|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Theories reducing to Newtonian gravity: general relativity doesn't
__________________________________________________ _____________________
NEW CANONICAL SCIENCE REPORT Theories reducing to Newtonian gravity: general relativity doesn't __________________________________________________ _____________________ Scientific knowledge is accumulative. Theoretical and fundamental scientists require a "single comprehensive theory applying to all physical phenomena". Newtonian gravity is used for a broad range of gravitational phenomena. This implies that any theory of gravity, to be taken seriously, would reduce to Newtonian gravity in some limit. It has been broadly thought since its born in 1916 that general relativity reduces to the theory of Newton. However, articles as "On the Newtonian limit of general relativity" published in journals as Comm. Math. Phys. still revise the issue about eight decades after. Experts on the Newtonian limit of general relativity as Joy Christian openly accept that Newtonian theory is not the Galilean limit of general relativity. Numerical relativists as Miguel Alcubierre Moya recognize that "Strictly speaking, Newton's theory is not contained in GR". Unfortunately both of them failed to see the deep implications this has for the physics of gravity, some of which are noticed below. This Research report studies the Newtonian limit of six theories, presenting the difficulties and inconsistencies found when rigorously revised using new techniques. The theories considered a general relativity; nonlinear field theory; Stefanovich theory; the Weber & Mach relational theory by Assis & Graneau; Vladimirov's relational theory; and Stückelberg, Horwitz, & Piron action-at-a-distance theory worked by Trump & Schieve. This Research report shows that (i) the assertion that general relativity reduces to the theory of Newton as well as (ii) the assertion that the quadratic-'field'-low-velocity geodesic equation of motion is identical to the Newtonian equation of motion do not hold upon close inspection. It is also demonstrated that some observational difficulties of relativistic theories of gravity —such as the unphysical boundaries imposed in general relativity— are related to their lack of compatibility with Newtonian gravity. One of the main findings of this Research report is that all current theories of gravity revised belong to one of two incompatible classes, extending and generalizing the incompatibility between quantum electrodynamics and quantum mechanics denounced by Dirac. The main pros and cons for each kind are presented. Moreover, it is showed that the assertions of complete equivalence between general relativity and the field theory over flat spacetime are unfounded. Quasi-equivalence in a weak limit is showed. Finally, this Research report introduces the new post-relativity theory and discusses its possibilities and advantages over current theories. Cosmological and astrophysical puzzles, and specially the topics of dark matter and dark energy, would be solved in this new gravitational approach. This Research report starts a new era in our understanding of the physics of interactions, beyond the profound cultural divide between the relativity and the particle physicists' community in dealing with spacetime. It is a shock for astrophysicists and cosmologists who believed that our understanding of classical gravity was already complete. It is also a strong shock for some subfields of quantum gravity, specially for attempts like loop theory —deeply rooted into the geometrical language of general relativity—. It turns into a historical curiosity the premature claims about the end of science advanced on that famous book —with the same apocalyptic title— by John Horgan. Field theorists and particle physicists find satisfactory that the non-geometrical approach to gravity works better, letting us to advance in the task of unification of interactions. The relativistic field theorist and fractal cosmologist Yurij Barishev writes: "yes it is important problem that even Newtonian limit is badly defined in geometrical approach". We only can speculate that this result would fascinate even to Richard Feynman, one of the most celebrated promoters of a non-geometrical approach to gravity. Whereas this work has been well received by theoretical physicists working in generalizations of general relativity and of superstring theory, general relativists have found repugnant the idea that general relativity is not a complete theory of gravitation and that the geometrical picture is not more a fundamental part of physics —in one sense, their position is not different from that of the 20th century physicists who strongly rejected the development of quantum mechanics and its revolutionary change of picture—. Moreover, general relativists have confirming also that the usual derivations given in textbooks on general relativity are flawed. NEWS AND BLOG: ______________ http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/p.../20091005.html http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/p...encetoday.html METADATA, REFERENCES, AND DOWNLOAD: ___________________________________ http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/p...rts/20092.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Theories reducing to Newtonian gravity: general relativitydoesn't
On Oct 8, 10:48*am, ---- wrote:
.... Theories reducing to Newtonian gravity: general relativity doesn't Explicit lie. This message has been spammed individually to many newsgroups. Since the poster has no intention / history of replying in all these newsgroups, this is spam, and violates the code of conduct of this place. Just because "dicks" do it... does not make it right. David A. Smith |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Theories reducing to Newtonian gravity: general relativitydoesn't
On Oct 8, 8:19 pm, dlzc wrote:
On Oct 8, 10:48 am, ---- wrote: ... Theories reducing to Newtonian gravity: general relativity doesn't Explicit lie. This message has been spammed individually to many newsgroups. Since the poster has no intention / history of replying in all these newsgroups, this is spam, and violates the code of conduct of this place. Just because "dicks" do it... does not make it right. David A. Smith Dear David, All of us are starting to realize that the crackpot Juan R. is also becoming a professional spammer, what a pity :-( |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
new draft: theories reducing to Newtonian gravity, generalrelativity doesn't | Juan R. González-Álvarez | Astronomy Misc | 9 | April 29th 09 03:40 PM |
Newtonian Mechanics versus General Relativity | Androcles[_8_] | Astronomy Misc | 2 | March 26th 09 11:39 PM |
Quantum Gravity 240.8: How "Causal" Is General Relativity? | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 1 | April 3rd 08 07:36 AM |
Gravity, Dark Matter, Alpha, & General Relativity | Klaatu | Amateur Astronomy | 6 | December 3rd 03 05:02 PM |
Gravity, Dark Energy, Alpha, & General Relativity. | Klaatu | Research | 0 | December 3rd 03 10:11 AM |