Re: (mechanical) Gravity


JoeT wrote:
Universal Forces - A. Gravity

There is a mechanical interpretation for every universal phenomenon! I
am going to post them one by one. It is time for scientists,
particularly physicists, to bravely come back to physics of mechanics.
Now, we must give up formal-science philosophy believing that universal
phenomena are mathematically derived functions. We did not find such
well understood phenomena, as wind, fire, sound, atmospheric pressure,
heat, etc., to be mathematical functions.

Sure we did. What do you think Newton's Universal Law of Gravity is?
What do you think electric potential is?

Now, you may be wanting to confine physics to be the discussion of
phenomena where there is a physical medium present, filled with
"stuff".

I have no idea why you would want to restrict physics to be limited to
such cases.


The space in the universe is not empty. It is filled with an atmosphere
of dense

Define "dense". What's your dividing line between dense and sparse?

energetic neutrinos continuously replenished by billions of
stars at essentially an overall constant rate. Also, contrary to the
belief of scientists, neutrinos are very interactive.

Not compared to other particles, they're not. Electrons interact with
matter a whole lot more often and more strongly than neutrinos interact
with matter.

They continuously
interact with subatomic particles of matters to produce all universal
phenomena. Inside a planet or star, neutrinos continuously lose their
kinetic energies due to their interactions with its subatomic
particles. As a result, planets and stars are low energy centers of the
atmosphere of neutrinos and the atmospheric neutrinos continuously push
things towards them to produce gravitational force (The neutrinos going
into a planet have stronger kinetic energy than neutrinos coming out of
it).

Very good. Now you'll have to show that this model produces the
behavior observed and cataloged by Kepler's laws, produces the correct
precession of the perihelion of Mercury, produces the correct amount of
bending of starlight as observed by Eddington. Until you can produce
the calculations, your idea is worth diddly squat in physics.

Besides being the only objects filling the entire space of the
universe, only neutrinos have the unique physical properties that fit
those of gravity! For example, only neutrinos are capable of
penetrating through all objects

You do know that they penetrate precisely because they don't interact
much, don't you? Electrons don't penetrate very far because they do
interact, a hell of a lot more than neutrinos.

having atomic and molecular structures
to interact with all their subatomic particles nondestructively to
produce gravitational forces having strength proportional to their
masses.

Although scientists have long discovered the presence of an atmospheric
neutrinos and even its energy variations around planets and stars, they
have misinterpreted them as spacetime and curved-spacetime phenomena to
support their no-aether theories (Newton's Universal Theory of
Gravitation and Einstein's General Theory of Relativity), which are
wrong scientifically and only partially correct mathematically.

Since "curved spacetime" mimics the energy variations of the
atmospheric neutrinos around planets and stars well, the mathematics of
Theory of General Relativity is useful despite that its science is
completely wrong. The interactions of neutrinos with subatomic
particles of all matters besides producing gravity also continue to
generate heat. Paul Stone has shown that Newton's gravitational force
equation is applicable to the gravity of neutrinos and estimated the
heat produced the planets of the solar system (Sci. Physics 19 Feb.
1999).

You do know that neutrinos are detectable, and that there are many
experiments devoted to counting them, don't you?


Although scientists are able to accurately calculate the orbit motions
of the planets in the solar system, the mathematics of the current
gravity theories is wrong to predict the presence of infinitely strong
gravity.

There is no region of observable space that has infinitely strong
gravity. I don't know where you got the impression there is.

Since the atmospheric neutrinos have limited energy and
concentration like the atmosphere of air, there should be an upper
limit of the strength of gravitational force. Besides, the gravity of
stars is very complicated from their producing neutrinos, changing with
their aging and having very high temperatures. The mathematics of
current theories is wrong for use in systems containing stars! Using
mathematics to calculate universal phenomena without scientific
understanding them first is the fatal mistake of all no-aether theories
including modern physics.

In summary, gravitational force is the act-on-contact pushing force of
neutrinos. To make modern physics real its spacetime must be replaced
by the presence of a dense energetic atmosphere of neutrinos in the
universe and its curved spacetime must be replaced by the variation of
energy of neutrinos around stars and planets.

The Missions of my Posts

I would like to prove to the public that it is a mechanical world that
is logical and makes common sense

Theories are not judged by whether they are logical or by whether they
make common sense. You may think they should be. Tough.
Theories are judged by their ability to turn an explanation into a
quantitative model that can accurately predict the results of
experimental *measurements*. If the measurements are consistent with
what the theory predicts, and this is unique to this theory compared
with other theories, then this is taken to be a successful model.
If a theory does not do that (and yours so far does not), then it is
worthless as a theory, no matter how much it appeals to your sense of
logic and common sense.
You are simply hanging your hat on the wrong hook for evaluating a
scientific theory. Period.

by posting follows topics: Real
science, Gravity, Other universal forces, Light and universal
red-shift, Microwave background, Universe, Stars, Planetary motion,
Particle physics. Public debates and actions are needed for the further
development of the physics of mechanics-based new aether science now in
its infancy stage and to save our science.

Physics of mechanics has been repeatedly proven to be the only real
(correct) science without unproved postulation in the past four
centuries. It has long predicted the presence of something (aether)
having masses and relative motions taking up all space in the universe
to produce universal phenomena. Recent I have discovered that the
atmosphere of neutrinos is both the aether scientists have been looking
for centuries and the common scientific origin of all universal
phenomena. My discovery has expanded physics of mechanics to the
science of everything and again disproved all no-aether theories
including modern physics, which should be wrong to begin with since
they are based on postulations contradicting the teachings of physics
of mechanics. Like the ancient geocentric cosmology, both modern
physics and its modern cosmology are now proven to be a pseudo-science
based on unscientific postulations (those contradict the teachings of
physics of mechanics) and mathematic models.

It is time for physicists, cosmologists, astronomers, their scientific
communities, particularly the scientific research and education
agencies of our government such as NSF and NASA, which we all trust so
much, to bravely face the contradictions between physics of mechanics
and all the no-aether theories they have developed and accepted over
the past three centuries including modern physics and come back to real
science. Lets all welcome a scientific "quantum leap" from
religious beliefs and mathematic fantasies, to a simple consistent
coherent scientific understanding of the universal and universal
phenomena.

JoeT

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: (mechanical) Gravity
    ... to bravely come back to physics of mechanics. ... The space in the universe is not empty. ... belief of scientists, neutrinos are very interactive. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Ripples in cosmic neutrino background measured for the first time (Forwarded)
    ... Neutrinos are elementary particles with no charge and very little mass, ... impact on the growth of structures in the Universe. ... Oxford's Department of Physics and Dr Alessandro Melchiorri of La ... Cosmology is becoming a more and more powerful laboratory ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: (mechanical) Gravity
    ... to bravely come back to physics of mechanics. ... What do you think Newton's Universal Law of Gravity is? ... belief of scientists, neutrinos are very interactive. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Electric force and charge
    ... to continue to produce gravity neutrinos have to continue to ... "Charge" should also be some kind of energy since ... carrying to the entire space of the universe by neutrinos. ... physics of mechanics offers a consistent common-sense making ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Mechanical Light
    ... community has instead accepted light theories contradicting the science ... is the "particle wave" of neutrinos just like that sound is the ... anywhere in the universe. ... For example, scientists have found ...
    (sci.physics)