Science Seen **Physicist and Time One author Colin Gillespie helps you understand your world.**

# What’s Wrong with Relativity?

There is no absolute frame of reference. It’s called the Principle of Relativity. Problem is: The principle is wrong. How so?

Let’s take a closer look at what it is. Italian physicist Galileo Galilei had an idea. He said an experiment that’s done inside a smoothly moving ship can’t tell you that it’s moving. In 1905 Albert Einstein adopted this idea, turning it into ‘the principle of relativity (in the restricted sense).’ British physicist Sir Arthur Eddington—Einstein’s explainer-in-chief to the English-speaking world—had a now-widely-accepted way to state the principle: ‘It is impossible by any experiment to detect uniform motion relative to the ether.’ (The ether was the medium through which light waves were thought to travel.)

New theories and more recent measurements reveal that this is wrong.

(Einstein had a more cautious version. Rather than we *can’t* detect motion it said we* don’t*. And the principle should not be confused with his two theories of relativity.)

Cosmologists soon dumped Eddington’s principle. It led to conclusions that there is no preferred or absolute frame of reference; that we must mix space with time as spacetime; that there is no absolute way to determine the simultaneity of spatially separated events; and that there is no ether. In a cosmological view of the universe these conclusions are untenable. One way to think of this is: The entire universe provides a preferred or absolute frame of reference.

Here’s how we found this frame. Starting in the 1970s, measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation or CMB gave us a window into it. Sorry, Sir Arthur: New measurements show with increasing precision our motion relative to the ether (thus achieving what Michelson and Morley set out to do with the wrong kind of instrument). They tell us we are moving at 365 km/s—more than 0.1 percent of light speed, toward speed—toward the constellation of Leo.

So, long said to be dead, the ether makes a big comeback in cosmology. This would have been no surprise to Einstein. In a 1920 lecture he explained how general relativity requires that the ether must be real and substantial, though its properties were not quite the same as people had imagined.

Some may argue that the CMB reflects only the part of the universe we see, which could be moving at a significant fraction of light speed relative to the perhaps-far-larger part of the universe that we can’t see. However, observing large-scale structure in the part we can see gives us reason to conclude this part moves little if at all. The movements of galaxies and larger structures that we see result from unbalanced forces of gravity. But these moving structures are far smaller than the visible universe, as one would expect due to both the long-range averaging and the inverse square law drop-off of gravitation at larger scales.

Of course, the CMB *is not* the ether. But it is observable. It is a good surrogate for the whole universe. This gives us a preferred or absolute frame of reference in principle, subject to a modest uncertainty (maybe 5 percent) in practice. It gives us absolute simultaneity. It fundamentally separates 3-D space from time and so abolishes the weird conundrums that come with the mathematical convenience of 4-D spacetime.

Meanwhile myths of relativity continue to both damage the fabric of physics and obstruct its progress. It’s easy to find both amateurs and serious physicists expounding with great certainty false propositions about relativity and ether Einstein laid to rest in 1920. As Wikipedia tells us: ‘Since the development of special relativity, theories using a substantial aether fell out of use in modern physics, and were replaced by more abstract models.’

Maybe this sounds like progress; but this is how faith in the Principle of Relativity has bad consequences. For example, it leaves faithful modern physicists searching their more abstract models for Dark Energy—which physics now knows holds two thirds of the universe’s mass—long after Einstein left his substantial ether right under their noses.

This too tells us that the Principle is wrong! It’s true that local ether provides no absolute frame of reference. But the whole universe—most of which is ether—does.

**Sources:**

Sir Arthur Eddington (1920), *Space, Time & Gravitation: An Outline of the General Relativity Theory*, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 20.

Wikipedia, “Aether theories”, citing Max Born, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories

**Image credit:** AKG; https://www.mpg.de/9236014/eddington-sonnenfinsternis-1919

About Gravity

“Resultant force of attraction and centrifugal force of Earth is the true nature of gravity.” This is cited from a website. However, I think that attraction in this citation is the true nature of gravity. This citation is evasive and delegate.

Equivalence principle is unacceptable. One reason is that, I can’t recall ever seeing universal gravitational constant mentioned on inertial force.

About Gravity

Following claims : Newton’s spherical shell theorem, Perihelion shift of Mercury (claimed before relativity, before 1905) are unacceptable. My veiw are posted into some web-sites in English.

Also in relativity, I find no acceptable claim regarding gravity (equivalence principle is unacceptable). And I posted objections (that I can) to relativity’s claims regarding gravity.

Centrifugal Force is not Fictitious

Centrifugal force that is accompanied by rotational motion is inertial force, that is, real force, action. Reaction to it is a centripetal force (In case of hammer throwing wire, it can also be tension, tensile stress). Its reality and magnitude is one and only. From any frame.

The same is true for all curvilinear motion.

Centrifugal Force is not Fictitious (again)

On a plane, two rods cross each other (without friction) and rotate around intersection point. This basic form can be transformed as follows.

1) Body of mass m is attached to both ends of one rod. Body of mass 2m is attached to both ends of the other rod. Mass of rods is assumed to be zero.

2) Body of mass m is attached to each of four ends of two rods. Length of one rod is a, and length of the other is 2a. Mass of rods is assumed to be zero.

.

Centrifugal force and tension acting on rods are real forces, not fictitious. From any frame.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious (Summary)

Spaceship is moving horizontally with uniform acceleration. Body m is pushing against rear wall of the spaceship’s cabin (A). Rear wall pushes back the body with normal force (B). A is action, B is reaction.

Spaceship is moving horizontally with uniform acceleration. String attached to front wall of the spaceship’s cabin stretches backward inside the cabin, pulling body m attached to rear end of string (A). The body resists pulling force of string (inertial resistance) (B). A is action, B is reaction.

To begin with, distinction between action and reaction seems to be unclear.

Acceleration and Non-Acceleration (again)

Imagine a human being in accelerating passenger car and a station staff standing on platform. Now, it is a thought experiment. What if increasing acceleration g is at the level of an unmanned missile ?

Difference between acceleration and non-acceleration is not fictitious. The two are physically different. Again, because it is big problem.

Acceleration and Non-Acceleration

A spherical fluid is floating in space. The fluid is uniform and isotropic. That is, gravity has no acting on the sphere.

The sphere will be in non-accelerated frame. It is moving in a uniform linear motion through space (or is at rest). However, if the sphere moves in a way other than the above, there will be a corresponding deviation from uniform isotropy. The difference between accelerated and non-accelerated frame is not fictitious.

Acceleration and Non-Acceleration

A body is being pulled by strings from the left and right. Tension in the strings is the same, ma. The same body is being pulled by one string from the left and by two strings from the right. Tension in all three strings is the same, ma. Let the body in two figures be A and B.

Are A seen from B and B seen from A symmetrical ? No, that’s not, because the internal stresses in body A and B are different.

Inertial force is not Fictitious (rewritten)

A spaceship is moving horizontally with uniform acceleration. Inside the spaceship, a body m is pushing against the rear wall. This force is action, and is inertial force. As reaction, and as normal force, the rear wall pushes back against the body. Magnitude of the two is ma.

Above explanation should be valid for one inside and outside the spaceship. Inertial force will be a real force for everyone, and will not be fictitious.

Sorry, not a latest test was posted. Allow me to post again.

Accelerating Frame and Non-Accelerating Frame (fragmentary)

◎ An observer in a passenger car in uniformly accelerating linear motion will see everything in the car as at rest ? What if g is large ?

◎ A website says that equiliblium of forces are only for frames that are at rest or in uniform linear motion.

◎ The difference between accelerating frame and non-accelerating frame is crucial. But we continue to turn away from to it. This is physics ?

◎ A string stretches horizontally inside the cabin of a spaceship moving to the right with a uniform acceleration. The right end of the string is fixed to the right inner wall of the cabin, and the left end is fixed to body m, which is floating inside the cabin. The string has a tension ma (ignore the mass of string). Both m and a are specific values.

Note) m and a will be the same for one inside and outside the ship.

◎ An observer in a passenger car accelerating at a uniform speed will see everything in the car as at rest. What if g is large ?

◎ A website says that equiliblium of forces are only for framess that are at rest or in uniform linear motion.

◎ The difference between accelerating frame and non-accelerating frame is crucial. But we continue to turn away from to it. This is physics.

◎ A string stretches horizontally inside the cabin of a spaceship moving to the right with a uniform acceleration. The right end of the string is fixed to the right inner wall of the cabin, and the left end is fixed to body m, which is floating inside the cabin. The string has a tension ma (ignore the mass of string). Both m and a are specific values.

Note) m and a will be the same for one inside and outside the ship.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious (rewritten)

Inertial force of a body moving in uniformly accelerated linear motion is based on m and a. There can be no denying. In addition, ma = F. In short, inertial force is not fictitious.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious

In actual examples of action and reaction in Newton’s third law of motion, sometimes, it is unclear which is action and which is reaction. But it must be clear that inertial force can be either of the two. Then inertial force must be real force. For everyone.

In the well-known formula F = ma, which is inertial force ? It can be ma. Then inertial force must be real force. For everyone.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious (rewritten)

Inside the cabin of a spaceship moving with uniform acceleration to the right, a string stretches. Right end of the string is tied to the right inner wall of the cabin, and left end is tied to a body m, floating inside the cabin. There is tension ma in the string (ignore mass of the string).

This physical fact and its explanation must be the same for one inside and outside the spaceship.

Compound Nouns

Gravitational acceleration, local inertial frame, inertial mass, gravitational mass. Only four compound nouns. Sorry for my shallowness. But, probably or clearly, these four will be forcible.

Statics or Dynamics ?

A point (point of action) is pulled left and right by strings with a vector F, creating balance. Next, can the force on the right be considered an inertial force ? At right end of the right string, a body with mass m is placed. In other words, tension ma is acting on the right string. In this pictere, the whole is moving to the left with a uniform acceleration.

Note: This is a horizontal free falling.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious (rewritten)

An body m is suspended by a string from the center of the ceiling of a passenger car. If passenger car is accelerated to the right, string and body will tilt downward to the left. But, what if passenger car is jerk-moving? The inclination of string and body will continue to increase, the tension in string will increase, and eventually the string will break.

These situations and explanations of the situation must be the same for one inside and outside passenger car. Inertial force is not a fictitious force for one inside and outside the car. Inertial force in this case is action, and the reaction is the tension in string.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious (rewritten)

By a string, a body of mass m is hanging from the ceiling in the center of the passenger car. Body and the string are perpendicular. Next, the passenger car begins to accelerate to the right. Body and the string tilt to the left. This acceleration is usually constant. However, if an external force F continues to grow as time passes, the inclination of body and the string also continues to grow.

These pictures will be the same for one inside and outside the passenger car. And, the tension of the string which is reaction to the inertial force will be the same for the two also (and if the string breaks, it will be the same for the two also).

Speed of Starlight (Supplement)

Allow me to add to latest post. When the glass cube moves left and right….

Inside the glass, c/n is constant, and the other two are variable

Just before entering the glass, λ is constant, and the other two are variable

Just after leaving the glass, c is constant, and the other two are variable

Speed **of Starlight

A glass cube is floating horizontally in outer space. Two rays of starlight coming from the left and right are passing through the glass horizontally. Below is the difference between the two rays of light as seen from viewpoint of the glass (difference in formula v = f λ).

Difference inside the glass c/n = c/n f ≠ f λ ≠ λ

Difference just before entering the glass c ≠ c f ≠ f λ = λ

Difference just after leaving the glass c = c f ≠ f λ ≠ λ

Measuring λ of Starlight

How is λ of starlight measured ? One thing is certain. The λ before it enters measuring device is not be varied with the motion of measuring device. So, if measuring device is moved, it will become clear which λ was measured (which λ of starlight before extinction or after extinction).

Allow me to revise the first “Note” of my post (most recent). Sorry.

Note) For light before it reaches the glass, formula v = f λ also holds (from perspective of the glass). And value f is the same as f for the glass.

Value of Speed of Light (of starlight in outer space)

Light of two stars coming from the left and right is passing through a glass cube. This cube is floating horizontally in outer space. Inside the glass, formula c/n = f λ holds on starlight. Four values are known.

Two lights inside the glass are spectralized and the spectrum (distance between chosen atom or molecule A and B) is compared. The distance will be slightly different.

Note) For light in outer space, formula v = f λ holds. And value f is the same as f for the glass (from perspective of the glass).

Note) It seems that extinction does not conceal the difference of spectrum.

Speed of Light is not Constant Always (again)

Starlight is coming to a glass cube floating in outer space from the left and is leaving to the right. At the left and right ends of the glass, frequency of starlight is the same. Imagine that the glass is moving at various uniform speeds to the left and right. v of light on the left and right will not be the same, and so will λ (the formula v = fλ is viewed from perspective of the glass).

Extinction

Light entering glass from outer space has a speed of c/n relative to the glass. This equalisation in speed within the medium is called extinction, and is completed in a very small optical path length that differs depending on mediums. For glass, it is 0.0001 mm.

Imagine that the glass moves in various uniform linear motions in outer space. The speed of light coming the glass and leaving the glass are not the same (from the perspective of the glass).

Wavelength Measurement (supplement)

A starlight is passing through horizontal tube in outer space from left to right. A flat glass plate is fitted in center of the tube. Imagine that this tube is moving at different uniform speed in left and right directions. For left and right light each, the formula v = f λ holds. From the perspective of the tube, f on the left and right sides are the same. But v will be different and λ will also be different.

There is an argument that v are the same. If so, λ must also be the same. However, λ on the left does not follow (does not be affected by) the motion of the tube. But λ on the right follows (is affected by). This difference must not be forgotten.

The wavelength of light and the speed of light each is not the same before and after extinction.

Note) For glass, extinction is done in the distance of 0.0001 mm.

Wavelength Measurement (Aw)

Is wavelength of light traveling in outer space being measured as it is (on light before arriving) ? Isn’t what is being measured light (extincted light) that has passed through a medium such as glass ? In internet (a bit), any site mentioned can not be found.

Suppose an observer moving in various motions in outer space is measuring wavelength of starlights. In the formula, c = f λ, f varies. Accordingly, c varies. However, we seem to believe, it is λ that varies.

We must distinguish the light before and after measurement device (before and after extinction).

Hollow Tube and Speed of Light (again)

In outer space, starlight coming from the left is passing through a stationary horizontal tube of length L. Frequency at the left and right ends of the tube is the same. This sameness is true even if the tube is moving in the left and right directions at different uniform speed. In other words, number of waves that exist inside the tube (wave number × L) is invariable. There is no varying in wavelength of light. In the formula, c = f λ, it is f and c that vary. It is the first picture.

In the second picture, there are two tubes the same as above. The two are moving at a uniform speed. One is to the left and the other is to the right. As mentioned above, wavelength of light is the same. In the formula, c = f λ, f and c (of the two) are not the same.

Aether Drift (again)

Speed of light is the distance that light travels in one second, 299,792,458 m/s (defined value). Above value was obtained by measuring frequency and wavelength of laser light that is performed by Evenson et al in 1973 (error was ± 1.2 m/s).

Imagine frequency and wavelength of light coming from two fixed stars located at symmetrical points (at opposite ponts) on the celestial sphere. Measuring must be done simultaneously. Perhaps many of the measured speeds of light are different. If so, it will be possible to identify two points (on the celestial sphere) where the difference is greatest.

Note) Differences due to known mtion of Earth such as revolution and rotation must be excluded.

Note) Wavelength must be measured before the light enters mediums such as glass. Is it possible ?

One-way Speed of Light/Isotropy of Aether (again)

English version of Wikipedia has an item titled “One-way speed of light”. Word isotropic is found in 27 places.

However, if the light from multiple celestial bodies on the celestial sphere is recorded and analyzed in outer space, one-way speed of light will become disclosed. Probably easily. By established means of measuring aberration.

The position of bright lines and dark lines in spectrum of the celestial body’s light will show the speed of celestial body’s light and speed of light relative to Earth (and Aether drift). The isotropy and uniformity of aether will also be disclosed.

Lunar Laser Ranging (again)

Distance between Moon and Earth is measured with millimeter precision. Measurement is based on the formula “distance = speed of light x round trip time / 2”. What is noteworthy here is that the direction of laser beam with respect to celestial sphere does not affect the measurement results.

Assume that the space where Moon and Earth exist is also filled with aether. Measurement results will differ depending on the direction of laser beam with respect to celestial sphere (according to the explanation of MM experiment).

