FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics
"Gravity"
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [2 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
Cetir
science forum beginner


Joined: 02 Jul 2006
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 11:31 am    Post subject: "Gravity" Reply with quote

"Gravity"

Like almost everyone else, the writer started by assuming that General
Relativity represented good science and that it was his task to understand
that science. Almost immediately it became obvious that a flaw must exist
somewhere in its derivation. Allegedly, General Relativity and Special
Relativity followed The Principle of Equivalence but THEIR CONCLUSIONS WERE
NOT EQUIVALENT! In a Force-Length-Time systems of units, Special Relativity
and General Relativity provided:

Dimensional Entity Special Relativity General Relativity

Force(F) 1 1
Length(L) 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 1
Time(T) (1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2

Where (1-$) is the gravitational time dilation of General Relativity.

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to recognize that these
transformations are NOT ANALOGOUS. Under Special Relativity, the
transformations for length and time are reciprocal. Under General Relativity
such a reciprocal relationship does not exist since the transformations for
length does not exist.

It is the lack of such a reciprocal relationship that made it
impossible for Dr. Einstein to solve the equations of General Relativity in
terms of our familiar three dimensional Euclidean space. After struggling
with the problem for about 18 months, he asserted that space was not three
dimensional Euclidean but was curved into an unobservable fourth spatial
dimension! He did not go back to see where a rather naive mathematical error
was preventing the solution. This crutch allowed the mathematical equations
to be solved since they added the degree of freedom that his error hid. The
idea of "curved space" was accepted because "no one can prove it isn't
curved". This is hardly a responsible justification for accepting a physical
theory!

Since I wished to understand gravitation, I proceeded to derive the
nature of the gravitational field by using two completely different and
independent methods. ("There is more than one way to skin a cat.") Under
both of these derivations, the following transformations were found:

Dimensional Entity Special Relativity General Relativity

Force(F) 1 1
Length(L) 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 1/G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2
Time(T) (1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2

These results satisfies the Principle of Equivalence since it provides
reciprocal relationship between the transformations for length and time.
These results yield a solution which is consistent with three dimensional
Euclidean space. (Recent cosmological observations have shown that the space
represented by the Universe as a whole is not "curved", it is three
dimensional Euclidean.)

The correct derivation of gravitational theory described is provided
in http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm. The test for its validity is whether
it agrees with both the results of observation and the results of
theoretical derivations. The material presented passes this test. It agrees
with the observations which are alleged to have verified General Relativity.
The Sun's gravitational field is about 5 orders of magnitude too weak to
reveal the difference between the two approaches. Observations of strong
gravitational fields, such as around neutron stars, cannot differentiate
between the theories without a close up observations of orbital parameters.
Such a verification must await the availability of Star Trek's Warp Drive.

The advantage of the revised approach is that, among other results, it
reveals the source of gravitational energy (force), allows the total energy
of the Universe to remain constant over time, eliminates the idea of a
singularities (no black holes), and explains the creation of Universes. The
topics covered are:

Summary of "Gravity"

Chapter Titles

1: - Introduction
2: - Laying the Groundwork
3: - Evaluating the Gravitational Conversion Factors
4: - Comparison with the "Real World"
5: - The Complete Gravitational Field

There are 50,000 words and 22 diagrams.

EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING
ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS,
AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET
THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP
FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.

Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

E-mail:- einsteinhoax@isp.com. If you wish a reply, be sure that your
mail reception is not blocked.

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.
Back to top
dan.echegoyen@gmail.com
science forum beginner


Joined: 30 Jun 2006
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:53 pm    Post subject: Re: "Gravity" Reply with quote

For a non-mathematical explicit description of gravity, see my book,
free on the web:
www.structureofexistence.com
Cetir wrote:
Quote:
"Gravity"

Like almost everyone else, the writer started by assuming that General
Relativity represented good science and that it was his task to understand
that science. Almost immediately it became obvious that a flaw must exist
somewhere in its derivation. Allegedly, General Relativity and Special
Relativity followed The Principle of Equivalence but THEIR CONCLUSIONS WERE
NOT EQUIVALENT! In a Force-Length-Time systems of units, Special Relativity
and General Relativity provided:

Dimensional Entity Special Relativity General Relativity

Force(F) 1 1
Length(L) 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 1
Time(T) (1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2

Where (1-$) is the gravitational time dilation of General Relativity.

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to recognize that these
transformations are NOT ANALOGOUS. Under Special Relativity, the
transformations for length and time are reciprocal. Under General Relativity
such a reciprocal relationship does not exist since the transformations for
length does not exist.

It is the lack of such a reciprocal relationship that made it
impossible for Dr. Einstein to solve the equations of General Relativity in
terms of our familiar three dimensional Euclidean space. After struggling
with the problem for about 18 months, he asserted that space was not three
dimensional Euclidean but was curved into an unobservable fourth spatial
dimension! He did not go back to see where a rather naive mathematical error
was preventing the solution. This crutch allowed the mathematical equations
to be solved since they added the degree of freedom that his error hid. The
idea of "curved space" was accepted because "no one can prove it isn't
curved". This is hardly a responsible justification for accepting a physical
theory!

Since I wished to understand gravitation, I proceeded to derive the
nature of the gravitational field by using two completely different and
independent methods. ("There is more than one way to skin a cat.") Under
both of these derivations, the following transformations were found:

Dimensional Entity Special Relativity General Relativity

Force(F) 1 1
Length(L) 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 1/G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2
Time(T) (1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2

These results satisfies the Principle of Equivalence since it provides
reciprocal relationship between the transformations for length and time.
These results yield a solution which is consistent with three dimensional
Euclidean space. (Recent cosmological observations have shown that the space
represented by the Universe as a whole is not "curved", it is three
dimensional Euclidean.)

The correct derivation of gravitational theory described is provided
in http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm. The test for its validity is whether
it agrees with both the results of observation and the results of
theoretical derivations. The material presented passes this test. It agrees
with the observations which are alleged to have verified General Relativity.
The Sun's gravitational field is about 5 orders of magnitude too weak to
reveal the difference between the two approaches. Observations of strong
gravitational fields, such as around neutron stars, cannot differentiate
between the theories without a close up observations of orbital parameters.
Such a verification must await the availability of Star Trek's Warp Drive.

The advantage of the revised approach is that, among other results, it
reveals the source of gravitational energy (force), allows the total energy
of the Universe to remain constant over time, eliminates the idea of a
singularities (no black holes), and explains the creation of Universes. The
topics covered are:

Summary of "Gravity"

Chapter Titles

1: - Introduction
2: - Laying the Groundwork
3: - Evaluating the Gravitational Conversion Factors
4: - Comparison with the "Real World"
5: - The Complete Gravitational Field

There are 50,000 words and 22 diagrams.

EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING
ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS,
AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET
THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP
FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.

Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

E-mail:- einsteinhoax@isp.com. If you wish a reply, be sure that your
mail reception is not blocked.

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1 [2 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:31 pm | All times are GMT
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts Study of gravity, dark energy and black holes gb7648 New Theories 1 Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:48 pm
No new posts Anomalous Acceleration Proves Gravity Anisotropy. Max Keon Relativity 17 Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:40 am
No new posts Which gravitomagnetic precession will be measured by Grav... Sue... Relativity 8 Sun Jul 09, 2006 9:46 pm
No new posts Supersolid Emergent Gravity Jack Sarfatti Math 0 Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:13 pm
No new posts Emergent Gravity Theory Jack Sarfatti Math 0 Fri Jul 07, 2006 8:04 pm

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: Electronics forum |  Medicine forum |  Unix/Linux blog |  Unix/Linux documentation |  Unix/Linux forums  |  send newsletters
 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0415s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0227s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]