Re: Tom Van Flandern and Newtonian Gravity
From: Dennis McCarthy (djmenck_at_aol.com)
Date: 10/01/04
- Next message: AllYou!: "Re: Define a clock"
- Previous message: jahn: "Re: Define a clock"
- In reply to: Tom Van Flandern: "Re: Tom Van Flandern and Newtonian Gravity"
- Next in thread: Dennis McCarthy: "Re: Tom Van Flandern and Newtonian Gravity"
- Reply: Dennis McCarthy: "Re: Tom Van Flandern and Newtonian Gravity"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 01 Oct 2004 17:44:46 GMT
Hi Tom,
Excellent reply. Perhaps, you will discover that we may agree more than you
think.
There is a confusion here over the physical characteristics of a gas vortex,
which practically everyone makes, including most physicists. When we say
"vortex," we're not talking about a naive Cartesian view where the ether flows
are circulating in giant orbits around planets. The fact of the matter is that
all medium views of gravity involving the solar system and planetary systems
necessarily are a vortex hypothesis -- including your Le Sagian view. Let me
explain.
When you have a hurricane (or any other sink producing a gas vortex), an
individual molecule in the flows of the hurricane does not suddenly begin to
travel hundreds of miles in a giant circle (or ellipse) around the eye of the
hurricane. The mean free path of every molecule remains extremely small
(remember it's significantly less than a mm), and the molecules all remain
moving in every direction --north, south, east, west, up, down, etc. With
wind, whether in hurricanes or not, the very small mean free path of the
molecule elongates (slightly) in the direction of lower pressure. If the wind
is moving to the east, then those molecules do so for a slightly greater
distance, and slightly longer time in one particular direction, resulting in
the fact that more molecules are moving to the East than in any other
direction. (Also, the low pressure sink to the east also results in fewer
particles moving to the west). Thus, the *average velocity* of all the
molecules in each local group of particles is non-zero in that particular
direction -- in this case east.
If you were to just look at a computer simulation of all the molecules in a
hurricane or gas vortex, it is very difficult to detect that there is any
vortex at all. It is difficult to tell that the gas is not really in a normal,
chaotic, state of equilibrium. However, if you were to pour a visible,
macroscopic die into the vortex, you would see the characteristic vortex shape
at once. The die would not be tracing out the motion of any actual, particular
molecule or even group of molecules, but would simply and continuously be
reacting locally to the average velocity of the particles at every point in the
"vortex." That's what a vortex is: It's the state of a physical medium in
which there is a non-zero component of the average velocity of each local
system of particles in a particular tangential direction around a central
point. The vortex system leads to a tangential force (drag) on objects not
moving with the local average velocity of the particles.
Now, here are the facts:
1) You agree there is a small tangential force on the moon, pushing it outward
(due to rotation and tides).
2) You agree that if there were a moon in retrograde about the Earth at the
same orbit as the moon, there would be a small tangential force against the
moon, shrinking its orbit.
3) I also know for a fact that you don't believe in magic, so you attribute
this tangential force to the moon's interaction with the local velocity of a
medium.
4) Thus, and necessarily, you follow a vortex view -- even though it involves
a Le Sagian medium. You agree that there is a medium around the Earth which has
an additional component of velocity that is tangential to the center of the
Earth in the direction of the moon's orbit -- and this additional component of
velocity results in an additional tangential force. That's a vortex in a very
low pressure gas medium.
Now, you may retort that the additional component of velocity in your medium
is the result of the rotation of the Earth and tidal forces, but that just
identifies the cause of the vortex of your medium -- it doesn't deny that it's
a vortex.
You may also retort, that, by far, the average velocity of the particles in
your medium is almost exclusively radial -- just placed slightly ahead of the
center of the Earth. But that's precisely our view as well --that the average
velocity of local groups of particles is almost exclusively radial. But the
force is just a little bit in front of the center of the system. That's what
occurs in sink-vortices.
You may retort that none of the particles in your medium actually travel all
the way around the Earth (vortex), but that's true of all gas vortices. It is
always the detectable objects caught in vortices that will circumnavigate the
center, not the particles of the medium --which move in straight lines and in
standard gases move very short distances relative to the radius of the vortex.