However, aether does not affect the propagation of electromagnetic waves at the distance between Moon and Earth. That is, aether does not affect the propagation of electromagnetic waves for a few seconds after emission. Ritz’s emission theory is revived, although in a limited extent. For now, let’s take this as an assumption. There is no need to be worried about the framework of time or space.

Law of Universal Gravitation (rewritten)

Formula for the law of universal gravitation is F=GMm/r^2. Value r is the distance between centers of gravity of the two bodies (let’s call them spheres L and R). If r is 50, the squared is 2500. It is the first diagram.

Now, this is the second diagram. On a horizontal straight line, spheres L, R1, and R2 are lined up. If distance between L and R1 is 49, and distance between L and R2 is 51, the squared are 2401 and 2601. If these two are added and divided by 2, the value 2501 is gotten, which is slightly larger than 2500. In other words, the formula of universal gravitation doesn’t care about the size of the two sources of gravity, but in reality, there will be some effect, even if it’s a little ? Is Newton’s spherical shell theorem not perfect ? Is this the main cause of apsidal precession ?

Note) 2500 and 2501 are coefficients in numerator of the formula.

Note) Masses of R1 and R2 each are 1/2 of the mass of R.

Note) Assume that R1 and R2 are hemispheres of R (distance of centers of gravity is 2).

Accelerated Motion and Non-Accelerated Motion (again)

All accelerated motion is accompanied by inertial force (it is reaction. See Newton’s third law of motion).

All non-accelerated motion is not accompanied by inertial force. It is the same for absolute rest (relative to aether frame).

Gravity is unrelated to this problem.

Equivalence Principle (again)

Allow me to repeat the previous question,regarding two situations ◎ below. Two situations ◎ can be explainend qualitatively and quantitatively using formulas based on Newton’s laws of motion. The question is, how to explain equivalent principle ? Is there anyone who can ? .

◎ Forces of the same magnitude are acting on a mass point from the left and right directions. Types of forces are tension, gravity, and inertial force. Since there are no combinations of inertial forces and inertial forces, there are five combinations of forces (ignoring the difference between left and right).

◎ A body is sliding down inclined surface (no friction).

Equivalence Principle (again)

On the ground, a passenger car is moving with uniform acceleration to the right. In the car, a body hanging from the ceiling with a string is swinging to the left. The angle can be explained qualitatively and quantitatively using equations based on Newton’s laws of motion. What about equivalence principle ? Is there anyone who can ?

Accelerated Motion and Non-Accelerated Motion (again)

Difference between the two motions above will be the difference of motion with respect to aether frame. A mass point moving in accelerated motion is accompanied by inertial force, that corresponds qualitatively and quantitatively. A mass point moving in non-accelerated motion (uniform linear motion) is not accompanied by inertial force.

A saying are trying about inertial force and gravity. What can we say by comparing the two words ? Inertial force is inertial force, gravity is gravity and both are true forces ! That seems to be all that can be said. This is a short report.

Local Inertial Frame (again)

An elevator cabin is in free fall. Imagine mass points placed regularly in the elevator. Vector of inertial force acting on each mass point is the same. Local inertial frame is impossible.

Two elevators are moving apart horizontally. One is in accelerated motion and the other is in non-accelerated motion. By an accelerometer, to tell which one is accelerating is possible. In the elevator with accelerated motion, there is no inertial frame, even locally.

Accelerated Motion (again)

A passenger car is accelerating to the right (uniform acceleration). A light source (wavelength is onstant) at the rear wall of the car emits light, and on the front wall, frequency measuring device is settled. During acceleration, in the car, there will be more waves than before. In other words, accelerated motion is not fictitious (inertial force will not be fictitious also).

A ray of light is emitted from the ceiling of a passenger car directly below. When this car is accelerated, the light ray reaches the floor in a parabola. Difference between acceleration and non-acceleration is not fictitious.

Accelerated Motion & Inertial Force (again)

Accelerated motion is absolute motion relative to aether frame. The two are two sides of the same coin. Gravity is irrelevant at all, and does not play a role in this problem.

Measuring Aether (again)

In outer space, frequency and wavelength of incoming lights from two stars (from opposite directions on the celestial sphere) are measured. To the measurer, speed of two incoming lights will be different. And sum of speed of two lights will be 2c (or close to 2c : constant). In post 2024-03-05, it is forgotten to note. Sorry.

Accelerated Motion & Inertial Force (again)

Accelerated motion and inertial force correspond qualitatively (also, in the direction of celestial sphere and of aether) quantitatively. This will lead to zero inertial force in non-accelerated motion. Without exception. In addition, let us assume that non-accelerating motion includes absolute rest.

Centrifugal force (again)

Rods of length 4r and 2r are rotating horizontally (in the shape of a cross). Assume that four edges

of the rod each has mass point of mass m, and the mass of the rod is zero. Tension (centrifugal force) acting on the rod is a true force.

The formula for centrifugal force is F = m v^2/r. And as Newton’s third law of motion shows, centrifugal force is an action and centripetal force is a reaction. The magnitude of the force is the same. The two are true forces.

Tension is centrifugal force, an effect of Newton’s third law of motion, and centripetal force is a reaction. The two are true forces. Rotational motion can be boiled down to accelerated motion and non-accelerated motion (including absolute rest). Frame will be the celestial sphere and the aether.

Measuring Aether (again)

In outer space, frequency and wavelength of incoming lights from two stars (from opposite directions on the celestial sphere) are measured. To the measurer, speed of two incoming lights will be different. And it will mean the motion (in the direction of light path) of the measurer with respect to aether.

Note) If the measurer moves in the direction of light path, frequency and speed of two incoming lights will vary. Because, wavelength of two incoming light does not vary.

Propagation of Light in Two Ways (again)

Annual aberration and daily aberration mean motion of Earth (with respect to aether). Aether is real existence. On the other hand, if the distance to the light source is not too far (no, even the distance to the Moon also !), propagation of light will follow emission theory. Both aether and emission theory will revive. As phoenixes some day. Relativity will fade away.

Sorry, I made a silly mistake. I ask to erase my most recent post, please (and this).

Propagation of Light in Two Ways (guess)

In space, spaceship is floating (not accelerating). From this spacecraft, multiple probes begin a uniform linear motion towards assigned star on celestial sphere. A light source set on the probes that shines at a certain frequency is visible from the spacecraft.

Is the assumption that propagation of light in two ways (written before) correct ? If correct, frequency of probe’s light (reaches the spacecraft) that emitted from before and after a few light-seconds distance will be different (although in rare cases it may not be different). The two, emission theory and aether will revovebe as phoenixes.

Emission Theory (guess)

For a few seconds after emission, propagation of light will follow emission theory, and then follows the aether reference frame (as written before). In other words, from the aether reference frame, speed of light will vary, and energy of a photon will also vary. It is said that energy of light is proportional to its frequency.

Note) The above will be possible to explain accuracy of measuring the distance to Moon (by laser) and aberration without contradiction.

Aberration (again) (クリ)

Space is filled with aether. For light, aether acts as a medium (as a reference frame). In other words, light propagates at the same speed through aether. Regardless of the direction of propagation. Earth is moving at different speeds with respect to aether. Therefore, speed of light with respect to Earth is different

Aberration is a phenomenon completed in upper atmosphere. It is the same as refraction. Result of Airy’s experiment (tube of telescope is filled with water) is only natural.

Due to aberration, it is said that visible position (direction) of celestial bodies shift beyond the direction of motion of Earth. No, shift will be behind the direction of motion of Earth. This will be clear by illustration of light rays in upper atmosphere.

Draw trajectory of position of a celestial body (on celestial sphere. returns to source every year). Ellipse of annual aberration will be warped by secular aberration. Daily aberration will be many small circles (365 pearls).

Is speed of light constant? (again)

As posted preciously (one of which is on 2023-2-19), constancy of speed of light is impossible. Therefore, time dilation and Lorentz contraction are also impossible. Without a doubt.

Propagation of Light (again)

Light propagates in two ways.

1) A reflector placed on moon’s surface is irradiated with laser light, and by reflected light, distance to Moon is measured. Error is a few centimeters. Laser light emitted from light source will follow emission theory for one second at least. This guess can be scored 90 points out of 100 points.

2) Various types of aberration. Light will follow reference frame of aether after passing through the region 1 above. This guess can be scored 120 points out of 100 points.

Note) In air,light propagates following to reference frame of air. So, MM experiments done in air is nonsense.

Sound Waves, Light Waves and an Observer (summary)

Sound waves propagate through air, and light waves propagate through aether. Medium is uniformly isotropic, and speed of waves with respect to medium is constant. So, when a point-like wave source is stationary in medium, waves drawn on a plane are concentric circles. Therefore, if an observer is moving with respect to medium, speed of sound waves and light waves for the observer is not constant.

Note: Light waves using air as a medium propagate in the same way as sound waves.

Culculating Equation of Doppler Effect

Speed of sound waves is constant only with respect to air, which is medium of propagation. Speed of light waves will probably be constant only with respect to aether, which is medium of propagation.

Therefore, calculating equation for frequency of light waves observed by an observer must be the same as culculating equation for frequency of sound waves observed by an observer.

Doppler Effect and Variable Speed of Light

For Doppler effect of sound waves, following will hold. Speed of sound waves in air, which is medium for sound waves propagation, is constant. In other words, speed of sound waves is constant only with respect to air.

Doppler effect of light waves will be the same as that of sound waves. Medium of light waves is aether, which is uniformly isotropic. In other words, speed of light waves is constant only with respect to aether.

Speed of sound is variable, and also, speed of light will be variable.

Equation v = λ f holds between sound source and the observer. v is speed of sound to the observer, λ is wavelength, and f is frequency to the observer. The observer is in motion, which causes the frequency in varying. In above equation, what is varying is v (λ is not varying).

Equation v = λ f will also hold between light source and the observer. It will be v that is varying.

Kinetic Energy: Momentum: Force: Impulse (supplement)

Rotational momentum seems to be no matter. In the rotational motion of a body (imagine a disk), there is a state of speed zero (no rotation). And on both sides of it, there are plus and minus rotations. The two behave symmetrically. We can see the two qualitatively and quantitatively.

But what about linear momentum ? Even in the linear motion of a body, there will be a state of speed zero (no moving). And on both sides of it, there will be plus and minus moations. The two behave symmetrically. However, we cannot see the two qualitatively and quantitatively.

Kinetic energy: momentum: force: impulse (supplement)

Momentum is physical quantity that we can vary in laboratory. And the rotational momentum can be zero (no matter who sees it). The same will go for linear momentum. The two momentums will be adjoining. But we don’t understand that, and we don’t try.

Kinetic Energy: Momentum: Force: Impulse (inference)

A homogeneous disk with mass M, diameter 2a, and uniform thickness is stationary (not rotating) with respect to the celestial sphere. Angular momentum of this disk is zero. It is zero for any observer in any motion.

There is a type of momentum called linear momentum, which is limited to motion in a straight line. A body of

mass M is moving in a straight line. By analogy with rotational motion, there may be situations where linear momentum is zero even on a straight line (stationary on a straight line). All motion of a mass point can be understood as motions relative to aether (absolute rest).

Motion of a Mass Point & Aether (again)

Every mass point is either in motion or not. Motion is said to be relative, but this will be only appearance. For mass points in motion, there are motions in which vector of motion (magnitude and direction) vary and motions in which vectors are without varying. In motions varying, inertial force that vary (qualitatively or quantitatively) are recognized. In motions without varying, inertial force are not recognized.

The above will be depending on existence of a uniform isotropic aether in space. Every motion relative to aether (absolute rest frame) will be measurable by optical way.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (is this A THORY ?)

Perihelion shift of Mercury is 575 seconds in 100 years. In wikipedia, there is a site titled “Perigee Shift” (in Japanese). In it, it’s stated that 532 of the 575 seconds are caused by perturbations due to gravity of other planets, and remaining 43 seconds are caused by the effects of general relativity. Simply adding up gravity of other planets ? Is this A THEORY ?

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (summary)

In a web-site in English titled “Perihelion Precession of the Planets”, there is a table on observed rates from Mercury (5.75 seconds/year) to Neptune (0.36 seconds/year). In these, direction of precession is the direction of planet’s revolution, and these magnitude are assumed to be constant. Let’s assume this table is true. So, this phenomenon will be caused by two bodies: planet each and Sun.

Adams and Le Verrier predicted the existence of Neptune and its position on the celestial sphere (from the precession of Uranus’s position). But it was temporary and exceptional precession (perturbation).

Title of the page of the National astronomical observatory (of Japan) ephemeris computation office is shown below. Sorry for repeated addition.

暦Wiki/近日点の移動－国立天文台暦計算室

A web-site with figures related to problem below appears using following keywords. Sorry, in Japanese.

近日点の移動 国立天文台暦計算室

To yesterday’s post, following my posts are related.

Aug 5, Sep 22, (2023).

Shift of Perihelion and Vernal Equinox of Earth (fake ?)

A drawing shows Sun, Earth, and orbit of Earth. It also shows shift of perihelion of Earth (in the direction of revolution, annually) and shift of vernal equinox (in the opposite direction of revolution, annually). Shift of vernal equinox is said to be caused by precession of rotation axis (of Earth). Precession of rotation axis ? Really ? Shift of vernal equinox seems to be caused by extra centrifugal force due to size of the Earth. There is no other reason than that it seems to fit well.

Note: Perihelion is said to take about 110,000 years, and vernal equinox takes about 26,000 years to complete one revolution.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (and free fall)

Towards Earth, two bodies with the same mass are in free fall. One is assumed to be a single point (with no size), and the other is a long pole (falling vertically). Also assumed that gravity of Earth is constant at g. As posted formerly, magnitude of gravity of Earth acting on two bodies will be former < latter slightly. As example, in my former post, it was 0.04 < 0.0400479. So latter continues to fall in advance. In a broad sense, orbital motion is considered to be free fall. It seems that the shift of perihelion of Mercury is caused by its size.

P.S. See 0.0400497 as problem presentation.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (supplement)

Imagine that two Mercurys are revolving in the orbit of Venus and Neptune. At two perihelions, Mercury moves in the same vector (direction and speed) as Venus and Neptune. Magnitude of Mercury’s shift of perihelion will be smaller than that of the two. Because size of Mercury is smaller than that of the two.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (continued)

Imagine Mercury is revolving in the orbit of Neptune. Size of Mercury seen from Sun is almost a single point. So, magnitude of perihelion shift as two-body problem will be slight. And are perturbations outstanding ?

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (estimate)

Two Mercurys are revolving. One is in the orbit of Mercury and the other is in the orbit of Venus. In the former, magnitude of shift of perihelion seems to be larger. This is probably because effect of Mercury’s size is greater in the former.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (rewritten)

Allow me to rewrite my previous post (Sep 29 and around).

Shift of perihelion is constant. Then, a doubt arises. What is momentum of Mercury ? Is it increasing ? Is it decreasing ? Is there no increase or decrease ?

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (imagine)

Size of Mercury will increase Mercury’s gravity. The main result will be slight expansion of orbit, and followed by shift in perihelion. Therefore, centrifugal force also increases. Newton’s third law of motion will be inviolable.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (supplement)

Size of Mercury will cause the difference in its gravity and in its orbit. It will rotate long axis and shift perihelion (in the direction of revolution).

But, will size of Mercury cause difference in its centrifugal force ? This difference probably correspond to the difference in motion (caused by difference in gravity).

Note) How does gravity cause bodies to move ? In phenomenon such as perihelion shift of Mercury, we seem not to grasp it enough.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (rewritten, from my post, posted on Sep 16 or around)

There is a figure of Mercury and its orbit. Mercury is drawn as a single point. But actually, Mercury has a size, and this size will slightly increase magnitude of gravity and centrifugal force of Mercury. Now, limit our consideration to half of orbit from perihelion to aphelion. Increase in gravity will shift aphelion in the direction of revolution. On the other hand, increase in centrifugal force will shift aphelion in the opposite direction of revolution. In increase, gravity will exceed.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury

There is one more problem. Size of Mercury send out surplus force. But where does this surplus force go ?

In figure of perihelion shift of Mercury, its destination seems not to be found. Ah, perhaps the same phenomenon as Moon’s retreat (Moon’s orbit is expanding) will be destination. This surplus force probably turns and expands Mercury’s elliptical orbit each time.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury

[Size of Mercury increases gravity during orbital motion]

Mm/r^2 is formula for gravity. There are models for Mercury and Sun. When, 2Mm is 100 and r is 50, gravity is 0.04. Next, two spheres (with half of mass of Mercury each) are lined up on the line of action of Sun’s gravity. Mm is 50, r is 49 and 51. Then, gravity is 0.0400479.

