August 11, 2025 at 9:48 am
Hi everyone,
I’d like to share something from the science side of life rather than the SQL side. It’s called the NKTg Law on Varying Inertia.
In classical mechanics, Newton’s laws describe how objects move under the influence of forces. But the NKTg Law takes a different angle: instead of focusing only on forces, it looks at the relationship between position (x), velocity (v), and mass (m) — with m allowed to change over time — to describe an object’s movement tendency.
The core idea is:
p = m × v # momentum
NKTg₁ = x × p # position × momentum
NKTg₂ = (dm/dt) × p # mass change rate × momentum
How to interpret it:
NKTg₁ > 0 → the object tends to move away from a stable state.
NKTg₁ < 0 → the object tends to move toward a stable state.
NKTg₂ > 0 → mass change supports the movement.
NKTg₂ < 0 → mass change resists the movement.
A stable state here means a situation where position, velocity, and mass balance out to maintain a controlled motion pattern.
I find it interesting to think about this not only in physics but also as a metaphor — for example, in project management, workloads, or even personal productivity:
“Mass” could be the amount of work or data you’re dealing with.
“Velocity” could be your processing speed.
“Position” could be how far you are into your goal.
And the two NKTg values might tell you whether you’re getting closer to stability or further away.
I’m curious:
Have you ever seen similar “momentum” or “tendency” models in non-physics fields?
Could this type of thinking be applied to systems, teams, or even SQL Server performance monitoring (just for fun)?
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
August 11, 2025 at 3:26 pm
Just because I was curious, I looked into this and I am a bit skeptical on it.
I found this website with more information on it:
Where some assumptions are being made about the mass change being constant even though it isn't. Mass changing over time isn't a constant value, so while models like this are good at estimating the future state, you are not taking into account the factors that attribute to mass change and thus the mass change calculation is incorrect UNLESS it is a constant. We can see from the data that mass chance is NOT constant on the planet in that example and actually went up somewhere between 2023-12-31 and 2024-01-01 and for the duration of 2024. Due to the mass not changing, the calculation for NKTg2 would be 0 and now the model doesn't work. You can confirm this by using data from 2024 to predict 2025 and due to the mass not changing. The model you propose requires the mass to change. The model also requires you to know the location (x) and velocity (v) in order to calculate NKTg1. The website I found seems to only be predicting the mass over time and predicting it wrong.
I also do not see how this changes anything with Newton's laws. NKTg1 is just saying that if an object is in motion, it will remain in motion, which we already know from Newton's laws of motion. NKTg1 doesn't factor into the equation any other forces acting on the object. NKTg seems to rely on data extrapolation assuming no change in forces. If I tell you that a baseball is at location 123m and it has a velocity of 10 m/s at a 45 degree angle perpendicular to the Earth, your model would say it keeps going up which we know is not true. Even if we add more data points, the model doesn't account for change in velocity - only change in mass and the baseball shouldn't be changing mass.
Now as for momentum or tendency models in non-physics fields, it happens all the time. Stock prices are based entirely on data extrapolation to guess which stocks will behave well based on past and current behavior. SQL Monitoring tools do this with estimating when disks or databases will be full. Any report that does data extrapolation does this sort of stuff. I've done similar things in Excel with my estimated vacation and sick time for example.
The NKTg is also adding 2 statistically insignificant numbers - NKTg1 comes in at 10^36 while NKTg2 comes in at 10^22. That could EASILY be a rounding error when calculating NKTg and in the example provided, NKTg1 = NKTg. Reviewing the link I provided, I don't really see what it is even calculating - we can see what NKTg works out to be, but what is that value used for? It's not used to calculate the position (x), mass, or velocity - it looks like the model just extrapolates data and then throws on extra math for... fun?
Not trying to shoot down the study or the "law", I just don't really see what it is doing that isn't already covered by Newton's laws of motion, except it seems to be introducing error.
The above is all just my opinion on what you should do.
As with all advice you find on a random internet forum - you shouldn't blindly follow it. Always test on a test server to see if there is negative side effects before making changes to live!
I recommend you NEVER run "random code" you found online on any system you care about UNLESS you understand and can verify the code OR you don't care if the code trashes your system.
