3 ms·

it's for educational purposes to express concepts like these to anyone interested using real world data to show why these concepts are important Like why Newt

it's for educational purposes to express concepts like these to anyone interested using real world data to show why these concepts are important Like why Newtonian physics is insufficient to explain Mercury's orbit Or how infinitely divisible energy leads to the 'ultraviolet catastrophe' Or how one can approximate the speed of light just using orbital data of io and earth (romer's initial method) I can appreciate that my wording may have been ambiguous Brevity can sometimes be the enemy of clarity but questions can help avoid assumptions

mnl 9y ago
Thank you, I get it now. You're absolutely right and that could be really interesting. The problem is you don't usually have large sets of data in elementary uni labs, because of schedules really, but that would be the best. I'm not an Astronomer (nor Astrophysicist, I know about GR coming from a Theoretical Physics bkg), so I suspect you could get more recent data, but a classic reference from the GR book of Weinberg is a paper from G. M. Clemence: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1947RvMP...19..361C http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1947RvMP...19..361C (it can be obtained if you look around, there's a similar free-to-read paper from the same Clemence: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3143142?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents https://www.jstor.org/stable/3143142?seq=1#page_scan_tab_con...) that has as reference this: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1943AJ.....50..126C http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1943AJ.....50..126C (full text), that quotes the Astronomical Papers of the American Ephemeris, Volume 11 (it says II, but it's actually 11), part I. Google is your friend (they've scanned those!) and you can find the data at https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000068403 https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000068403. This is how a little of preliminary research works, you have to do it yourself all the time... Luckily now you don't have to go hunting for a paper copy without being sure about the contents all the time (although it still happens). The classical mechanics calculation might be tricky, to say the least, as well. For the UV catastrophe I've always liked the Jeans cubic cavity and the Gamow observation that opening an oven doesn't kill you. And of course, the fact that integrating Planck's law gets you Stefan-Boltzmann's, very neat result. I should think about all this a bit more in order to give you better feedback.

mnl 9y ago

Thank you, I get it now. You're absolutely right and that could be really interesting. The problem is you don't usually have large sets of data in elementary uni labs, because of schedules really, but that would be the best. I'm not an Astronomer (nor Astrophysicist, I know about GR coming from a Theoretical Physics bkg), so I suspect you could get more recent data, but a classic reference from the GR book of Weinberg is a paper from G. M. Clemence: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1947RvMP...19..361C http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1947RvMP...19..361C (it can be obtained if you look around, there's a similar free-to-read paper from the same Clemence: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3143142?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents https://www.jstor.org/stable/3143142?seq=1#page_scan_tab_con...) that has as reference this: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1943AJ.....50..126C http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1943AJ.....50..126C (full text), that quotes the Astronomical Papers of the American Ephemeris, Volume 11 (it says II, but it's actually 11), part I. Google is your friend (they've scanned those!) and you can find the data at https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000068403 https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000068403. This is how a little of preliminary research works, you have to do it yourself all the time... Luckily now you don't have to go hunting for a paper copy without being sure about the contents all the time (although it still happens). The classical mechanics calculation might be tricky, to say the least, as well. For the UV catastrophe I've always liked the Jeans cubic cavity and the Gamow observation that opening an oven doesn't kill you. And of course, the fact that integrating Planck's law gets you Stefan-Boltzmann's, very neat result. I should think about all this a bit more in order to give you better feedback.