[Size of Mercury increases centrifugal force during orbital motion]

See my post posted on March 15, 2023 (or around).

Perihelion Shift of Mercury

Size of Mercury will increase gravity and increase centrifugal force quolitatively also. Of the two, gravity is probably the main factor. Because, increase in gravity shift aphelion in the direction of revolution. On the other hand, increase in centrifugal force shift aphelion in the opposite direction of revolution.

The formula for gravity F = mM/r^2 probably shows that magnitude of gravity is related to the size of Mercury (but surprisingly small).

Moon’s Retreat

Moon is said to be moving away from Earth by several centimeters per year. As proposed formally (posted on 08-05. by me), size of Moon will increase its centrifugal force (compared to calculated as a point). This additional amount will be divided in rotation of long axis and in extension of long axis of orbit of Moon. Is Mercury moving away from Sun too ?

Decelerated Motion

From a passenger car moving to the right, a rope is extending to left, and on it, constant tension is acting. Then, the passenger car is decelerating. And, when the ground speed of passenger car falls in zero, tension of the rope is still constant. So passenger car starts accelerating to the left. But, there will be no difference in situation in before and after in the passenger car. There will not be much meaning in the ground speed of passenger car.

As written above, everything is accelerated motion and decelerated motion does not exist. But “counter-jerk motion” where degree of accelerated motion withdrawing may be possible.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (rewritten)

In a figure, Mercury is drown as a circle. In addition, in the figure, center of the circle and an arc extending vertically through the center are drown. Arc is a part of orbit. The arc divides Mercury into left and right, and the area is left > right (Sun is in the right). This figure shows that actual magnitude of the centrifugal force exceeds magnitude calculated for Mercury as a point (see formula of centrifugal force, ignore rotation). Perihelion shift of Mercury may be due to Mercury’s size.

Newton’s Spherical Shell Theorem (correction)

In my yesterday’s post, I made a mistake. To admin, please replace yesterday’s post to the following.

In my previous post (2023-03-20), Mercury is divided into two spheres. But this thought experiment doesn’t seem to explain perihelion shift of Mercury. Because, a/49^2 + a/51^2 = 2a/50^2. Surprising ! And also, it does not disprove Newton’s spherical shell theorem ! So, my hope is shifted in another thought experiment on centrifugal force (2023-03-15).

Newton’s Spherical Shell Theorem (correction)

In my previous post (2022-06-05), Mercury is divided into two spheres. But this thought experiment doesn’t seem to hold. Surprising ! It does not disprove Newton’s spherical shell theorem ! So, my hope is shifted in another thought experiment on centrifugal force.

Newton’s Three Laws of Motion

Uniform linear motion (aether can be emerged in an optical way), uniform circular motion, inertial force, action and reaction are all existence graspable qualitatively and quantitatively. These are not fictitious.

Speed of Light Waves

This is supplement to the former post (2023-02-19). Half of measurement results of speed of light waves will exceed c.

Speed of Gravity Propagation

Speed of gravity propagation is said to be the same to speed of light. But is it true ? Something can’t be found in thought experiments ? How about Sun and Mercury ? Solar system is said to move in the direction called sun facing point (on the celestial sphere). So position from which gravitational force of Sun acting Mercury will be the position some back in time. If so, this effect will slightly acuumlate (like free falling).

In Encyclopaedia Britannica 1969, there is a passage as follows (in item “Gravitation” ; original text). “If the action of gravitation were not absolutely instantaneous”(omission)”All experiments and observations were, however, consistent with the law, from the short distances employed in laboratory experiments to the long ranges used in interplanetary calculations”. It says, action will be instantaneous.

Centrifugal Force is not Fictitious

About centrifugal force, allow me to post on e more. A disk and the same ten spheres (evenly spaced around the disk) are rotating on a plane (no friction). Spheres and outer edge of the disk are connected with strings of the same length. Each string will show the same tension. Tension will be a sign that centrifugal force is not fictitious.

Note) Centrifugal force and centripetal force will work on the string (on every point) as Newton’s third law of motion.

Centrifugal Force is not Fictitious

Allow me to alter some of previous post. Previous setting was four spheres and two rods. Now, on two spheres and one rod (in X direction only), mass is two times (without deflection). Then, at close to the center, magnitude of centrifugal force and centripetal force will be about two times. Also, magnitude of centrifugal force and centripetal force will correspond to rotational speed.

Inertial Resistance/Inertial Force (rewritten)

Every mass point is placed in aether frame. When it is forced to move other than uniform linear motion (including zero speed) relative to aether frame, it shows resistance called inertial resistance. Inertial resistance is commonly said to be inertial force. Inertial force will correspond to the motion of mass in aether frame, qualitatively, quantitatively.

Centrifugal Force is not Fictitious

The same four spheres, connected to the ends of two rods are rotating on a plane (no friction). Asuume the bar as a cross and the whole as a disk. At any point on the rod, magnitudes of the centrifugal force and centripetal force are equal, as shown by Newton’s third law of motion. That is, centrifugal force (and centripetal also) is not fictitious to an observer in any frame.

P.S. Original text of the third law is said, it is not on two bodies, but on every point of action of force.

Gravitational Acceleration

Well, “gravitational acceleration” is “magnitude of gravity on the surface of Earth ?” asked an Alien

Idiom (compound word) “gravitational acceleration” seems to be meaningful only in limited situationon. Free fall, gravity at the surface of Earth, etc. Is it an idiom of physics ?

If gravity and inertial force are different things, gravity and acceleration are also different things. Will there be qualification of idiom ?

Inertial Force is not Fictitious

Gravity acts on a body as a vector. At a local area in free falling elevator, vector of gravity and vector of inertial force (vector of action, not of existence) will cancel each other. In that case, inertial force will not be fictitious.

Inertial Force and Gravity are Different Things (additional)

In light of the followings, inertial force and gravity will not be equivalent.

◎ Inertial force: It is emerged in an accelerated motion (of a mass point) in space.

◎ Gravity: It does not emerge in an accelerated motion (of a mass point) in space.

Inertial Force and Gravity are Different Things (additional)

It is argued that inertial force and gravity are equivalent. However, in light of the followings, the two will not be equivalent. Even if vectors as action cancel each other out, vectors as existence do not disappear. Qualitatively, quantitatively. These are composing and decomposing of forces.

◎ Inertial force corresponds to accelerated motion of a mass point in homogeneous isotropic space.

◎ Gravity corresponds to position of a mass potint in space modified by gravitational fields.

Inertial Force and Gravity are Different Things (rewritten)

◎ Inertia Force

1) Between inertial force and motion of a mass point in space, there will be direct connection.

2) Position in space has no meaning. Space is homogeneous isotropic.

3) Absolute space is required.

◎ Gravity

1) Between gravity and motion of a mass point in space, there will be no direct connection.

2) Position in space has meaning. As a gravitational field. Space is not homogeneous isotropic.

3) Absolute space is not required.

Local Inertial Frame (additional)

A homogeneous cuboid made of atomic silver (atomic weight 107.9) is in free falling. Magnitude of inertial force acting on every silver atom is the same. There can be no local inertial frame.

Local Inertial Frame (rewritten)

An elevator cabin is in free falling. Let’s assume that every local frame of this cabin is the same (mass m). There can be no local inertial frame.

Inertial Force and Gravity are Different Things

1) For inertial force, space is homogeneous isotropic. Gravity is not (gravitational field exsists).

2) For inertial force, every position in space is the same. Gravity is not (gravitational field exsists).

Local Inertial Frame (again)

Every mass point is either in an inertial (unaccelerated) frame or accelerated frame. If a rigid homogeneous cuboid is in free-falling, every mass point is in accelerated frame. In this cuboid, there can be no inertial frame, even locally.

P.S. This difference is not fictitious but absolute.

Correction (on today’s post : on the third note)

A starlight > A light source

Two Formulas for Speed of Light (in vacuum)

First formula, v=fλ: It is speed of light relative to aether, and v is constant. Area is where light follows aether frame. That is, more than a few light seconds away from light source.

Second formula, c=fλ; It is speed of light relative to light source, and c is constant. Area is where light follows emission theory. That is, within a few light seconds from light source.

Note) First formula is the same as formula for the speed of sound in air (depending on f and λ).

Note) In outer space, a starlight is passing through a tube. In the center of the tube, a plate of glass is placed. In front of the glass, the starlight follows aether frame, and in back of it, starlight follows emission theory.

Note) A starlight is moving in aether. It is possible that v and c move at the same speed. Usually, v will be below c.

Note) For a moving observer, speed of light must be reconsidered (starting with the Doppler effect).

Speed of Light Varies

On the Moon’s surface, plane waves of Sunlight are arriving horizontally from above to two passenger cars. There is a small pinhole at the center of ceiling of two passenger cars, and on the floor, there is a spot of light that passed through pinhole.

Two passenger cars are moving on the Moon’s surface at different speeds (in x direction). For an observer inside the passenger car, position of light spot on the floor will be different. This difference in position will be the same for an observer stands on the Moon’s surface.

Gravity (gravitational field) and Time

There is optical path of triangle ABC with top A of tall tower and mirror BC placed on the ground (as vertices). Laser light emitted from light source set at A (frequency is constant) is reflected by BC and returns to A. Frequencies of laser light at ABC will be the same. Time dilation due to gravity will be impossible.

Pinhole Camera

In outer space, a starlight is coming from the right. This ray enters the pinhole of a pinhole camera and is reflected upward by a mirror set at 45 degrees upwards in the camera.

When the camera moves to the right or left (at a uniform speed), the position where reflected light hits the upper inner wall of the camera will move. Incident light is propagated in aether, and reflected light follows emission theory.

Note: Speed of lincident light and rleflected light relative to the mirror are generally different. So, angle of the two are also. λ are also).

Apology and Cancellation

My recent posts 04-29 seem to be invalid. Sorry.

Aether

In outer space, three pinhole cameras are pointed in X, Y and Z directions (these are in uniform linear motion, the same as Sun). Cameras are pretty large. In the camera, on the inner wall, on the opposite side of the pinhole, disks rotate once and receiving position of star lights are recorded.

Recorded position of star lights on three disks will not be true circle. These may indicate motion of the pinhole cameras relative to aether.

Mars & Aether

Annual aberration of Mars is based on its revolution period of 1.881 years and average orbital speed of 28.07 km/sec. That is, aberration is mainly caused by motion of observer relative to the aether. Qualitatively and quantitatively. Needless to explain.

Other aberrations of Mars are also.

Equivalence Principle

Two bodies of the same mass m tied by a fairly long string are in free fall to Jupiter. Two bodeies are back and forth, and increasing tension of the string is informed to Earth. Inertial force and gravity are different things.

Comet Shoemaker-Levy, which fell to Jupiter in 1994. It was broken into at least 21 pieces in falling.

Equivalence principle (as an impression)

In laboratory experiment, inertial force is something that we can control. In a laboratory called thought experiment, we can control falling of an elevator cabin also. On the other hand, it seems that gravity is beyond our reach. In other words, inertial force and gravity will be different things.

Even outside laboratory (whether within our reach or not), inertial force and gravity may be different thing.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (long axis)

Long axis of Mercury’s orbit is slowly rotating. That is, Mercury will follow an orbit outside its previous orbit after passing either perihelion or aphelion (for some extent). This is not so for perihelion in many figures.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (again)

In many figures, Mercury’s orbit is outside the previous orbit for some extent after aphelion, and inside for some extent after perihelion. Unacceptable.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (unfamiliar figure)

I found a figure unfamiliar on web. About two Mercury’s orbits are shown. New orbit is outside the previous orbit twice and inside the previous orbit twice during one round.

Note) This site is in Japanese. image page. big red sun. 水星の近日点移動

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (Summary?)

Two laps of elliptical orbit of Mercury is drawn. Ellipse B after perihelion must be drawn outside previous ellipse A. However, in many figures such as web, it is inside. Ellipse is rotating around Sun. Many figures must be wrong.

In other words, state of ellipse nearby perihelion must be the same as that of nearby aphelion (the same qualitatively). Nearby these two points, Mercury will be affected by excessive acceleration due to its size. Acceleration will be caused by centrifugal force or gravity or by both.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (reconfirmation)

As posted before, the size of Mercury as a sphere would be the core to this problem. Allow me to reconfirm.

Divide Mercury into two the same spheres (two are contacted). Two centers of sphere lie on the line of action of Sun’s gravity. Distance between Sun and centers of two spheres are 49 and 51. Magnitude of Sun’s gravity is F=GM/r^2. Therefore, the denominators of magnitude of Sun’s gravity acting on the two spheres are 2401 and 2601.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (Labyrinth)

This problem could be discribed as a problem in which Mercury’s elliptical orbit rotates slightly in the direction of Mercury’s orbital motion. Like hands of a clock. Reason for rotation may be due to the fact that Mercury is not a point but a sphere that has a size (mass distribution). But beyond that, it is a labyrinth for me.

Is the reason for rotation lies in perihelion or in aphelion ? Or is it in neither ? And, if the reason lies in aphelion, is it due to addition of centrifugal force ? Or is it due to weakening of gravitational pull of Sun ?

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (problem posing)

I said earlier that this story should start from aphelion, not perihelion. Yes, size of Mercury will increase centrifugal force and will rotate the orbit of Mercury in the direction of revolution. It will also increase size of orbit and increase momentum of Mercury.

Moon is said to be receding away from Earth. Although it is on order of a few centimeters per year. There are not a few sites on web. Many of them say that reason is slowing down of rotation of Earth. And total angular momentum of Earth and Moon must be conserved. But is relationship between Earth and Moon still the same today ? I guess what I said in the first half of this post applies to Moon as well.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (Supplement)

Story will be started from aphelion. Starting is addition of centrifugal force (because of the size of Mercury), which causes orbit to be outside the original orbit. Then, very slight rotation of long axis and short axis, i.e., the elliptical orbit (centered on the forcal point where Sun is located) will continue.

Note: It is said that Moon is receding from Earth at a rate of a few centimeters per year. Perhaps, size of Moon will add centrifugal force on Moon’s orbital motion.

Spherical Shell Theorem

Let me revise my 03-12 post as follows.

There are two figures A and B that draw Sun and Mercury. A shows Mercury on the line of action of gravity of Sun extending from the left. Distance between two stars is 50. In B, Mercury is divided into two hemispheres, left and right. The distance between center of sphere (of A) and the center of gravity of two hemispheres each is 1. In B, denominators of formula for magnitude of gravity are 49 and 51. And squared are 2401 and 2601.

Magnitude of gravity is 2500 in A and 2501 in B. Size of sphere seems to be related to magnitude of gravity. Spherical shell theorem will not be valid. Main reason for perihelion shift of Mercury will be its size.

Note) In this post, only gravity of Sun is under consideration.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (again)

There is a figure of Mercury. Mercury is drawn as a circle. Plus, the center of it and an arc are drawn. This arc passes through the center and is extending symmetrically upward and downward. This arc is part of circle centered at the center of Sun that is located on the right of this figure. Therefore, the area of Mercury divided by the arc is left > right. Thus, actual magnitude of centrifugal force of Mercury due to its orbital motion will exceed the magnitude calculated as a point. Probably, this will be the main reason for perihelion shift of Mercury.

Note : For planets with satellites, perihelion shif seems to be larger. This will be due to centrifugal force.

Note : There must be more unknowns in perihelion shift.

Spherical Shell Theorem (Continued)

In figure A, let distance from the center of sphere to fixed point be 50. And in figure B, let distance between the center of sphere and center of gravity of two hemispheres be 1. In figure B, in the formula of gravity, denominators are square of 49 and 51. These are 2401 and 2601. Contrary to expectations, size of the sphere seems to reduce the magnitude of gravity.

Therefore, gravity seems not to be the cause of perihelion shift of Mercury. Size of Mercury will increase centrifugal force.

Spherical Shell Theorem

A homogeneous sphere, the source of gravity, and a line of action of gravity extending horizontally through the center of the sphere are drawn. At a fixed point, on left side of the line of action, not far apart, magnitude of gravity is calculated. Now, let the gravity source be the left and right hemispheres, and the gravity originating from the two hemispheres is calculated. Magnitude of gravity depends on the square of the distance. Therefore, sum of the gravity originating from the two hemispheres will differ from the magnitude calculated by the spherical shell theorem.

The above is on the Sun’s gravity only.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (again)

Shift of perihelion is in the direction of Mercury’s own revolution, and speed of shift is constant. Like hands of clock. Main reason will be two-body problem.

How is Sun’s gravity acting on Mercury calculated ? Will be by Newton’s spherical shell theorem. But is this theorem right ? Has anyone raised any objection ?

Gravity of Sun acting on Mercury depends on square of the distance between them. On the other hand, centrifugal force due to orbital motion of Mercury depends on distance between them. Therefore, the size of Mercury and Sun will also play a role. But it is contrary to the spherical shell theorem

If the above is right, because the two bodies are close, size of Mercury and Sun will increase the magnitude of gravity. And orbital motion of Mercury will be accelerated.

Selected Posts on Anti-Relativity (5)

◎ Doppler Effect of Light

Frequency of incoming light varies with the motion of an observer. In the formula c = fλ, it is clear that the speed of light (for the observer) cannot be constant.

Selected Posts on Anti-Relativity (3)

◎ Light Clock

A light clock is working in a moving passenger car. In books or in other illustrations, light travels back and forth vertically, but this light clock slightly leans to the right or left. So, the zigzag (sawtooth) of light path seen by an observer on the ground warps. Two kinds of dilations ? And how about if two light clocks with different lean work ?

◎ Time Dilation

In outer space, a spaceship is sailing horizontally. Plane wave of light (wavelength is constant) of the first-magnitude star Sirius is coming from directly above. Phenomenon of time dilation can not be valid.

◎ Relativity of Simultaneity

On the Moon’s surface, a passenger car is moving to the right. From the center of the ceiling of the car, light rays are emitted to directly below and diagonally downward to left and right at 45 degrees. And three points of light are reflected on the floor. Three points are symmetrical to observer on the Moon’s surface also. Relativity of simultaneity will be invalid.

◎ Perihelion Shift of Mercury

The perihelion shift moves in one direction and its speed seems to be almost constant. Like the hands of a clock. Main cause of the shift seems not to be gravity of other planets. Main cause will be two-body problem of Mercury and Sun. Not as points, but as spheres.

Selected Posts on Anti-Relatiyity (4)

◎ Speed of Light

For speed of light, the constant speed, and the formula c = fλ seem to be all. But is it really that simple?

A beam of light is propagating through aether. An observer is in uniform linear motion at various angles relative to this beam. The speed of the observer relative to aether also varies. Observer’s motion can be accelerated motion, jerk motion, or curvilinear motion. Also, speed of light wave and light ray (photon) will generally be different.

No, to light, special treatment must not be given. Then, all must be simple.

◎ Aether

In outer space, frequency and wavelength of two stars light are being measured. Two stars are in opposite directions (antipodal point) on the celestial sphere, and the measurements are done simultaneously. The sum of the two values will be 2c or a constant close to 2c.

The above will show the motion of the observer relative to aether.

◎ Accelerated Motion and Aether

Accelerated motion will be absolute motion against aether. Accelerated motion and inertial force are two sides of the same coin. Gravity is not involved and is irrelevant.

That is, we are surrounded by aether.

◎ Acceleration and Non-Acceleration

The passenger car is accelerating uniformly to the right. In this car, a ray of light (frequency is constant) is emitted from the rear to the front. The number of light waves existing inside the car will be higher than when the car is stationary. That is, there will be apparent difference between non-acceleration and acceleration.

Ray of light is emitted from the ceiling of the passenger car downward. If the passenger car is accelerating, the ray draw a parabola. That is, there will be apparent difference between non-acceleration and acceleration.

◎ Local Inertial Frame

An elevator-like but homogeneous rectangular body is in free falling. Suppose this body consists of many local area of mass m. So, inertial force acting on each local area is mg. That is, local inertial frame will be impossible.

Gravity and inertial force are cancelled out partially or sometimes totally. But, it is action that cancelled out, not existence.

Selected Posts on Anti-Relativity (2)

◎ Lorentz Contraction

Plane waves of starlight (wavelength is constant) is arriving from upper left 45 degrees. Two spacecrafts are sailing in the right and left directions. Number of waves hitting the front and rear ends (A and B) of each spacecraft is the same. Therefore, number of waves existing between A and B is invariant (for both spacecrafts, regardless of lateral motion). Lorentz contractions will be impossible.

Relativity of simultaneity will be impossible also.

◎ Aberration

Aberration is caused by various motions of Earth relative to stationary aether (uniform isotropic). Light that enters upper air of Earth (from aether) is bent in the direction of motion of Earth. As a phenomenon, aberration is completed in the upper air. The same as refraction.

Therefore, illustration of raindrops and an umbrella is NG. Result of Airy’s experiment with a water-filled telescope is only natural. It is said that apparent displacement of stars is displaced in the direction of Earth’s motion, but in fact, it will be the opposite. You can check this by drawing light bending (in upper air) on a paper.

◎ Inertial Force is not Fictitious.

The same five bodies (mass m) are lined up sideways on a horizontal plane. Five bodies are tied with four strings. Assume that horizontal plane is zero friction, and mass of strings is zero. On right most body, force of 5ma is acting to the right and five bodies start a uniform linear accelerating motion toward the right. Tension acting on four strings are, from right to left, 4ma, 3ma, 2ma, and 1ma.

Tension in the string above will be the same to an observer of any frame of motion. Inertial force (accelerated motion) is not fictitious.

◎ Equivalence Principle

For gravity and inertial force in free-falling elevator, acceptable explanation will be Newton’s law of action and reaction. Equivalence principle should be forgotten.

Selected Posts on Anti-Relativity

◎ Michelson-Morley Experiment

It (done in air) is nonsense. In air, light is propagated at c/n. So, the result of M-M experiment (done in air) is only natural.

In a book “Theory of Relativity” by Pauli, W 1958, it’s written as follows (quoted from English version ; in 1-6). “Rather should one say that for an observer moving with medium, light is propagated as usual with velocity c/n in all directions”.

◎ Speed of Light

The defined value of speed of light is based on measurements (with wavelength and frequency) done by Evenson et al. in 1973. Error is 1.1 m / s in pramai. Now measuring instrument is separated into a measuring part and a light source part. When one of them is moved at a constant speed higher than above error (in the direction of light path), different value will be obtained.

◎ Propagation of Light

In outer space, a starlight is reflected by a mirror. There is a formula c = f λ. Now, the mirror is stationary. In comparing of incident light and reflected light, f is the same. And usually, c & λ are different.

Now, the mirror moves in the direction of the light path of incident light. In the formula on incident light, λ is constant. And c & f will be variables. And in the formula on reflected light, c is constant. And f & λ will be variables.

1. In outer space, a star light is reflected by a mirror. Speed of incident light is constant relative to aether.

2. In outer space, a star light is reflected by a mirror. Speed of reflected light is constant relative to the mirror (the emission theory).

In two pictures sbove each, speed of light to a moving observer follows Galilean transformation.

◎ Aether

All kinds of aberration are caused by motion of Earth. Qualitatively, quantitatively. For example, cycle of annual aberration is 365 days. It is reflection of motion of Earth. On the other hand, any motion of star’s side has no influence. Only position on the celestial sphere is valid. These facts will be explainable only by aether.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious (again)

The same five bodies (mass m) are lined up sideways on a horizontal plane. Five bodies are tied with four strings. Assume that horizontal plane is zero friction, and mass of strings is zero. On right most body, force of 5ma is acting to the right and five bodies start a uniform linear accelerating motion toward the right. Tension acting on four strings are, from right to left, 4ma, 3ma, 2ma, and 1ma.

Tension in the string above will be the same to an observer of any frame of motion. Inertial force (accelerated motion) is not fictitious.

Equivalence principle (again)

For gravity and inertial force in free-falling elevator, acceptable explanation will be Newton’s law of action and reaction. Equivalence principle should be forgotten.

Free Fall

A body is in free fall. Assume that this body is a homogeneous rectangular. Inertial force is acting on every local area. Therefore, there can be no local inertial frame for this body.

Inertial force and gravity are canceled each other partially and sometimes totally. But canceled is action not existence.

Local Inertial Frame (monologue)

On a plane (no friction), a body is pulled by a string and is moving in a uniform linear acceleration. Magnitude of inertial force and force originating from the tension of the string (acting on each mass point of the body) are equal. This body is not inertial frame.

However, in free-falling elevator, there is local area where magnitude of gravity and inertial force are equal. And, it is considered to be local inertial frame.

Local Inertial Frame ? (again)

A homogenous disk is rotating vertically. Gravity from below. Therefore, inertial force (centrifugal force) and gravity act on each mass point of the disk. When the rotation speed of the disk exceeds a certain magnitude, a mass point appears where vector of inertial force and gravity are canceled (as total). But it is only natural. It seems to not be note worthy.

In free falling elevator, mass point where vector of inertial force and gravity are canceled (as total) also. Physically, it would be the same phenomenon as a rotating disk.

Free Fall (Monologue)

A large number of particles are floating in vacuum space. To our eyes, these are visible as a cube or an elevator cabin. Suddenly, a gravity source appears below and the elevator-like thing starts free-falling. As time passes, the elevator-like thing gradually changes its shape.

The above can be explained by Newtonian mechanics.

Inertial Resistance is not Fictitious (rephrase)

Not a few explanations of law of action and reaction begins with two bodies. Misleading explanation. This law is the law at point of action of force. And, it is the law that action and reaction are equal, and direction of force is opposite.

A body is pulled by a string. At every point on the string, tension is the same. That is, action and reaction have the same magnitude and opposite directions. This is the same when the body is uniformly accelerated by the string. Both forces are true forces. It is Impossible that one (inertial resistance) is fictitious.

Inertial Resistance is not Fictitious (again).

Let’s review formulas, F = ma and F = mg.

Dividing both sides by m gives a = F/m and g = F/m. Therefore, a = g.

Thus, mass acting as gravity and mass acting as inertial force are (assumed to be) the same. Also, quantitatively as m. This is also guaranteed by Newton’s third law of motion.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious (Continued)

In previous lost (01-16), both sides of formula F = ma are divided by m. Now, alternatively, F = ma are divided by a. Then, formula F/a = m is given. This will also show that a and ma will not be fictitious.

Also, two formulas F = ma and F = mg may not be compatible with the assertion of gravitational mass and inertial mass (“Both are completely different phenomena” on Wikipedia “mass” in Japanese. Also, not be compatible with existence of two idioms).

Inertial force is not fictitious (is something wrong ?)

Formula, F = ma, is well-known formula. Now, dividing both sides by m. It gives F/m = a. F on the left side is the force (external force) in “Newton”. Both F and m are physical quantities. Both will not be fictitious. Therefore, a and inertial force ma will not be fictitious also. Is there anything wrong with the above ?

Inertial force is not fictitious (monologue)

On a plane (no friction), there is a body mass 3m. It is pulled by a string from the left and is accelerated. Tension of the string F is 3ma. Now, suppose there is another body to the right of this body. Two bodies are tied with a string. Also suppose the mass of the left body be 2m and the mass of the right body be m. The force F that pulls the left string is the same. So, tension on the left string will be 3ma and tension on the right string will be ma.

Newton’s Third Law of Motion

A body of mass m is suspended from ceiling by a string. From below, this body is pulled by another string. Tension of this string is 2 mg. So, the tension of upper string is 3 mg. That is, action-reaction of upper string is both 3 mg. Mass of the body is basically irrelevant.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious (partially reposted)

Gravity acts on everything equally. And if there is action, there is reaction. As stated by Newton’s third law of motion. Below are some examples.

F = mg (free fall)

F = normal reaction

F = air resistance (falling at terminal speed)

F = air resistance + inertial force (falling before terminal speed)

Is F in F = mg fictitious ? The claim of fictitious will not hold.

Motions Relative to Aether (monologue)

1) Rotary motion: Two same disks are rotating. If the rotary speed is the same, the same inertial force will appear. Regardless of the direction of plane of rotation. It must be because of aether (homogeneous and isotropic).

2) Curvilinear motion: Two same spheres move in curvilinear motion. Two curves are the same in size and shape. If two spheres move at the same uniform speed (from the same starting point), the same inertial force will appear. Regardless of the direction of curve. It must be because of aether (homogeneous and isotropic).

3) Accelerated motion on straight lines: Two same spheres move on two straight lines. If motions are the same accelerated motion, the same inertial force will appear. Regardless of the direction of the straight line. It must be because of aether (homogeneous and isotropic).

4) Uniform linear motion: Two same spheres move in uniform linear motion. Inertial forces do not appear. Regardless of the direction of straight line. It must be because of aether (homogeneous and isotropic).

Local Inertial Frame (Monologue)

In all areas of a free-falling elevator, formula F ≒ ma ≠ 0, or F = ma ≠ 0 will consist. So, there will be no inertial frame, even locally.

In a free-falling elevator (assumed to be a rigid body), coexistence of inertial frame and accelerated frame will be impossible, even locally.

Aberration on the Moon

Major aberrations observable on the moon’s surface are four. Two are corresponding to daily, annual aberrations of earth. Two are annual, secular aberrations of earth themselves (in common). These four aberrations show that aberration are caused by the motion of the telescope on the moon’s surface relative to aether. Qualitatively, quantitatively. Motion of telescope is motion relative to aether.

On the moon’s surface, a water-filled telescope will show what Airy imaged (but if light receiving surface is glass, it will follow the refractive index of the glass). Also on the moon’s surface, picture of tilted umbrella and rain drops (raindrops are photons) will be valid.

Gravity and Time Dilation

There are two mirrors. One is on the ground, one is 22.6m above. These are facing each other. A laser beam is emitted downward from the left end of the upper mirror, forming letter W, and is coming to the upper right (beam is in vacuum). Frequency at five points will be the same. There will be no time dilation due to difference of gravity.

Note) A few translated books say that (outline), when the distance between two points on the light path remains the same, the frequency of two points are the same (assuming frequency of the light source is constant).

About the speed of light (supplement to the post 12-19)

Plane waves and rays (photons) of light from the first-magnitude star, Sirius are propagating through outer space. An observer is moving in various motions. Speed of plane waves and light rays (photons) to the observer will be different (usually).

About the Speed of Light

For light that is propagated in aether, speed of light waves and ray (photons) relative to an observer will be different (usually). And, for light that is propagated according to emission theory, above will be the same (different also, usually).

About the speed of light

As for speed of light, constancy of speed of light, and the formula c = f λ seem to be all. But is it so simple ?

A ray of light is propagating through aether. An observer is moving in a uniform linear motion lerative to this ray at various angle. The speed of the observer relative to aether is also varies. And, the observer’s motion can be accelerated motion, jerk (on a straight line), or can be curvilinear motion. Besides, there will be areas where the propagation of light follows emission theory.

In short, there will be no reason to treat light specially. It’s so simple.

Inertial Force

◎ Inertial force is reaction of Newton’s law of action-reaction (the third law of motion). It is not a fictitious force.

◎ In the entire elevator cabin in free-falling, gravity and inertial force are action and reaction. And the two are equal. So, it is not surprising that in this cabin, there is a local area where the magnitude of gravity and inertial force are equal. In this local area, magnitude of inertial force is not zero. That is, this local area is not an inertial frame.

◎ There are two points that are not in relative motion. It is impossible to say for one to be an inertial frame and for the other an accelerated frame. There can be no such thing as a local inertial frame.

Equivalence Principle

When a mass point is accelerated, inertial force appears. Its vector can be at our will. On the other hand, gravity acting on a mass point is unrelated to the accelerated motion of this mass point. And, the vector is not at our will. In summary, inertial force and gravity are two different things, like water and oil (even if the vector of the two acting on a mass point happen to cancel each other out).

Equivalence Principle

In free-falling elevator cabin, and at the especial local area, gravity and inertial force are equal in magnitude. This seems to be the reason for the equivalence principle. However, at many local area, gravity and inertial force are not equal in magnitude. Is it possible that the principle is based on this one especial local area ?

Inertial Force is not Fictitious Force

Inertial force is not fictitious force. See, Newton’s third law of motion (law of action and reaction). Also see, formula F = ma in the second law of motion. This is a big problem.

P.S. There are two types of motion: uniform linear motion and all other motions. In the latter, inertial forces appear during the motion, and corresponding to the motion.

Gleaning (wavenumber, invariant)

In outer space, a starlight is coming. When an observer moves in the direction of light path, frequency varies. But, according to this, in the formula c = f λ, does wavelength λ vary ? Unbelievable !

There is a word “wavenumber”. It is the number of waves in a unit length (1 cm or 1 m) and is called Kayser. Like 25,000 K (visible red). This wavenumber and wavelength are reciprocals of each other. Therefore, since the wavenumber is an invariant, the wavelength will also be an invariant. That is, the wavelength cannot be varied with the motion of an observer. It is the speed of light that varies.