September 14, 2025 at 11:37 am
Response to the Reviewer’s Comments on the NKTg Law
On the assumption of constant mass variation
The NKTg law does not assume that the mass change must be constant. Rather, it states that there exists a trend of variation which can be described and interpolated using NASA data. Planetary mass (e.g., Neptune) may appear stable or even fluctuate within small intervals due to observational accuracy and updates to data. In such periods, NKTg₂ naturally approaches zero. This is not a flaw of the model, but rather a mathematical limit case that reflects the real physical situation.
Does NKTg₂ = 0 make the model “stop working”?
When NKTg₂ = 0, the law still holds because NKTg₁ remains. This does not invalidate the model, but only indicates that mass variation plays no role in that particular interval. Thus, the model does not require mass to change at every point in time; instead, it generalizes the dynamics when it does.
Relation to Newton’s laws
Newton’s laws assume invariant mass. NKTg is not a replacement but a generalization that extends Newton’s framework to cases where mass is not constant. The “baseball” example offered by the reviewer is not relevant, because in that case the object’s mass is effectively fixed (hence NKTg₂ ≈ 0). The NKTg law is designed for celestial bodies such as planets or comets, where mass variation due to radiation, outgassing, or accretion is real and significant.
On data extrapolation
It is true that NKTg employs interpolation/extrapolation. However, this is not a weakness: virtually all modern physical models, from weather forecasting to orbital mechanics, depend on empirical data and prediction. The difference is that NKTg provides a specific mathematical framework for quantifying the tendency of motion under varying inertia, not merely statistical extrapolation.
Magnitude differences between NKTg₁ and NKTg₂
The fact that NKTg₁ ~ 10³⁶ and NKTg₂ ~ 10²² does not imply rounding error. Differences of many orders of magnitude are common in physics and often reflect dominant versus secondary contributions. In some intervals NKTg₂ may be small, but this does not render it meaningless; rather, it shows that its contribution is minor under those conditions.
On application and meaning
The NKTg law has been tested against NASA’s Neptune data (2023–2024) and demonstrated predictive capability for planetary mass evolution. Its value lies in extending classical mechanics to account for systems with varying mass, something Newton never formally included. Hence, NKTg does not duplicate Newton’s laws but supplements them in domains where they are insufficient.
Conclusion:
The NKTg law is fully consistent with Newtonian mechanics but extends them to cases of varying mass. When NKTg₂ = 0, this is not a failure but a special case. Differences in magnitude between terms are not errors but natural features of physical modeling. The core contribution of NKTg is to provide a framework for describing motion tendency in systems with variable inertia, particularly in astrophysical contexts.
September 16, 2025 at 10:28 pm
Just my 2 cents but the example provided in the link I provided to me proves that NKTg₂ is irrelevant in that example. If you assume NKTg₂ is 0, you get the exact same results for NKTg. NKTg = NKTg1 in the link I provided.
Plus the results are wrong because they inaccurately estimate the change in mass. Plus the data in the table is inaccurate - it indicates the error is approximately 0.000020% where in fact it is 0.000098%. This is easy to calculate.
I also see no point in including the positional and velocity error as they are not being calculated - that data is coming straight from NASA.
Plus I still stand by the claim that the difference between a 10^36 and a 10^22 number is statistically insignificant. That could easily be a rounding error or measurement error.
This model requires the position, velocity, and mass to be known otherwise you can't calculate NKTg1 or NKTg2. And without those, you can't calculate NKTg - you are just estimating the values and you can estimate them without the model and the math involved. There is also no explanation as to the math behind NKTg - NKTg = √(NKTg₁² + NKTg₂²). Why are you squaring those values and then taking the root of them? What's the point? How does that help calculate anything? Best I can tell from reading the article and the math provided, there is no way to calculate out the velocity, position, or mass.
BUT going back to the baseball example, there are micro-variations in the mass of the baseball when thrown due to friction and debris on the throwers hand and any dirt it picks up when it bounces. The mass changes between each throw, it is just not significant enough to bother with calculating or evaluating the change. The change in mass in the NASA data, with it being so small in comparison to the total mass, it is likely more due to instrumentation limitations and that is why the values stabilized for the 2024 data.
I personally do not see any benefit to these new "laws" and since the "law" has a proven non-zero margin of error, can it really be a law?
The above is all just my opinion on what you should do.
As with all advice you find on a random internet forum - you shouldn't blindly follow it. Always test on a test server to see if there is negative side effects before making changes to live!
I recommend you NEVER run "random code" you found online on any system you care about UNLESS you understand and can verify the code OR you don't care if the code trashes your system.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply