Re: ORBITAL MOTION --MECHANICS
- From: Uncle Al <UncleAl0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:43:10 -0700
ACE wrote:
[snip crap]
No force is necessary to cause orbital motion.[snip more crap]
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0609417
http://www.oakland.edu/physics/mog29/mog29.pdf
16.8995 deg/yr periastron advance PSR J0737-3039A/B
Deeply relativistic neutron star binary
This modified first law leads to the conclusion that[snip rest of crap]
the force of gravity and the velocity of light are
misleading illusions.
<http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-4/index.html>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039
<http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html>
Experimental constraints on General Relativity
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
.
- Prev by Date: Re: atomic orbitals program
- Next by Date: Tom Potter, are you this person ?
- Previous by thread: OT: WHAT’S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 19 Oct 07 Washington, DC
- Next by thread: Lee Smolin, what's he got against strings?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