Light is Propagated in Two Ways (supplement to the 14th post)

◎ Statings on the formula: c = f λ are from the view point of the mirror (stationery or in uniform linear motion).

◎ Light will follow the emission theory for a few seconds only, after leaving light source. And then light follows aether.

Light is Propagated in Two Ways

In outer space, a starlight is reflected by a mirror. There is a formula c = f λ. Now, the mirror is stationary. In comparing of incident light and reflected light, f is the same. And usually, c & λ are different.

Now, the mirror moves in the direction of the light path of incident light. In the formula on incident light, λ is constant. And c & f will be variables. And in the formula on reflected light, c is constant. And f & λ will be variables.

Binary Star and Aether

Speed of light coming from approaching and receding stars of binary star is the same. This will be one of evidence of the existence of aether.

Note: However, as for evidence, aberrations (caused by motions of Earth relative to aether) will be more definite.

Murmur, Again

Starlight is coming from outer space. When an observer moves in the direction of the light path, frequency of the starlight varies. For light, there is a formula c = f λ. Which one, c or λ, varies with the above frequency varying ?

An Intermittent Ray of Light

Imagine that an incoming star light is intermittent (on and off: by human work). An observer is observing this ray of light. It will be certain that observer’s motion (in the light ray direction) does not affect anything of coming ray (intermittency, wavelength, amplitude, waveform, etc). So, in the equation c = f λ, it is f and c that vary for the moving observer.

A Light clock

A light clock is working in a moving passenger car. Light path of light clock is illustrated vertically (in drawings). But this light clock leans somewhat to the right (or to left). So, to an observer stands on the ground, zigzag of light path (saw-tooth like) warps. Two kinds of dilation ? And if two clocks work, and these lean differs ?

Absolute Rest Frame & Aether Frame

It would be easy to reveal the aether frame by optical means. By measuring aether drift. On the other hand, non-accelerated motion, accelerated motion (uniform linear motion and all other motions) of bodies are distinguished. And accelerating bodies show inertial forces. This is probably due to absolute rest frame. Aether frame and absolute rest frame each will probably be one and only, homogeneous, isotropic. And perhaps the two are the same frame. One thing two functions. Surprising.

Absolute Rest Frame

Newton’s Bucket” is a thought experiment that assumes the existence of absolute rest frame because of the rotational motion accompanied by inertial forces. Let’s take the thought experiment one step further. Inertial force must occur by “all motions except uniform linear motion” of a body with respect to absolute rest frame. Without exception. And inertial force is real existence in physics.

Note: Uniform linear motion and other motions can be superposed. And, superposition is very universal.

Absolute Rest Frame (proposal)

Accelerated motion, non-accelerated motion (uniform linear motion) and combined motions of a body all will be motions relative to absolute rest frame.

1) Uniform linear motion of a body is through.

2) Accelerated motion of a body will have corresponding inertial force.

Absolute rest frame can be easily measured (as aether drift) using light.

Relativity of Simultaneity

On the moon’s surface, a passenger car is moving to the right. From the point at the center of ceiling, light rays are emitted at 45 degrees downward to the left and right. So, on the floor, there are two points of light. Position of two points are symmetrical for an observer in the car and stands on the moon’s surface. This drawing should be understood by the emission theory.

Gravitational Acceleration

Gravitational acceleration is a compound word. But is it worth it? About acceleration, what is special ? Nothing, will be.

Equivalence Principle

An elevator cabin is slowly falling due to gravity of an asteroid below. In addition, a rope is extending below the elevator cabin, and the rope is under artificial tension. Let us assume that acceleration g due to gravity (uniform acceleration) is equal to acceleration a due to tension. The equivalence principle should be forgotten.

Elevator Cabin and Inertial Frame

On a plane (no friction), an elevator cabin is accelerated horizontally by tension of a rope. Tension of rope is controlled so that horizontal acceleration is the same as free fall. Not only at infinite small area (local area), but also on whole area of this elevator cabin is inertial frame ?

Aether (repost)

All kinds of aberration are caused by motion of Earth. Qualitatively, quantitatively. For example, cycle of annual aberration is 365 days. It is reflection of motion of Earth. On the other hand, any motion of star’s side has no influence. Only position on the celestial sphere is valid. These facts will be explainable only by aether.

For an observer stationary with respect to the aether frame, there will be no aberration.

Local Inertial Frame (repost)

Inertial frame or non-accelerating frame, is a frame that is non-accelerating with respect to aether. So, in free-falling elevator, there is no inertial frame, even locally. Term “local inertial frame” will be nonsense.

In the elevator, equal acceleration due to falling is acting on every mass point. There are no exceptions. Even locally.

There can be composition or partial composition of inertial force and gravity. But the two are inviolable to each other. Inviolable, qualitatively and quantitatively.

Does Aether Exist?

Two spacecrafts are sailing from left to right in outer space. It is as far apart as Mars. Speeds are v and 2v. Two spacecraft flash at the same and long time interval. What is interval between the position of flashes on the celestial sphere as seen from the Earth ?

Secular aberration

This is what comes into my mind. Three aberrations; daily, annual, and secular seem to form a closed necklace drawn in one stroke. Pearl are 365 (assuming star is visible even during day time).

The star change its position at all times. Trajectory drawn on celestial sphere in one year will not be a ellipse but be an extended necklace with pearls.

Sorry again, 9-21 > 9-22

Sorry, to all and to Admin,

Please go through the post dated 9-21. I want to rewrite it someday.

Equivalence principle

A free-falling elevator is assumed to be a micro mass point. And gravity f and inertial force f are acting on this mass point. As Newton’s third law of motion states, vectors are opposite in direction and magnitudes are equal. Similarly, acceleration g and a are opposite in directions and magnitude are equal. Therefore, gravitational mass and inertial mass are the same. Then, all situations seem to be described simply by “mass”. And above all will be in the range that Newton described.

Michelson-Morley Experiment

In a book Theory of Relativity by Pauli, W 1958, it’s written as follows (quoted from English version ; in 1-6). “Rather should one say that for an observer moving with medium, light is propagated as usual with velocity c/n in all directions”. It seems to be the “very and true explanation” for M-M experiment (done in air) !!

There is Einstein’s saying the same as above Pauli’s. Therefore, probably, he said that he didn’t know M-M experiment (and he mutters, “M-M experiment (done in air) is nonsense and I have no obligation to talk about it”).

About Light

In outer space, frequency and wavelength of two star lights (coming from the opposite direction) are measured (at the same time). Sum of the speed of two lights will be constant. It is 2c or close to 2c.

Above shows that in outer space, light is propagated relative to aether. And, speed of light relative to an observer is not constant.

Moon and Sun (Hypothesis: Restated)

Assume that sun’s light follows emission theory for a few seconds only. Matter of those on few seconds will be indistinguishable from earth. That is, sun is being in aether. So, light-time correction. And, light-time correction will be offset by secular aberration.

Assume that moon’s light follows emission theory for a few seconds only. So, visible position of moon is exactly where it is. Just like sun. But the mechanism will be different.

Equivalence Principle ?

A body is suspended by a string from roof of a passengercar. The same two passengercars started at the same jerk at the same time. Tension of string is increasing, and string broke at about the same time (for both person in the car and on on the ground). Inertial force and gravity will not be equivalent.

Equivalence Principle

Starting is to accept inertial forces as inertial forces. In a free-fall elevator, inertial force and gravity acting on the entire cabin is equal. As Newton’s third law of motion shows. Magnitudes of inertial force and gravity acting on each mass point (assume fluid) in elevator are as shown by Newton. That’s all.

Eh, the equivalence principle? Will be worthless at all.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious

In addition to acceleration, there are jerk, snap, etc. And accordingly, inertial force must be varied. Inertial force cannot be fictitious.

There must be absolute rest frame, so there are acceleration, jerk, snap, etc. In wikipedia (Japanese), in “Acceleration”, there is a table titled “Comparison of magnitude of acceleration”. Many examples of acceleration are shown in 18 division by magnitude.

Inertial Force is not Fictitious

The same five bodies (mass m) are lined up sideways on a horizontal plane. Five bodies are tied with strings. Assume that horizontal plane is zero friction, and mass of strings is zero. On right most body, force of 5ma is acting and five bodies start a uniform linear accelerating motion toward the right. Tension acting on four strings are, from right to left, 4ma, 3ma, 2ma, and 1ma. For any observer.

Accelerated Motion is not Fictitious

A horizontally long container is filled with fluid. This container is being accelerated to the right. In the container, pressure of the fluid will be high on the left and low on the right (effect of gravity is separated question). Accelerated motion is not fictitious.

But is this worth writing down ?

Equivalence Principle

On a mass point, two forces of equal magnitude are acting from the left and right. Two forces are tension, gravity, and inertial force. Wnen, left and right are not distinguished, there are five possible combinations (there is no combination of inertia force and inertia force). Is the equivalence principle still insisted upon ?

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (an essay)

Shift is smooth, like a hand of clock. Mainly, it will be two-body problem.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (an essay)

Centrifugal force is inertial force and cannot be the first cause of perihelion shift. The 99-101 effect mentioned above (tentative naming: contrary to Newton’s spherical shell theorem) will be caused by size of Mercury, size of Sun, and distance between Mercury and Sun. On Mercury, these have effect on gravity and it will be the first cause. And then, direction of elliptical orbit may be shifted. At perihelion, this effect will be greatest.

Magnitude of perihelion shift of planets with satellite is far superior. This is probably because gravity of Sun acting on satellite in half orbit close to Sun is far superior.

Perihelion shift of Mercury (an essay)

Another inference. Half mentioned already at end of May. Mentioned was problem posing about a single gravitational source and gravitational sources separated into two. Let’s call this effect as the 99-101 effect. The 99-101 effect is equal to the two of binary stars. The 99-101 effect is a candidate for explanation of perihelion shift of Mercury. However, it is incompatible with attempt to explain by Sun’s spherical surface. I don’t know which one is hopeful.

If gravity source is close, size of gravitational source will increase gravity slightly. Then, Newton’s sphericl shell theorem must be reviewed.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (an essay)

This is an idea. In this problem, planets seem to be treated as a point. Now, planet is divided into two hemispheres. One is closer to Sun and the other is far from Sun (back to back). If the planet is far from Sun, centrifugal force and gravity each acting on two hemispheres will be the same(1/2). But, how about Mercury? We must imagine a spherical surface that centers on Sun, and this spherical surface coincides with center of Mercury ? And then, in whole Mercury, centrifugal force will be larger and gravity will be smaller. It is compared to Mercury as a point.

Sorry, please ignore my two posts immediately preceding this one.

Allow me to revise my yesterday’s post.

At each of Mercury’s mass points, centrifugal force and Sun’s gravity are canceled out. Like an elevator in free-falling. In formula of centrifugal force, “r” (distance between the two) is as it is. But, in formula of gravity, it is inversely proportional to square of distance ” r”. Therefore, Mercury’s size will increase effect of centrifugal force. Sorry, only I can is qualitative saying (and these are guess).

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (essay)

Mercury is revolving in orbit. Size of Mercury increases centrifugal force acting on revolving Mercury. This will be reason for perihelion shift of Mercury. The angle is about 5.75 arc-sec in a year.

Size of Mercury will also increase gravity of Sun (which acts on Mercury). But it will not affect direction of long axis of elliptical orbit (after a round: that is, it will be unrelated to perihelion problem).

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (an essay)

This is a guess. Because of size of Mercury (in its elliptical orbit), centrifugal force will be increased. And, as Sun is near, effect of size will be larger (other planets are more like point).

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (an essay)

This is a thought experiment on close binary stars (imagine on a plane no friction). Imagine the same homogeneous true sphere with mass m. Main star is three spheres and companion star is two spheres (these are attached as a single unit). These are on a straight line. Gravity exerted and affected by and to each will depend on size of true spheres (of here and there). Forget the spherical shell theorem. Two-body problem is also complicated..

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (an essay)

Increase in gravity due to size of Sun will depend on distance r between Sun and Mercury. This increase in gravity will be larger at perihelion and smaller at aphelion. Is this the reason for perihelion shift of Mercury ? Sorry for my repetitive posts.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (correction)

Sorry, I ask to delete my post (06-08) and replace it with following.

It is said that magnitude of Sun’s gravity acting on Mercury depends on Sun’s mass m and distance r between the two. However, in reality, Sun’s size will have effect. Noticeably on Mercury, which is close to Sun. Gravity will be greater slightly. Let’s focus on orbit just after Mercury passes perihelion. Orbit will be slightly inward (r will be shorter also). This means that size of Sun shifts position of perihelion in the next around.

P.S. Orbit to be compared is orbit when Sun is a point.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (Gleanings)

It is said that magnitude of Sun’s gravity acting on orbiting Mercury depends only Sun’s mass m and distance r between the two. But in reality, in addition, there will be an effect of Sun’s size. Gravity will be slightly greater. Therefore, Mercury’s orbit that has left aphelion will be slightly inward (and r will also be shorter), and then, perihelion will be shifted.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (repost)

In a drawing, a fixed star F homogeneous true sphere and a planet P orbiting nearby are drawn. F acts gravity on P. Is magnitude of gravity on P dpending solely on mass m of F and distance r between FP ? No, the size of F may also have a slight effect. This will be main reason for the perihelion shift (secondary reasons are omitted). Newton’s spherical shell theorem may not be perfect.

Square of 99 is 9801. Square of 101 is 10201. See above my post.

Perihelion Shift of Mercury (repost)

Size of Sun relative to Mercury will be main cause of this problem (however, will be incompatible with Newton’s spherical shell theorem).

There are two drawings in which Mercury and gravity source (considered as a point) are drawn. In one drawing, gravity source is Sun and its mass is m. Distance from Mercury is 100. In the other drawing, there are two alternative gravity sources to the Sun, Mass is m / 2 each. Distance from Mercury is 99 and 101(aligned on a straight line extending from Mercury). Magnitude of the gravity acting on Mercury is the latter > the former. It can be ignored on Neptune.

Apology, Adjacent my post “Speed of light” (on prism) was wrong. Sorry.

To admin, i thank you always for accepting of my posts (I appreciate if you erace this and that two posts).

Speed of light

In Wikipedia’s “Dispersion (optics)”, there is a video of dispersion. By a prism, white light is spectrally dispersed. The speed of light is different between red and violet light after dispersion (spectroscopy). It is obvious at a glance.

Galaxy Rotatin Curve

Is it because gravitational sources (that revolve galaxy) also extend over the disk of galaxy ? Is it because the state of inverse square law of gravity is different from that of solar system ?

Galaxy Rotation Curve

Allow me to post an idea about the above. It is contraction of the size of galaxies. But in Wikipedia (in English), there seems to be no mention.

Newton’s Third Law of Motion

Does gravity always act as action? Is inertial force always reaction? It is a problem statement. As an example, there is an elevator cabin in free fall (mass is m).

Newton’s Third Law of Motion

As an action and reaction, there are two examples about gravity. One is normal force. The other is Inertial force in free fall. The two should be accepted qualitatively and quantitatively.

Reviewing the Heliocentric Theory

Motion of earth is various, such as rotation, revolution, uniform linear motion of solar system, and others. And there is aberration to each. These are reflection of motions relative to uniform isotropic aether. Qualitative and quantitative.

Free fall (rewrited)

A body is falling in free fall. On a horizontal plane, an observer is moving in a uniform linear motion. To the observer, the falling body draws a parabola. Every point of the body is accelerating.

An elevator is falling in free fall. Assume, that there are two sources of gravity and there is a considerable distance between the two (even when viewed from elevator). How does equivalence principle explain ?

Perihelion shift of Mercury!

In a close binary, gravity of main star is acting on companion star. Magnitude of gravity is inversely proportional to square of distance. Therefore, if size of companion star is large, gravity that acting is somewhat larger (even if mass is the same).

Note: Here is a horizontal line. From the right, gravity of main star is acting. On the line, we see three masses. Mass of right and left is m/2 and middle is m (interval is the same). Magnitude of gravity acting will be m<m/2+m/2.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

Here is a close binary. A companion star approaches the main star and is passing the periastron on orbit. Actual orbit of companion star is different from orbit of mass point of it. Difference will be due mainly to size of companion star (mass distribution).

Perihelion shift of Mercury

5.75, 2.04, 11.45. These are observed value of perihelion shift of Mercury, Venus, and Earth (in a table of a website. Value are in arcsec/year. Table covers to Neptune). The decrease in Venus will be due to distance from the Sun, and the increase in Earth will be due to the Moon.

Perihelion shift of Mercury (an essay)

Scaled models of Mercury and Vulcan (of my post, April 7) are falling in free fall. Magnitude of acceleration is probably Mercury > Vulcan > mass point. At the beginning of falling, centers of gravity of three models are at the same horizontal level.

A web-site says, periastron shift are many in close binaries. This will be a two body problem.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

Recurring orbits will show that this is a two body problem.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

Mercury is perihelion shift and binary star is periastron shift. Two shifts are smooth and in one direction. Two each must be considered to be a two body problem.

See again that table (in 近点移動). Values are observed values. And these each will be two body problem.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

In Wikipedia (in Japanese version : “Apsidal precession” 近点移動), there is

a table named “Perihelion shirt of planets of solar system”. These seem to

varies greatly depending on the distance from the sun and the

presence or absence of satellites. Newcomb’s table and explanation

of relativity would be NG.

A planet called Vulcan is revolving the orbit of Mercury. Assume

that mass is the same and diameter is half to Mercury. The

gravitational force of the Sun and the centrifugal force due to the

orbital motion each would be Mercury > Vulcan > mass point.

Newcomb’s table (of perturbation values of the planets acting on Mercury) should be nonsense.

Stationary aether

In outer space, an observer (in an inertial frame) is measuring light of stars. The number of stars being measured is reasonable and there is no clumping of stars on celestial sphere. What is measured is frequency and wavelength of each star’s light, i.e., speed of light. The results will reveal the existence of stationary aether.

Note: Existence of stationary aether is not in doubt due to aberration.

Accelerated motion & light

On the moon’s surface, a passenger car is accelerating to the right. A starlight (horizontal) is passing through a hole A in the front wall, and reaches B in the rear wall of the passenger car. Frequencies of A and B will be the same. Therefore, number of waves existing between A and B will be constant (even at different accelerations). Above is not only for uniform acceleration but also for non-uniform acceleration.

On the moon’s surface, a passenger car is accelerating to the right. A light emitted from light source A’ in the front wall reaches B in the rear wall. What is frequency of A’B ? How many waves exist between A’B ?

Bending of light (by gravity)

Light will not be bent by gravity. Because…

1) At the center of Milky Way galaxy (where we live), it’s said that a black hole exists. Around it, several stars are revolving. These orbits seem to be natural.

2) How about a star, before it is occulted by the moon or Jupiter ?

Perihelion shift of Mercury (an essay）

Perihelion shift of Mercury is about 574 arcsec per century, and main cause is said to be perturbations due to the gravity of other planets (Venus is about 280 arcsec, Jupiter is about 150 arcsec).

There is a question. At the left end and the right end of the orbit of Mercury (a view from above), force that accelerates and decelerates Mercury by perturbation by other planets will be equal (in probability). Especially in the span of the century. Main cause will not be gravity of other planets.

P.S. Perturbations of other planets will be caused only by the position of these on the orbits (

and speed of gravity will be infinite).

Aberration on the moon

Many of widely accepted explanations for aberration will be right if these are on the moon. Illustration of raindrops and an umbrella will be OK. But as already mentioned, aberration on the earth is completed in the upper atmosphere. The explanation for aberration of earth must be rewritten.

Aberration (both on the moon and on the earth) is incompatible with constançy of the speed of light, and existence of aether is a prerequisite.

Selected notices in English

28 selected notices (anti relativity) in English are added in a site below. Yes, these are selected.

http://www.asyura.com/0306/idletalk2/msg/1242.html

34 notices on anti-relativity

Shown below (notices are mine, selected) will be plain and definite (sorry, in Japanese : 1-36. excluding 11&36).

http://www.asyura.com/0306/idletalk2/msg/1242.html

Inertial force is not fictitious

On a plane (without friction), a body is pulled to the left by two strings and to the right by one string. The tension of each string is the same F. That is, the body is accelerating to the left. Inertial force is not fictitious (Newton’s third law of motion holds at the left end of the body).

Gravitational time dilation

Allow me to post an essay

Laser beam (frequency is constant) emitted from the ground is reflected by the mirror at the top of the high tower, and returned to the ground. Frequency at these three points is the same. There is no time dilation.

Acceleration & non-acceleration

Allow me to post an essay

A passenger car is moving in a uniform accelerated motion to the right. In the car, a ray of light emitted downward from the roof will be bent to the left (as a parabola). Defference of acceleration and non-acceleration is not relative (but absolute).

About Light

Allow me to re-post as an essay.

◎ How are light waves propagated ?

1) Emission theory (for a few seconds only)

2) On aether (after the above)

◎ How are light sources visible ?

1) For celestial bodies beyond a few light-years, effect of emission theory is too small to be found (e.g. binary stars). So, every celestial body is visible to be stationary on aether (celestial sphere). Also by various aberrations.

2) Moon is by emission theory.

3) Celestial bodies in solar system (excluding moon) are depending on planetary aberrations. Also, depending on other aberrations (but, is secular aberration offset ?).

◎ Motion of light relative to observers

Same as bodies. Follows Galilean transformation. Constancy of speed of light cannot be hypothesized. By the way, light waves (speed = fλ) and photons (rays) are basically different. Especially in outer space.

Acceleration and non-acceleration

Rewriting of my past post (2020-11-18)

A passenger car is moving in an accelerating motion to the right (in a uniform acceleration). From a light source set in rear of the car, a light ray is emitted to an observer at front. The number of waves existing in the car will be higher than before accelerating. That is, difference between acceleration and non-acceleration will not be relative but be absolute.

PS : This phenomenon is similar to Sagnac effect.

Speed of light

In outer space, plane waves of starlight are coming from just above. A spacecraft is sailing horizontally. What should we think of speed of the spacecraft relative to light waves (c=fλ) and relative to photons (light rays)?

Speed of light (an essay)

Rewriting of my past post (2020-11-18)

The defined value of speed of light is based on measurements (with wavelength and frequency) done by Evenson et al. in 1973. Error is 1.1 m / s in pramai. Now measuring instrument is separated into a measuring part and a light source part. When one of them is moved at a constant speed higher than above error (in the direction of light path), different value will be obtained.

Free fall (an essay)

Rewriting of my past post (2021-9-6)

An elevator cabin is falling in free fall. Cabin is made up of n mass points (with the same mass of m). Imagine a single moment of falling.

Inertial force acting on each mass point is the same ma. No exceptions. On the other hand, magnitude of gravity acting on each mass points is not the same slightly. Difference depend on the position of the mass point.

P.S. For the entire cabin, magnitude of inertial force and gravity is equal.

Lorentz contraction

Plane waves of starlight (wavelength is constant) is arriving from upper left 45 degrees. Two spacecrafts are sailing in the right and left directions. Number of waves hitting the front and rear ends (A and B) of each spacecraft is the same. Therefore, number of waves existing between A and B is invariant (for both spacecrafts, regardless of lateral motion). Lorentz contractions will be impossible.

Relativity of simultaneity will be impossible also.

Free fall (an essay)

An elevator cabin is falling in free fall. Cabin is made up of n mass points (with the same mass of m). Free fall is supposed to be a uniform acceleration.

Inertial force acting on each mass point is the same ma. No exceptions. On the other hand, magnitude of gravity acting on each mass points is not the same slightly. Difference depend on the position of the mass point. P.S. For the entire cabin, magnitude of inertial force and gravity is equal.

Supplement to my post (sep 3 2021)

Even in a resultant force, inertial force is inertial force, and gravity is gravity. Vector follows own law each and is inviolable.

Cabin is made by a 3D printer. Material is uniform.

On a plane (no fliction), elevator cabin is moving in a uniformly accelerated linear motion (to the right). Inertial force acting on every local area (mass is m) of the cabin is the same ma (vector is the same also).

Free fall (reexamination)

Problem of free fall in an elevator will be problem of resultant force of inertial force and gravity (nothing else). In any local area, it will be so also.

Note: Inertial forces acting on every local area of the cabin (supposition: mass of every local area is m) is the same ma.

Note: External force (gravity) and inertial force acting on entire cabin are equal (Newton’s second law and third law of motion). How about in local area ? To image will not be difficult.

Aberration (reexamination)

Aberration is caused by various motions of Earth relative to stationary aether (uniform isotropic). Light that enters upper air of Earth (from aether) is bent in the direction of motion of Earth. As a phenomenon, aberration is completed in the upper air. The same as refraction.

Therefore, illustration of raindrops and an umbrella is NG. Result of Airy’s experiment with a water-filled telescope is only natural. It is said that apparent displacement of stars is displaced in the direction of Earth’s motion, but in fact, it will be the opposite. You can check this by drawing light bending (in upper air) on a paper.

Aether

Existence of aether (uniform isotropic) is precondition for Newton’s first and second laws of motion. There can be no other explanation.

Supplement to my post (July 9)

1) In space far from light source, propagation of light follows aether frame. See again various aberrations.

2) In space close to light source, propagation of light follows the emission theory. See again various facts.

3) In outer space, a mirror is moving at a uniform speed. Plane waves of light of a star are reflected by this mirror. 1) and 2) must be seen as facts.

Allow me to rewrite my post (24.April).

Constancy of speed of light (Reexamination)

Constancy of speed of light is not possible always. No, it will be

possible limitedly in the following two events only. Btw, speed of

light in mediums is not subject of this reexamination.

1) A measurement point and a light source are stationary in the same

inertial frame. Distance between the two is within a few light

seconds. Speed of light is c.

2) A measurement point is stationary in aether frame. Light

propagated in aether is coming to this point. Distance from the

light source is more than a few light sveconds. Speed of light will

not be c.

Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

It will be impossible

Constancy of light speed will be impossible. It will be clear if the formula c = f λ is looked at.

Equivalence principle will be impossible. It will be clear if the formula F = m a is looked at.

Constancy of speed of light (Reexamination)

Constancy of speed of light is not possible always. No, it will be possible limitedly in the following two events only. Btw, speed of light in mediums is not subject of this reexamination.

1) A geometric point and a light source are in the same inertial frame. Distance between the two is supposed to be within a few light seconds.

2) A geometric point is stationary in aether frame. Light propagated in aether comes to this point. Distance from the light source is supposed to be more than a few light seconds.

Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Constancy of speed of light is impossible

Plane waves of light come from the upper left (in outer space) and is incident on two glass cubes A and B. A is stationary and B is moving upward at a constant speed. Wavelength of light in cubes is A > B. Since speed of coming light relative to the cubes is different, the wavelength in the cubes is also different.

Constancy of speed of light will be impossible

Plane waves of light coming from the upper left are reflected to the upper right by an upward-facing mirror (in outer space). Generally, speed of the two lights is different, and angle of incidence and reflection is different. By the way, the other mirror is moving vertically. Constancy of speed of light will be impossible.

Space and time will be absolute (a supposition)

Perhaps, space and time each will be absolute. Each will not be affected by any phenomenon or situation (at all). If so, relativity is impossible.

About emission theory

For a few seconds only after emission, light follows the emission theory. After that, light follows aether frame. In the light emitted from Earth, Moon is in the area where the emission theory is valid.

Propagation of light (I say again)

Light is propagated in three ways (as follows).

1. In mediums, speed of light is c/n. MM experiment (done in air) is nonsense.

2. In outer space, a star light is reflected by a mirror. Speed of incident light is constant relative to aether.

3. In outer space, a star light is reflected by a mirror. Speed of reflected light is constant relative to the mirror (the emission theory).

In three pictures sbove each, speed of light to a moving observer follows Galilean transformation.

Constancy of speed of light (in vacuum)

If light source and measuring device are in an inertial frame (A), speed of light is c. On the other hand, if light is coming from different inertial frame (B), speed will not be c. And if light is coming from that inertial frame (B), and is transmitted or reflected by glass or mirror located on this inertial frame (A), speed will be c.

Note: Above all is in the area where the emissions theory is valid.

Constancy of speed of light

Basic problem seems to be left in speed measurement (also in wavelength measurement) of light. A thought experiment below will be free from the problem.

Remind Fizeau measurement of light with one gear. This thought experiment done on moon’s surface is with two gears. A device telescope-like is pointed at a star, and star light is visible through two gears (the two are placed on front and rear of the device). When two gears start rotation (rotation speed of the two is the same), and speed increases, starlight will disappear.

Note: By measurements of plural stars, existence of aether will emerge.

Constancy of speed of light

Light of a star arriving in space is being reflected by a mirror. Speed of reflected light relative to the mirror is c. Speed of incident light relative to the mirror is also c? Since f of the two lights is the same, λ is also the same?

Secular aberration and aether : an essay (part 2)

Two phenomena will cancel each other out and Mars will be visible at right above. This total cancellation will be actual (regardless of direction and distance. imagine letter F and also distorted F). In other words, in the appearance of objects of solar system, positional shift due to secular aberration will be cancelled out.

Note : Ratio of horizontal lines to vertical line of letter F is the same in the sky and in a tube. It will be the same also in distorted F. ct: vt = ct’: vt’.

Secular aberration and aether : an essay (part 1)

In my mind, an illustration of planetary aberration of Mars (I saw in a textbook) is even now attractive. Like that, is it possible to illustrate secular aberration of Mars ? The following is a prototype. Orbits of Mars and Earth are assumed to be parallel lines (as equal sign=). Mars is located right above Earth, and two stars are moving to the left at 30 km/sec. Geometric center of spherical waves of Mars does not move in the frame of aether. Therefore, light of Mars comes to Earth from slightly behind. On the other hand, aberration observed in hollow tube (located in outside the atmosphere) displaces the apparent position of Mars slightly forward.

About aberration

◎ If observer is stationary relative to aether, no aberration will occur. Aberration occurs due to observer’s motion relative to aether.

◎ Aberration is not a phenomenon of each star, but a phenomenon of distortion of celestial sphere or aether frame.

Apology

It seems that my previous post (February 28) was not valid thought experiment. Sorry for that. But, how about if uniform linear motion of space probe is assumed to be uniformly accelerated motion in a straight line? No, it would still not be an impactful thought experiment.

Aether is real

There are words : solar apex and solar antapex. Following is a related thought experiment. In outer space, there is a space probe. Outwardy, it looks like sea urchin on beach. Main body is sphere and many long tubes are attached. These tubes are pointed on the celestial sphere at equal intervals. Light sensor at bottom of each tube detects light that reaches bottom of tube.

Recall illustration of aberration. If space probe were in a uniform linear motion, all tubes will not detect light. As a result, uniform linear motion of space probe relative to celestial sphere and aether will be revealed quantitatively.

Speed of light (a thought experiment)

Descartes said like this, “divide the difficulties”. The formula for

sound Doppler effect is simplified as follows.

In vacuum, an observer is moving (at different speed) relative to a

light source stationary. Formula c = fλ is valid for light source

and observer each. The two formulas show the reality as it is. In

the observer’s formula, c is variable.

About aether

A star is shining in outer space. From the light (spherical waves) emitted from this star, effect of proper motion of the star is eliminated (cancelled) by aether. Therefore, light of two adjacent stars on the celestial sphere always arrive at the earth at the same speed (the same aberration).

Light of stars on the celestial sphere shows the position of light source only. It is caused by aether.

Motion of the star in the line-of-sight direction (relative to aether) will vary f and λ of light. Also it will vary bright lines of spectrum.

About constancy of speed of light

In outer space, light is propagated on aether. On it, there is no doubt because proper motion of every star (including planets) is ignored. Therefore, constancy of light speed is unthinkable for an observer moving relative to aether.

Is equivalence principle true?

A disk is rotating. Tilt of axis of rotation is 45 degrees. Centrifugal force (inertial force) and gravity will be non-interfering and independent. In addition, gravity of the moon is also acting.

About contancy of speed of light

Is light speed constant or not ? It will depend on experiment. In an experiment, it is constant (invariable). In an experiment, it is not constant (variable).

Sagnac effect and medium

A pillar of glass laying horizontally is accelerating to the right. Light is emitted from light sources (frequency is the same and constant) settled on rear and front ends of the pillar, and interference fringes are observed at the center of the pillar. Varying of interference fringes will reflect varying of acceleration. Sagnac effect will also occur on acceleration in a straight line.

Gravitational redshift (reference)

A passenger car is moving in a uniform accelerated motion to the right. The light emitted from the light source on the right inner wall (frequency is constant) is measured on the left inner wall. The wavelength is measured longer than when the passenger car is not accelerating. The frequencies are the same. As shown before (Dec 19, 2020), difference in color is caused by difference in frequency, not by difference in wavelength. No redshift will be observed.

