravity. The problem with "big G" is that it cannot be expressed in a relationship to any other known constants in physics. This forces us puny humans of the 21st century to measure big G experimentally. Because gravity is both universal for all mass, and its so weak relative to other forces, experimentally measuring it is very difficult even for the most expensive and sensitive lab equipment. There is no agreed-upon method for measuring G, and the results of measurements performed all over the world often disagree on the value to as much as 0.6% error.

If sixth tenths of a percent seems "small" to you, consider this fact: The distance from the earth to the moon is known to an experimental error of 3 centimeters. So an error as large as 0.6% in a fundamental constant of nature, in the year 2015, is an embarrassment.

In the following linked article, you can follow various lab teams from the USA, Europe, and Russia, as they devise ever more clever methods of measuring G, in their collective battle to find its true value.

http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/bigG

hyksos
Active Member

Posts: 1267
Joined: 28 Nov 2014

Re: A Slice of piε0

It seems reasonable to imagine: Universal properties arise from the universe's structure.

That would include universal speed limit c (a.k.a. c0 to explicitly specify in vacuum), with its parameters ε0 and (the vacuum permittivity and permeability of free space respectively) among others. In fact G, despite the upper case treatment, seems directly analogous to Coulomb's constant ke where:
ke = 1/(4piε0).

That would suggest a γ0, such that G = 1/(4piγ0). 4pi is the solid angle encompassed by spherical fields. Since Maxwell gave us:
c2 = 1/ε0μ0,

one wonders if there could be an analogous description relating our γ0 to c.
Perhaps c2 = 1/γ02 would make a reasonable starting point. From Einstein's E = mc2,
c2 = E/m, so, γ02 = E/m,
γ0 = √(E/m) = (1/c)? Just playing around.

When asked what he was experimenting on Cavendish replied "I'm weighing the earth."
I weighed it myself this morning. It's 180 lbs. I know because that's how hard it was pressing on the bottom of the bathroom scale upon which I was standing. ;o)

Active Member

Posts: 1675
Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Location: Times Square (T2)
 hyksos liked this post

[The problem with "big G" is that] it cannot be expressed in a relationship to any other known [constants in physics]

Up until Nov. 20, 2016 the underlined was true. Since then, things have changed.

I direct you to that online lecture found on DailyMotion. Search for "gravitational constant equation"

It's a 15 min. video showing the mathematical proof of a new equation for "big G"

Casnew
Forum Neophyte

Posts: 4
Joined: 16 Jul 2017
Location: U.S. (Southern California)

"Does this value of G make me look fat?"
someguy1
Member

Posts: 640
Joined: 08 Nov 2013

http://www.dailymotion.com/gravitationalconstant

Absolutely nothing wrong with mathematic and science related merchandise. In fact, more of it could aid in getting future minds involved in these fields. (well done someguy1! Love the jovial comment! …a specific scenario embracing mathematics and science in its fashion/attire)

Casnew
Forum Neophyte

Posts: 4
Joined: 16 Jul 2017
Location: U.S. (Southern California)

The link doesn't work. It just goes to search results of various sites? Is that what you want, us to guess??

Watson
Resident Member

Posts: 4594
Joined: 19 Apr 2009
Location: Earth, middle of the top half, but only briefly each 24 hours.

Watson, the link in my last post should work, it's the channel homepage (only one video on the channel). Alternatively, here is direct link to video...

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5tgma3

Casnew
Forum Neophyte

Posts: 4
Joined: 16 Jul 2017
Location: U.S. (Southern California)

Hi Watson, when you said "the link doesn't work" I believed you were referring to the links I posted.... But, it seems you we referring to Hyksos's link.... My mistake. Yes, you are correct, the link Hyksos posted does not work.

Watson, have you watched the proof lecture yet? Anything I can answer for you?

Casnew
Forum Neophyte

Posts: 4
Joined: 16 Jul 2017
Location: U.S. (Southern California)

hyksos
Active Member

Posts: 1267
Joined: 28 Nov 2014
 Casnew liked this post