Re: Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ?
From: Greg Neill (gneillREM_at_OVE.THIS.netcom.ca)
Date: 01/28/05
- Next message: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\): "Re: Relativistic CMB"
- Previous message: Nicolaas Vroom: "Re: Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ?"
- In reply to: Nicolaas Vroom: "Re: Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ?"
- Next in thread: Nicolaas Vroom: "Re: Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ?"
- Reply: Nicolaas Vroom: "Re: Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:59:49 -0500
"Nicolaas Vroom" <nicolaas.vroom@pandora.be> wrote in message
news:L7rKd.7170$kA5.450780@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
>
> "Greg Neill" <gneillREM@OVE.THIS.netcom.ca> schreef in bericht
> news:rFgKd.9151$Yg6.1354506@news20.bellglobal.com...
> > <harald.vanlintel@epfl.ch> wrote in message
> > news:1106833544.305402.176660@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > > 1. Does anyone know if the classical calculation of the perihelion of
> > > Mercury accounts for the attraction of the sun by Mercury?
> > >
> > > I stumbled on an interesting article that discusses flaws in Newton's
> > > theory, and which suggests that the sun's motion is neglected even for
> > > the most accurate calculations.
> > > It would be surprising if that were true!
> > >
> > > 2. It also suggests that when taking it into account, the correct
> > > answer may be found. Any ideas if htat could be right?
> > > http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Links/Papers/gravi.pdf
> > > Regretfully I know nothing about astronomy.
> > >
> > > Harald
> > >
> >
> > Attempts to calculate the precession of the perihelion of
> > Mercury by purely classical means have taken into account any
> > number of influences, including of course the motion of the
> > Sun. Newton's theory is completely symmetric when expressed
> > as differential equations to solve the problem.
>
> 100 % Correct.
>
> Newton's theory assumes that gravity act instantaneous.
> However if you take into acount that the speed of gravity is
> not infinite but equal to 300*c you can correctly simulate
> the perihelion precession of Mercury.
Unfortunately, this leads to the problem of the
energy of the orbit changing due to the non-central
nature of the resulting force. The magnitude of the
effect is such that it would lead to obvious changes
in the semi-major axes of the planets over relatively
short periods of time.
> For details go to my home page:
> http://users.pandora.be/nicvroom/
> and study the e-book:
> The Reality Now and Understanding.
> http://users.pandora.be/nicvroom/now.htm
>
>
> > Amongst the other factors included in "heavy duty" analyses
> > include the influences of other solar system bodies, and
> > the oblateness of the Sun due to its rotation.
> >
> > No amount of fiddling around with classical mechanics can
> > produce the correct result.
>
> There is no fiddling involved.
> To be even more precise:
> Within our solair system there is no dark matter.
> You do not need MOND.
>
> Nicolaas Vroom
>
>
>
- Next message: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\): "Re: Relativistic CMB"
- Previous message: Nicolaas Vroom: "Re: Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ?"
- In reply to: Nicolaas Vroom: "Re: Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ?"
- Next in thread: Nicolaas Vroom: "Re: Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ?"
- Reply: Nicolaas Vroom: "Re: Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