Gravitational redshift

Laser beam is emitted from the ground, reflected by the mirror at the top of the high tower, and returned to the ground (close to the emitted point). Frequency at these three points are the same. As shown before (Dec. 19, 2020), the difference in color is due to the difference in frequency, not wavelength. Therefore, there will be no gravitational shift (red or blue) in the returned light. The same will be true for the light coming back from geostationary satellites.

Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Speed of light variable

In outer space, toward a star, an observer is moving in a uniform accelerated motion. The value frequency is increasing. Therefore, in the equation light speed = frequency X wavelength, one of the two : wavelength or light speed must vary. It must be the speed of light that vary.

Bending of light

A passenger car is moving in a uniform accelerated motion to the right. In the car, a ray of light emitted downward from the roof will be bent to the left (from viewpoint of the car). This is not a phenomenon caused by gravity.

Laser light is coherent (P.S.)

Laser sources are placed at both ends of the long horizontal supporting arm, and interferometer is placed off the midpoint between the two. Supporting arm rotates gently (on the ground surface) as in the MM experiment. This experiment will be sufficient on an easy chair.

Laser light is coherent

Laser light is coherent. So, interference fringes will be visible when lasers of two light sources (the same frequency) separated in space are overlapped. Experiments using this phenomenon in air and vacuum will be a follow-up to the MM experiment.

Speed of light is variable

A book says that a photon (even a single one) has attribute of wavelength. Yes, wavelength is in the equation that shows energy and momentum of a photon (even a single one). And the motion of an observer has no effect on the wavelength of a photon of light coming from outer space. The equation light speed = wavelength X frequency shows that light speed is variable.

Speed of light will be variable

Speed of light (for an observer) will be variable. One thought experiment that shows this consists of a moving mirror in outer space and incident and reflected light (of a certain star). In this thought experiment, light is propagated in two ways (propagation on aether and propagation follows the emission theory for a few seconds only). However, the following thought experiment will be possible also.

A space probe loading a frequency measuring device is moving along the light path of a certain star in outer space. Wavelength of incoming star light is not affected by the motion of the space probe. That is, the speed of light varies in the formula : light speed = frequency X wavelength.

Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Difference of color

The color is said to be due to the difference in the wavelength of light. It must not be. It must be due to the difference in the frequency. The color of the light varies as an observer move closer to or further from the light source. The wavelength of light coming in this situation cannot vary. The relativity twists the facts.

Light rays (monochromatic laser) are emitted from one light source into water and air. The frequency in both media are the same, but the wavelengths are different. What is the color development of the color film exposed in both media?

Lorentz transformation

In a web-site titled “Why is the Light Speed constant ?” (In Japanese), there is a writing as follows. “I googled ‘Einstein, constancy of speed of light, evidence’. But I couldn’t find any evidences for it in literatures. Regardless of this, Lorentz transformation seems to be active ?

Emission theory (rewritten)

In the speed of light measurement by Evenson et al.(in 1972), error was ± 1.2m / sec. This value seems to be unrelated to directivity of the light path on the celestial sphere. This will support the emission theory.

As written formerly, in outer space, light is propagated in two ways. Imagine a mirror that is reflecting star light waves.

About speed of light

Snails, TGV trains, sound waves (in air), sound waves (in railroad rails), earthquake waves, light waves (follow emission theory : for a few seconds only : in vacuum), light waves (follow aether frame), light waves (in air : in various pressures), light waves (in media other than air). All follows Galilean transformations.

A site on anti-relativity (and on others : in Japanese)

It has been more than a year since a site of volunteer members of the Science Council of Japan was published. But there seems to be no reaction from the same field of physics.

https://reriron.kage-tora.com

Acceleration and non-acceleration

A laser beam is emitted from the light source on the right wall inside a passenger car (vacuum) and is reflected by a mirror on the left wall. Then, standing waves are formed. Now, this passenger car begins acceleration to the right. Standing waves will lose their form and disappear. Also, the speed of light can be said that it is not constant.

Accelerated frame and non-accelerated frame

A passenger car is accelerating to the right. Light is emitted from light sources (frequency is constant) settled on rear and front walls in the car, and interference fringes are observed at the center of the car. Varying of interference fringes will reflect varying of acceleration. Sagnac effect will also occur on acceleration in a straight line.

Speed of light

In the value of speed of light measured by Evenson et al (in 1972), error is ± 1.1 m / s. If the measurement device is moved at a higher speed, a different value will be read. Also, if light source is moved, a different value will be read.

Acceleration and non-acceleration (inference)

A passenger car is accelerating to the right. In rear of the car, there is a light source and in front, an observer. The number of waves existing in the passenger car during acceleration will be larger than before acceleration. The difference between acceleration and non-acceleration will not be relative but be absolute. PS : Inside of the passenger car is vacuum.

The emission theory

A measurement of speed of light is done by Evenson et al, in 1973. With modifying of this measurement, the emission theory will be proved to be true. This is, by motion of light source, it will be possible to detect effects of the few air molecules remaining in vacuum. Then, with motion of light source or with motion of measurement device, the refutations will be closed. There may be other ways, but the above will be enough for the validity of the emission theory.

Speed of light can vary (restating)

For an observer, speed of sound waves and water surface waves can vary. It is the same for light waves propagating through aether. It is the same also for light waves that follow the emission theory. Goodby relativity.

Emission theory

Emission theory will be valid on the light leaving light source (in vacuum). But it will be valid for a few seconds only. And it will explain all of the behavior of light. No special treatment is needed. Galilean transformation is everything. Space-time is absolute. Goodbye Lorentz transformation. Goodbye warped coordinates.

Emission theory (restating)

Light is emitted from two point sources. The two are moving in relative motion. Frequency is assumed to be the same. The speed of lights is the same for each of the two light source frame (wavelength is the same also). In short, the propagation of light will follow the motion of the light source. The natural explanation will be the emission theory. It is a hypothesis that emission theory is valid only for a few seconds.

About emission theory

The speed of light inside glass is c / n. And it is said that in the space between molecules in glass, light moves at c. If so, the speed of light going out of the glass (to vacuum) will also be c. The emission theory will be correct.

Local inertial frame

An elevator is falling in free fall. Imagine many mass points regularly arranged in space inside the elevator. The direction and magnitude of vectors of the inertial force acting on the mass points are all the same. There will be no local inertial frame.

Inertial force and gravity are acting on each mass point in the falling elevator. Is the action-reaction law valid for these two forces ? However, it is not problem of relativity.

Local inertia frame

On a plane (no friction), two elevators are separating horizontally. One is in accelerated motion, the other is in non-accelerated motion. With an accelerometer, it is possible to determine which one is accelerating. And there is no local inertial frame in an accelerating elevator.

.

Action-reaction law (reposting)

The original text of Newton’s third law starts with action and reaction (F=-F). But many texts in books and websites start with two bodies (objects). Why? To prevent people from realizing that the inertial force is not fictitious force, but true force.

Rotary motion (in vacuum)

A disk is rotating (relative to the celestial sphere). At any mass point on the disk apart from the center, centripetal force is acting as action and centrifugal force is acting as reaction. Both are not fictitious force.

Two disks A and B the same are rotating. The rotary speed of A is twice the rotary speed of B. The physical effect (of dynamics) of rotation does not extend beyond the disks.

About inertial force

A body is placed on a plane (no friction). The body has two strings (zero mass), the left string is tied to a wall and the right string is pulled by the force ma to the right.

Then the left string is removed. The body begins accelerating by force ma to the right. There is no change in the tension of the right string. According to the action-reaction law, inertial forces cannot be fictitious.

About inertial force

In the action-reaction law, inertial force is always a reaction. Attention, action is a force and reaction is also a force. The accepted view that inertial force is fictitious force and has no reaction is unacceptable.

Local inertial frame

An elevator is falling in free fall. On a horizontal plane, multiple observers are moving in uniform linear motions. For these observers, the elevator draws parabola and is in an accelerated frame. This is, the accelerated frame and the non-accelerated frame all are white and black. This means that there is no inertial frame in the accelerated frame. Even it be local.

About free fall

Is there a unified explanation for free fall and similar form of fallings ? Is there a unified explanation for the local inertial frame and the adjacent spots ? Probably not.

About inertial force

Inertial force seen from the accelerated frame is said to be fictitious. Who brought it (for the first time) and when? This my doubt is still suspending. This is brought after advent of general relativity ? They seem to say that inertial frame in an elevator in free fall is the same to accelerating passenger cars (also to acceleration in general). Also they seem to say that this problem is within the framework of Newtonian mechanics.

All about inertial forces

A body is hung by a string from the roof the passenger car accelerating to the right. The string is leaning to the lower left. The leaning of the string depends on the equilibrium of forces. The string is under tension. The leaning of the string is the same for one outside the car and for the other inside the car. Inertial force is not fictitious to them.

Inertial force is not fictitious

Three passenger cars are moving in different accelerated motions. These are shown with the formula, F = ma, 2F = m2a, 3F = m3a. Inertial force will not be fictitious (even for those in the passenger car).

Centrifugal force : reconsidering

Two mass points a and b (with large difference of mass) are in motion of two-body problem (a large, b small). One picture is in outer space, and the knot of a,b is gravity (b is in a circular motion). The other picture is on a plane (no friction), and the knot is tension of a string (the mass of the string is zero). In the two pictures, the centrifugal force of b is a vector that is on the extension line of a,b. The reaction is gravity in one picture and tension of the string in the other picture. Where and how is the centripetal force?

Tension of the string between a and b is constant. Gravity is not constant.

Inertial force, centrifugal force, centripetal force (an essay)

Between accelerated motion and non-accelerated motion (uniform linear motion), there is an immovable distinction. And accelerated motion is always accompanied by an inertial force (corresponding to the vector of motion). These are based on the existence of absolute rest frame.

A motion of a disk rotating is an acceleration motion. And the disk is accompanied by an inertial force called centrifugal force. It is said that centrifugal force depends on the situation of observer. But the physical phenomenon (centrifugal force) cannot be influenced by observers. Centrifugal force will show the same value to everyone.

The wiki defines centripetal force as “the force that moves an object in a curved motion”. But is that the correct definition? Is mere external force centripetal force also? Isn’t tension, tensile stress, gravity, etc. all the same? Is there any commonalities (grouped together)?

Propagation of gravity

The propagation of gravity will be done in an instant. For this, here are two reasons. One reason is that two-body problem, many-body problem are true for celestial bodies. The other reason is that the whole solar system is in an uniform linear motion and planets are in elliptical revolution on their revolution planes.

Perihelion shift of Mercury (an essay)

On planets, it is said that centrifugal force caused by orbital motion is balanced with attractive force of sun (and the action and reaction are equal). On Mercury, it will stand up also. But exactly ? Solar wind or some other solar- derived substances seem to go down slightly speed of orbital motion of Mercury (one of perturbation ?). If so, centrifugal force will be reduced accordingly. On the other hand, attractive force of sun will not be affected at all. This may be the main reason for the perihelion movement of Mercury.

Perihelion shift of Mercury (an essay)

A celestial body called Vulcan is revolving on orbit of Mercury. It has the same mass and revolution cycle as Mercury. And diameter is twohold (the both stars are uniform in density). Since the sun’s gravitational field is non-uniform, the sun’s gravity acting on both stars will be slightly larger in Vulcan and smaller in Mercury. The value of perihelion shift also likely will be similar. In short, the size of the celestial body (close to the gravitational source like Mercury) will be the main reason for the perihelion shift.

Imagine a cone with evenly spaced concentric circles on its surface. The non-uniformity of gravity will be exponential non-uniformity.

Perihelion shift of Mercury (again)

The main forces acting on Mercury are attractive force of sun and centrifugal force only. Hemisphere of Mercury facing sun is supposed to be A and the other hemisphere is B. The attractive force of the sun acting on the two will be A>B, and the centrifugal force will be B>A. From the look of the perihelion shift, the attractive force acting on Mercury as a whole will be slightly stronger.

Moon and earth (an essay)

Moon and earth are supposed to be two-body problem. Also supposed that common center of gravity of the two is outside of earth : the orbit of earth is perfect circle : and earth is a perfefct sphere. The strength of moon’s attractive force acting on earth and centrifugal force due to revolution of earth are equal in total (as action reaction : as centrifugal force and centrepital force).

The points on the surface of earth closest to moon is A and the surface farthest from moon is B. It will mean that the forces acting on the two points AB must be offset. It will explaine that level of high tides twice a day is the same.

Moon and earth (an essay)

Moon and earth are supposed to be two-body problem. In the illustration, the surface of earth closest to moon is A and the surface farthest from moon is B. At the two points A and B, the strength of resultant forces of moon’s gravity and centrifugal force (of earth) will be the same (act to opposite directions). It will be proved by the sameness of high tides.

Also it will be proved by stability of orbits of each body.

Pelihelion shift of Mercury (an essay)

Some wide binaries are separated by one light years. And many wide binaries are at most (as much as) by 1000 au. These motion will be treated as mass points (a point). On the other hand, there are many close binaries. What are physicists who repeat nonsense on perihelion shift of Mercury ?

Moon and earth (an essay)

As moon passes overhead, high tide (one of two tides a day) will come after a short delay. But why ? Why is seawater with a low specific gravity bulged ? Newton imagined that moon will continue falling. Earth will continue falling also. And seawater will cotinue falling too. So, it doesn’t matter how specific gravity is.

Moon and earth (rewritten again)

Allow me to rewrite again.

Moon and earth are supposed to be two-body problem. Also it is supposed that the common center of gravity

of moon and earth is situated outside the earth. And the orbit of earth is a perfect circle, and earth is a perfect sphere. In the illustration, the surface of earth closest to moon is A and the surface farthest from moon is B. At the two points A and B, the strength of resultant forces of moon’s gravity and centrifugal force (of earth) will be the same (act to opposite directions). Otherwise, earth cannot stay on orbit of perfect circle. This will explain that the level of high tide twice a day are the same.

Sorry, correction for today’s post

rotating (revolving) > revolving (not rotating)

Moon and Earth (rewritten)

Suppose the moon and the earth is two-body problem. And imagine, the earth is rotating (revolving) around the common center of gravity with the moon. The orbit is a perfect circle. If lunar attractive force acting on the center of gravity of the earth is action, the centrifugal force of the earth is a reaction. And the strength of the two will be equal. This will be also true for the earth as a whole.

In an illustration, the earth is drawn next to moon. Imagine two points on the surface of the earth closest to the moon and farthest from the moon. The difference between lunar attractive force and the centrifugal force of the earth at above two points will be almost equal and therefore the resultant force will also be almost equal. This will explain that the level of high tides twice a day are almost equal.

Note: Is the law of action and reaction valid for celestial bodies on elliptical orbits?

Moon and earth (an essay)

In an illustration, the moon and the earth are drawn side by side. Because of the lunar attractive force, seawater is bulged in the left and right edges of the round earth. The bulge is symmetrical. Two resultant forces are acting at two edges (to the opposite direction). Two resultant forces each are composed of the lunar attractive force and the centrifugal force caused by earth’s orbital motion (moves around the common center of gravity with the moon). Two resultant forces will be equal strength. This will explain that the level of high tides twice a day are generally the same.

Also, the lunar attractive force acting on the earth’s center of gravity (not the center of mass) and the centrifugal force resulting from its orbital motion (mentioned above) will be action-reaction and will be equal.

P.S. Is action-reaction in the sky exactly equal ?

Perihelion shift of Mercury (rewritten)

Mercury is moving on the revolution orbit. The sun’s gravity is equal to the centrifugal force. Because the two are action and reaction. Following are some explanations. Centrifugal force follows Mercury’s mass. But in addition, gravity is affected by the size of Mercury (and acting position of gravity is different). These are caused by the non-uniformity of gravity (in the space occupied by Mercury). And after perihelion passage, orbit will be pulled inward (from its original orbit).

High tide level twice a day is the same. Gravity and centrifugal force caused by the moon will be action and reaction. Centrifugal force is not fictitious.

Ty

In Mercury (in terms of Mercury’s size), the non-uniformity of the Sun’s gravity may be the main cause of perihelion shift. In artificial satellites, the effects of non-uniformity of the Earth’s gravity (the position of the center of mass and the center of gravity are different) are also mentioned.

All of propagation of light (I say again)

Bradley found annual aberration on gamma star : Eltanin. In books, picture of ellipse is shown. However, this ellipse must be warped because of secular aberration (not only Eltanin). With this warp, the motion of solar system relative to aether must be clarified.

Light emitted from a source in outer space will follow the emission theory. But for a few seconds only. The corner cube settled on the surface of the moon proves this.

The motion of an observer relative to light waves is the same as the motion of an observer relative to sound waves. Light waves are light waves. An observer is an observer. And everything follows Galilean transformation.

