Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
academic.oup.com
Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
1–10 of 41 posts
Re: Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
#2So, not a physicist, but the claims in the PDF about how GR has "never predicted a single galaxy rotation curve" are overblown, right? Aren't there a handful of galaxies where the rotation curve lines up pretty close with the predictions from the visible mass? Any new physics has to explain those, too.
Anyway, I think I can see why QI is so appealing. The paper contains a very short and sweet explanation.
Re: Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
#3Really interesting paper, however:
>The Alpha Centauri system is ideal for testing quantised inertia since it is close to us and well-observed.
Yet they're using 1994 estimate for AB mass, have nobody measured alpha centaury AB mass since 1994?
Re: Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
#4So, not a physicist, but the claims in the PDF about how GR has "never predicted a single galaxy rotation curve" are overblown, right? Aren't there a handful of galaxies where the rotation curve lines up pretty close with the predictions from the visible mass? Any new physics has to explain those, too. Anyway, I think I can see why QI is so appealing. The paper contains a very short and sweet explanation.
I'm not aware of any match between GR theory and observations when it comes to galaxy rotation curves. The wikipedia entry provides a decent description of the issue.
Re: Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
#5Really interesting paper, however: >The Alpha Centauri system is ideal for testing quantised inertia since it is close to us and well-observed. Yet they're using 1994 estimate for AB mass, have nobody measured alpha centaury AB mass since 1994?
This 2003 paper shows a very close match based on ESO Paranal observations:
https://www.eso.org/public/news/eso0307/
and this paper from 2016 also has very close mass estimation (see table 1)
https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2016/10/aa29201-...
Re: Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
#6Only read the first few pages, but as a non-physicist, but who went through grad school, it appears the author is advertising their own prior work quite a bit. I generally associate this behavior with a) cranks b) stubborn people who lost an ideological turf battle
Re: Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
#7Not a physicist, but I never heard of this before and looks quite interesting at first glance.
Google indicates that mainstream physics regards it sceptically ("pseudoscience"), but it was difficult for me to find out why.
I found a single paper containing criticism from an actual physicist ("A sceptical analysis of quantized inertia" by Michele Renda: https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/489/1/881/5545603), but that did not make the theory sound that bad, and it even mentions "absence of arbitrary tunable parameters", which sounds very promising to me...
I'd be very curious on why this is so controversial from an actual physicist (e.g. compared to MoND). Hopefully Hossenfelder will cover this at some point on youtube, those videos are always quite merciless with overhyped results...
Re: Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
#8Not a physicist, but I never heard of this before and looks quite interesting at first glance. Google indicates that mainstream physics regards it sceptically ("pseudoscience"), but it was difficult for me to find out why . I found a single paper containing criticism from an actual physicist ("A sceptical analysis of quantized inertia" by Michele Renda: https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/489/1/881/5545603 ), but…
The main reason, as far as I'm aware, is because McCulloch then went on to claim to invent several thrusters (EmDrive, most notably) derived from the effect that break normal conservation of momentum.
Re: Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
#9I wish he spent a bit more time on the section regarding magnitude of the effect for different accelerations.
If indeed there is a minimum acceleration I wonder if it might not be measurable with some atomic physics experiment (atomic clock, etc..) in space a bit away from earth.
Re: Testing quantised inertia on Proxima Centauri
#10So, not a physicist, but the claims in the PDF about how GR has "never predicted a single galaxy rotation curve" are overblown, right? Aren't there a handful of galaxies where the rotation curve lines up pretty close with the predictions from the visible mass? Any new physics has to explain those, too. Anyway, I think I can see why QI is so appealing. The paper contains a very short and sweet explanation.
I'm not aware of any match between GR theory and observations when it comes to galaxy rotation curves. The wikipedia entry provides a decent description of the issue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_curve
> The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.
Funny. “This discrepancy can be accounted for by accounting for the discrepancy using the number fudging we developed specifically to account for the discrepancy.”
Discrepancy’s been accounted for, boss!