In other words, if you argue that a medium produces a slight tangential
component of force on macroscopic objects all the way around a center -- which
you do -- you are describing a vortex. Yes, of course, the force (like the
velocity of the medium that causes the force) is mostly radial -- but it is not
exclusively radial (i.e. toward the center). We all agree that the average
velocity of the local medium points in the direction of the accelerating force,
and we all agree that this accelerating force does not point directly at the
center of the gravitating body -- but due to various reasons, points slightly
ahead (i.e., with a small tangential component pointing in the direction of the
orbit.)
But our solar system is not the only gravitational system where you can find a
vortex:
Take a look at this particular gravitational system:
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/archive/releases/2001/10/
Now, if you agree, that local interactions of particles of a medium produces
spiral vortex motions of detectable bodies in spiral vortex galaxies, then
necessarily you agree that the medium is a vortex. The average velocity could
be mostly radial -- but here, as cannot be denied, there again is a tangential
component to the force and this time it is not even that small.
Also, there is no need to invent dark matter in order to explain spiral
vortex galaxies as their velocity profiles match hurricanes. Indeed, the
resemblance is eerie:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://sealevel.jpl.nasa.gov/scienc
e/images/hurricane.jpg&imgrefurl=http://sealevel.jpl.nasa.gov/science/hurr
icane.html&h=300&w=400&sz=66&tbnid=ZtKfzP0vTJgJ:&tbnh=90&tbnw=120&start=4&
prev=/images%3Fq%3Dhurricane%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN
The sink-vortex view predicts such spiral vortex structures that current views
on gravity cannot easily explain --absent ad hoc hypotheses like dark matter.
Snip other helpful comments by Tom.
> > [McCarthy]: However it would not explain Uranus, which rotates on its
> > side, yet the moons still orbit its equator -- nearly perpendicular to
> > the rest of the solar system. I think it self-evident that we should
> > not seek to explain the coincidence of lunar orbits with planetary
> > rotation and planetary equators one planetary system at a time. The
> > current theory for the moons and rotation of Uranus is that it is the
> > result of its collision with a planetary sized body. But if we accept
> > the impact origin of moons, then have all the other impacts been just
> > right so as to ensure that essentially all the other major moons
> > remain prograde and in nearly the same plane as the solar system?
TVF:
> The tilt of Uranus requires a special explanation in any
> theory, and impact is as good an explanation as any. I envision a large
> impactor that gets absorbed into Uranus much like a lunar mascon, and
> slowly sinks and dissolves over many millennia. This would induce
> gradual axis tilt. As long as the tilt is slow compared to the
> precession period of the satellite orbits, they will be forced to follow
> the tilt and remain low inclination to the equator at all times.
Dennis: I'm not sure why the axis tilt would be gradual, but be that as it may,
if you
1) have the moons following the tilt and remaining in low inclination to the
equator and
2) you agree there is no magic, and that it's a material medium continuing to
change the trajectory of the moon and keep them orbiting the equator, then
3) again that is a vortex-medium view -- with the vortex being slowly tilted on
its side and the moons following suit. (Again, we are agreed the average
velocity (and force) is mostly radial, but the changing tangential component is
what would change the orbit of the moons. So while the tangential component
may not always be significant, in this case it is most certainly not
negligible.)
Where we appear to differ is the following:
A) The medium for gravity I follow has a much smaller mean free path.
B) The medium requires no dark matter for galaxies--and like all fluid systems
naturally predict spiral vortices. Thus, spiral vortex galaxies do not just
coincidentally appear and behave exactly like a medium-based spiral vortex.
They are medium based spiral vortices. (This is true even with Le Sage.)
C) its particles have an average velocity on the order of the speed of light
D) is also the medium for EM
E) Absent an efficient mechanism of matter expulsion, the ether sink view often
results in expanding planets and stars -- and so the Jupiter system does not
just appear to be exactly like a juvenile and miniature solar system. It is
one. However, the most probable fate of our solar system is steady evolution
into a binary system -- as all the planets and moons will be swallowed by
either the expanding sun or the expanding Jupiter. Jupiter will pass through a
brown dwarf phase before it becomes an infant star.
Dennis McCarthy
- Next message: AllYou!: "Re: Define a clock"
- Previous message: jahn: "Re: Define a clock"
- In reply to: Tom Van Flandern: "Re: Tom Van Flandern and Newtonian Gravity"
- Next in thread: Dennis McCarthy: "Re: Tom Van Flandern and Newtonian Gravity"
- Reply: Dennis McCarthy: "Re: Tom Van Flandern and Newtonian Gravity"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