The speed of light in medium is c/n. The MM experiment ( done in air) is nonsense.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

This is the top of tall tower. Two rods of equal mass and different length are arranged vertically (heigtht of center of gravity is the same). Now, two rods start to fall at the same time. The fall of center of gravity will not be the same. Because the strength of gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. This will be the main cause for perihelion shift of Mercury.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

Let’s reconsider the main cause of perihelion shift again. On Mercury or Venus, main cause will be the size of sphere. On Earth or Mars, effect of satellite is added. On asteroids each, effects of size is negligible. On Jupiter or Saturn each, the powerful and unstable effect of the other will act. On Uranus or Neptune each, slight and unstable effect of the other all planets will act. Anyway, common view on Mercury is wrong.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

Mercury has an own size as a sphere. Therefore, the sun’s gravity will have a different effect on Mercury than it does on the center of gravity. Strength of gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Actual orbit will be different from that the center of gravity must follow. On Mercury, it will be the main cause of the perihelion shift.

Perihelion shift of Mercury (I say again)

Imagine that two Mercuries are revolving on an orbit. One is located at the perihelion and the other is at the aphelion. Gravity of the sun acting on the two is different because distance is different. In addition, there will be difference corresponding to the size of sphere (hemisphere inside > hemisphere outside). The strength of gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. This will be main cause for perihelion shift of Mercury. The effect of other planets must be slight and unstable.

.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

The perihelion shift of the earth is 11.45 arcsec / year. Main cause will be its size (size of sphere). It is the same to Mercury. In addition, the earth has a moon as a satellite that Mercury does not have. The inertial force of the moon and gravity of the sun acting on the moon are also considerable. And like Mercury, effect of other planets must be slight and unstable.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

Value 5.75 arcsec/year seems to be an observed value. In a website, contribution of other planets to this value is shown. These are added simply !! And value 5.75 arcsec (and contributions) seems to be constant every year !! On these problems, further explanation seems not to be done.

I say again, other planets will not be main cause of this value 5.75 arcsec.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

A model of Mercury is shown previously. Now, there are plural models. Length of lord and mass of weight each is different. These are revoleved around separately on the real orbit of Mercury. Maybe, all will be explained by Newton’s theory (including 575 arcsec).

Perihelion shift of Mercury

There is a model of Mercury. A long lod penetrates a true sphere and at the both ends of the lod, weights are set. This model is rotating horizontally and is moving on the orbit of Mercury (two planes fall on). Main forces acting on the weights are gravity of the sun and inertial force (centrifugal force). And each force acting on the outside weight and inside weight is different.

Inertial force pulls the orbit to the outside. But actual orbit of Mercury is pulled to the inside. Gravity of the sun acting on the two weights is inversely proportional to the square of the distance (not come out even. not plus minus zero). In Mercury, the action of gravity will be superior.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

“It can be safely said that gravity of other planets has no effect on the perihelion shift of Mercury”. It’s in a website.

Imagine that with long radius of orbit of Mercury, the space of the solar system is divided into left and right. The probability that other planets exist on the two is equal. There will be no shift of perihelion in one direction at constant speed (common view is wrong).

But main cause of perihelion shift of Jupiter and Saturn will be mutual effect of gravity. Each perihelion is shifted every moment.

Is light speed constant !?

To the upper right at 45 degrees in still water, plane waves of light is propagated. Above the water surface is vacuum. Value of inclination of waves in vacuum can be determined. And also speed of light waves relative to moving observer who moves in vacuum horizontally or vertically can be determined.

How about when there is air above the water surface ? When air is stationary relative to the water, apparent difference in looks will not be found.

Gravity lense

Gravity lenses are said to be a positive evidence of GR. However if gravity of gravitational source can be estimated, which is real GR or Newton’s theory will be clarified.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

Main cause of perihelion shift of Mercury is said to be gravity of the other planets. But position of other planets move (also position of perihelion of Mercury moves). If so, values 5.75 secarc/year is unthinkable. Main cause

will be in Mercury itself. And also it will be the same on values of perihelion shift of the other planets.

Perihelion shift of Mercury is said to be 5.75 secarc. Sometimes it is shown as 575 arcsec/100 years. Only on Mercury ? Because the value is unreliable ? For evasion ?

Perihelion shift of Mercury (I say again)

In an binary system (formed by main star and companion star), periapis is shifted also. Motion of companion star (apsidal shift) will be depending considerably on its size (mass is supposed to be the same). Common view (says main cause is pertubation of other planets) will be invalid.

Equivalence principle (I say again)

An elevator cabin is accelerating horizontally (no friction : at 2g). At every mass point (at every infinite small area), acceleration is 2g.

Eddington experiment (on solar eclipce : 1919)

Eddington experiment is said to find the bending of star light by gravity of the sun. But the additional exam seems not to be done. Surface gravity of the sun is 28.02g and that of Jupiter is 2.53g. Gravity of position apart from each surface (at each radius) is a quater of surface gravity each. Experiment of Jupiter will be possible.

MM experiment

How about MM experiment done in still water ?

Time dilation

Two passenger cars are passing each other. At the front of side wall of each car, the same light source (frequency is the same also) is settled and light ray is emitted backward at 45 degrees. Each ray is reflected by mirror sticked on the side wall wholely and is coming back. Time dilation is impossible.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

The value of perihelion shift of planets is constant. It will not be three body problem or many body problem. And it will be the same to binary star.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

Perihelion shift moves forward constantly. It cannot be explained by gravity of other planets.

On asteroids, no perihelion shift will be observed. Some size is needed.

Cause of perigee movement of the moon is written to be the sun. But it will be the same phenomenon to perihelion shift of planets. Not acceptable.

Perihelion shift of Mercury

Yesterday’s post must be the most natural explanation of perihelion shift of Mercury. Because the value of pergee movement of the moon is remarkable (around 8.85 years). On the other hand, value of asteroids will not be found. Common explanation is not acceptable.

Perihelion shif of Mercury

Mercury revolving is divided in two (hemisphere A facing the sun and the other B). Inertial force is A＜B and gravity is A＞B (center of gravity is not on the orbit).

Time dilation

In outer space ahead, two space ships are receding to the right and the left (at the same speed : aether is invalid). On outside of each ships, the same light source is shining and this light is observed by facing ship. Time dilation (twin paradox also) will be impossible.

Time dilation

Ahead of us, a light source is shining. On the left space, two space ships are passing each other (horizontally : at the same speed). How is difference of frequency of light observed by two space ships explained ?

Acceleration and nonacceleration

A passenger car is accelerating (uniformly). A body is hung from the roof, a body is placed on the floor (no friction), and a station building. Physics seems not to distinguish the three.

Accelerated motion of a light source

Light emitted from an accelrated source will follow instantaneous speed of the source. In short, light will scceed motion vector of instantaneous speed of the source. The emission theory imply the above.

I say again, the emission will be valid for a few seconds only after the emission. After this, light follows aethe.

Sagnac effect

Let’s try to explain Sagnac effect by the emission theory. There is a picture of light pathes (a light path and two mirrors form equilateral triangle). On this triangle, there are three emission points (different inertial frames). It will be a cause of this effect,).

About inertial force (I say again)

On a plane, there are two passenger cars. One is accelerating and the other is at a standstill. Difference of the motion of the two is not relative but absolute.

On a plane, a passenger car is accelerating. On the floor (no friction), a body is put. This body is not accelersted ( to everyone). From physics of 20th century, nonsenses overflow.

Eddington’s solar eclipse

It is said that at the center of our galaxy, a black hole exists. Around this center of gravity, plural stars are revolving. These orbits are illustrated. Is there a fact like Eddington’s solar eclipse ?

Aether

Speed of light relative to mediums (water or air) is constant. Speed of light relative to aether (physical substance will be) will be constant also. Aberrations show this.

Accelerated frame and non- accelerated frame

.There are plural accelerated frames and plural non- accelerated frames. The two will not be relative.

Equivalence principle (I say again)

Vector of inertial force is shown by an arrow. Vector of gravity cannot be shown by an arrow generally. The two are different as physical facts.

Glass and light (I say again)

From the right, star light is coming. Two cubes of glass are moving toward the star at different speed. In the glasses, speed of light is c/n : the same. Because in the glass, light emitted from particle follows the emission theory. By the way, let’s see two lights before arriving (see from the glass). Wave length is the same. Frequency and light speed are not the same.

No one realizes

In air, all the effect of aether is excluded. No one seems to realize this simple picture. Not only Michelson.

Whether the result of Fizeau measurement (on light speed ; with gear) varies in the direction of the celestial sphere ? And how about when it is done in vacuum ?

Are there still berievers of relativity ? Demon fires. It is not a thing of this world.

Space is rest frame

Into space, let us draw plural vectors of acceleration a. Space will be rest frame absolute.

Acceleration (I say again)

On a plane, a straight line is drawn. On this line, two bodies are receding. One is at a standstill, the other is accelerated uniformly. On the one, inertial force is emerging but not on the other. All is shown by a and ma.

But what distinguishes acceleration and nonacceleration ? In above picture, uniform isotropic aether will be hidden. This picture is not picture of geometry.

Acceleration

From nothing, “a” seems not to emerge. By acceleration of body relative to aether, “am” will emerge. Qualitatively and quantitatively.

Light is propagated in two ways

Propagation follows the emission theory is propagated in vaccum space and propagation follows aether is propagated in aether space. A mirror in outer space that is reflecting star light ray shows above.

Inertial force is not fictitious

On a plane, there are two bodies. One is at a standstill, the other is accelerating. Acceleration (a) and inertial force (ma) both are not fictitious.

There are two disks. One is not rotating, the other is rotating. Acceleration and inertial force both are not fictitious.

Reexamination of propagation of light (I say again)

In outer space, a mirror is reflecting star light ray. Speed of reflected light relative to the mirror is constant. Speed of incident light relative to the mirror is not constant (the latter is constant relative to aether).

Equivalence principle is nonsense (I say again)

An elevator in free fall is explained fully by Newton. No different explanation is possible. And it is the same even if limited to an infinite small area.

Inertial force

On a slope (no friction), a body is sliding down. Action is gravity mg. Then, how about the reaction ? It is resolved to two vectors. Inertial force is not fictitious.

Constancy of c is nonsense (I say again)

1) There seems not to be basis (reliable) of constancy of c.

2) It is easy to disprove constancy of c. And many ways of disproval are possible.

Basis of special relativity

We seem to measure c only by the light source situated on the same inertial frame. A web site says, reasonable basis of constancy of c cannot be found in web (with three words).

Constancy of speed of light

In an area where propagation of light follows the emission theory, it is constant relative to the light source. In an area where propagation of light follows aether, it is constant relative to aether. So, it cannot be constant relative to moving observers.

Free fall

Any gravity is measurable. Any inertial force is measurable. In an elevator cabin in free fall, these are measurable.

Problem is limited to the infinite small area. It is not physics.

Gravity gradient and infinite small area??

Gravity is gravity. Inertial force is inertial force. Resultant force is resultant force.

Acceleration and non acceleration

On a plane, there is a body. Difference between the two above will be evident. It is enough to keep an eye on inertial force.

Inertial force

Inertial force is depending on m. So, it is not fictitious.

Equivalence principle

An elevator in free fall is explained fully by Newton. There is no room for Einstein.

Equivalence principle

From the roof of elevator cabin, a body is hung with a string. The elevator begins acceleration upward. Can the string distinguish between gravity and inertial force ?

Equivalence principle

Two forces the same vector in strength are acting on a particle from the opposite. The two are inertial force, tension and gravity. Different combinations are three. Forget the equivalence principle.

The emission theory

If there is no rest frame in space, light must follow the emission theory (but for a few seconds only).

http://lifeafterdeath.vip/eng.html

Accelerated motion

Accelerated motion will be the motion relative to aether frame. Vector causes the same vector of inertial force. Gravity has no connection.

From every inertial frame, accelerated motion is possible to know qualitatively and quantitatively.

Time dilation

A light source is shining (frequency is constant). Two observers are receding from the source in the opposite direction at the same speed. Two observers receive the same frequency. Where is the time dilation ?

New equivalence principle

A passenger car is accelerating (at a, to the right). A body is hung from the roof by a string. Can the string distinguish mg caused by acceleration and gravity ? No, it is a joke. But a picture of an elevator cabin seems to be a joke also.

Sorry i can not receive e mail. I do not have PC.

Falling of non free

Imagine an elevator cabins are falling in various density of air. Hydrodynamics tell motions of these elevators. Equivalence principle is invalid.

Free fall

There are inumerable vectors of inertial forces and gravity everywhere. On an elevator cabin, why they are making a big fuss ?

Difference of the motion

Difference of inertial motion and accelerated motion will be difference of the motion relative to aether frame. And accelerated motion and inertial force are the front and back of a fact. Inertial force is not fictitious.

Constancy of speed of light

They say, it stands up on an observer in every inertial frame, Yes, when the light source shines in that frame, it is true.

Some man mistook this fact natural for a great discovery. And it is believed widely.

Lorentz contraction

In a moving passenger car, MM experiment is being done. Between two light pathes diverged by a half mirror, there is considerable difference in length. Lorentz contraction will not stand up.

Free fall

Vector of gravity and vector of inertial force (in free fall) are said to be indistinguishable. But direction of the two is opposite.

Vector of gravity and vector of inertial force are ubiquitous around us. And resultant forces are the same. Why they make a big fuss on an elevator in free fall ?

Inertial force ma is said to be virtual. If so, mg in free fall will be the same. And normal force will be virtual.

MM experiment

For over a hundred years, we are suffering from a picture of MM experiment. Now, imagine to replace light with beam of particles (speed is constant). And it will be real behavior of light. Time and space will be absolute. All will be Galilean transformation.

Bremsstrahlung

A website says, “A charged particle is decelerated. And energy of motion is emitted as electro magnetic waves”. But, deceleration and acceleration will be relative difference seen from inertial frames. Or, bremsstrahlung depends on the absolute rest frame?

Below is new URL of my web site. Yahoo’s service ends in Mar 2019.

http://lifeafterdeath.vip/eng.html

Equivalence principle

In space, there are two gravitational sources (point source). In the middle of the two, a small area is selected. This area will be a state of weightlessness (not zero gravity). Like an elevator in free fall.

An elevator in free fall

Action and reaction are working in an elevator in free fall. The two are equal as a whole and at the selected infinite small area. By the way, the two are equal in an elevator accelerated horizontally (no friction).

Sorry I cannot receive email. I don’t have pc.

Time dilation

A light source is shinning (frequency is constant). Two observers are receding from the light source at the same speed (in the opposite direction). Two observers receive the same frequency. Where is time dilation ?

Below is new URL of my website. Yahoo (japan) ‘s service ends on Mar 2019.

http://lifeafterdeath.vip/eng.html

Lorentz contraction

Plain waves of light (wavelength is constant) are coming from the upper right 45 degrees. Two bars of the same length are moving to the right and the left at the same speed. The number of waves hitting the bars is the same. Lotentz contraction is unthinkable (also it will deny time dilation).

About MM experiment

In a moving passenger car, MM experiment is being done. On the ground, an observer stands. To this observer, are constancy of light speed and Lorentz contraction compatible ? And also, are constancy of light speed and time dilation compatible ? I

About MM experiment

In a moving passenger car, MM experiment is being done. On the ground, an observer stands. To this observer, are constancy of light speed and Lorentz contraction compatible ? And also, are constancy of light speed and time dilation compatible ?

About MM experiment

In a moving passenger car, MM experiment is being done. On the ground, an observer stands. To this observer, are constancy of light speed and Lorentz contraction compatible ? And also, are constancy of light speed and time dilation compatible ? it

Bradley found annual aberration on gamma star : Eltanin. In books, picture of ellipse is shown. However, this ellipse must be warped because of secular aberration (not only Eltanin). With this warp, the motion of solar system relative to aether must be clarified.

Gravitational acceleration

Who started to say gravitational acceleration ? Is it a technical term really ? It seems to be an adjective.

Is there a difference between an acceleration caused by an ordinal force? If there is not a difference, a thing called gravitational acceleration will not exist.

Aether is Measurable

On the moon’s surface, there is a passenger car. To the roof, waves of sun-light (plane waves) are coming horizontally. In the roof, there is a small hole. When the passenger car moves to the right (or to the left), a point of light projected on the floor will move.

Moon’s motion (horizontal) will have an effect (on the point of light) also. The angle of light ray (in the passenger car) will not be 90 degrees.

http://www.geocities.co.jp/Technopolis/2561/eng.html

Sorry, I cannot receive E-mail. I do not have PC.