Re: The Pioneer Effect, and a New Theory of Gravity

On 27 feb, 13:27, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Albertito" <albertito1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:c2312431-3bd3-4331-ba04-6d5ac1af5ba0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| On 27 feb, 07:49, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:| > <shala...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

| >
| >news:a2a36f95-a077-47b9-b719-16b8fb0ce8d2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > On Feb 26, 5:23 pm, xxein <xx...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| >
| >
| >
| > > On Feb 26, 5:44 pm, shala...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
| >
| > > > On Feb 26, 2:22 pm, bkh99 <b...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| >
| > > > > It was inevitable that if there were found to be serious flaws in
our
| > > > > physics and in our understanding of gravity or such things as
| > > > > 'momentum' these would be quickly revealed beginning in the early
| > > > > 1970s, when human beings first began to explore space.
| > > > > A new summation of this theory and a set of proposed experiments
to
| > > > > test the predictions of the Unified Field Theory is found
| > > > > here..http://www.awitness.org/unified/pages/new_physics.html
| >
| > > > The orbit of galactic material on your web page may contain an
error.
| > > > You are implying that the orbit time is independent of distance from
| > > > the galactic centre. In actuality, the velocity is independent of
| > > > distance. When you consider that orbit circumference increased with
| > > > distance (2*pi*r), you will find that the orbit time increases as
| > > > well. If the particles were to orbit in the way that you show, then
| > > > velocity would have to increase with distance. This is not the case.
| >
| > > xxein: Yes, it is the case. Not as described, but the actual case.
| >
| > > I give no credence to the op, however.
| >
| > > Perhaps a little more attention of the details of the outer velocities
| > > of round, eliptical and spiral galaxies will provide a little more
| > > differentiation and insight of why that is so.
| >
| > | A visit to Wikipedia should clear this up for you:
| > |http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_problem
| >
| > | In the top-right of the page is a graph. The y-axis is velocity. Line
| > | B represents the constant velocity of orbiting material, not "constant
| > | orbit period".
| >
| > | Someone call Guinness Book of World Records... Androcles is agreeing
| > | with me. :)
| >
| > The real problem is in the manner in which the velocity is determined.
| > One cannot find the velocity directly, it has to be computed from
| > Doppler shift, and whilst Doppler got his equation correct,
| > c+v
| > f' = f ----------,
| > c+u
| >
| > where v is the speed of the source relative to a medium
| > and v the velocity of the observer, the crank Einstein got it
| > wrong and so do most astronomers.
| > In the absence of a medium the correct equation is
| > f' = f. (c+v)/c [ or f' = f(1 +v/c) ]
|
| f' is the observed wavelength, correct?

Yes.

| I also think that the relativistic Doppler formula
| proposed by Einstein is wrong.

Can you prove it?

Yes, I can prove it. But firstly, it must be clarified what
proof means in physics. Physics is more than mathematics.
A theorem in mathematics can be proved through any
of those cases of proof you're provided
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_proof
But in physics, a proof may also be an experimental
evidence. A proof process in physics often involves
experiments with the aim to test a hypothesis.
When I claim the relativistic Doppler formula proposed
by Einstein is wrong, I'm claiming there are experimental
evidences proving that's the case: Galaxy rotation curves,
Pioneer anomaly, Flyby anomaly. All these 'anomalies',
amongst others, are telling us two things, namely that
relativistic Doppler formula is wrong and that the locally
speed of light is not invariant. Furthermore, these evidences
are telling us there was no justification/reason for replacing
newtonian gravity with GR. Sooner or later newtonian gravity
will be restored as the unique valid theory that can account for
gravitation, and GR will be definitively ruled out.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Pioneer Effect, and a New Theory of Gravity
    ... The y-axis is velocity. ... Physics is more than mathematics. ... When I claim the relativistic Doppler formula proposed ... if so please show your evidence. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Pioneer Effect, and a New Theory of Gravity
    ... The y-axis is velocity. ... Physics is more than mathematics. ... When I claim the relativistic Doppler formula proposed ... if so please show your evidence. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Relativistic Physics - Science or Religion?
    ... >Modern physics, at least that part which is based upon Dr. Einstein's work, is ... >compared the time recorded by that clock with the time recorded by an identical ... He did not accept the possibility that the velocity of the trip ... but neither theory is a theory of gravity. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Has the speed of light emitted by a fast moving particle been measured ?
    ... | Does that stop you from measuring, for example, your average speed ... Light with the Principle of Relativity. ... THERE is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according ... that the velocity of light in our theory plays the ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Relativistic Physics - Science or Religion?
    ... Modern physics, at least that part which is based upon Dr. ... >physicist transported an atomic clock around the world on jet airliner and ... He did not accept the possibility that the velocity ... >with a medium, called the Aether. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)