![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Let us assume that the total gravitational force acting on a
freely moving test body in a galaxy is always exactly compensated by an artificial force. In this case the motion of the test body is subject to the principle of inertia. As a thought experiment let us further assume that except for the test body, the whole galaxy is artificially set into motion in a given direction (i.e. the same velocity vector is added to every part of the galaxy). The question arises whether this setting-into-motion of the galaxy affects our test body or not. The answer according to the classical principle of inertia is: the test body is not affected by the galaxy. On the other hand, the test body is embedded in the gravitational field of the galaxy. Thus, the hypothesis that the test body is somehow affected by the setting-into-motion of the galaxy is also reasonable. If there is nothing outside the galaxy, then Mach's principle suggests that the test body's velocity wrt the galaxy does not change while the whole galaxy is set into motion, because inertia depends on the other masses which here are only the parts of the galaxy. This also implies frame dragging because the frame of the test body is dragged by the galaxy. If inertia somehow depends on the other masses, shouldn't nearby masses have a bigger effect than more distant masses? A simple hypothesis is that the effect of a distant object on inertial motion of a test body is proportional to the mass of the distant object and inversely proportional to the distance, i.e. proportional to gravitational potential lost by the test body due to the distant object (what we can call the gravitational dependence on the distant object). This means that inertial motion of the test body is dragged by all these objects. The resulting drag can be calculated by weighted averages. Let us introduce a coordinate system where the mass center of a galaxy is at rest and define an 'inersis vector field' in the following way: the inersis velocity vector at any point is the average of the velocity vectors of all parts of the galaxy, weighted according to gravitational dependence. If the kinematics and the mass distribution of a galaxy is known then it is easy to calculate the inersis vector field. This vector field obviously rotates around the center of the galaxy. E.g. near earth, the weight of the stars in our neighbourhood is stronger than the weight of the stars on the other side of the Milky Way moving in the opposite direction. Therefore, the inersis vectors in our galactic region point roughly to the same direction as the movement of this region. Let us assume that such a quantitive version of Mach's principle is realized in nature. Then a test body moving at the velocity of the corresponding inersis vector is at rest wrt the averaged movements of the surrounding masses. If the total gravitational force acting on such a test body were always exactly compensated by an artificial force, then the test body would rotate around the galaxy only by inertial motion (or rather by inertial rest). The validity of this hypothesis also entails that in order to analyze the dynamics of a galaxy, one should at first subtract the corresponding inersis vectors from the velocities of the galactic objects before applying the currently used methods. Cheers, Wolfgang How was Dark Matter calculated: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...7251463f6f78bf |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 28, 1:41 pm, "Wolfgang G. Gasser" wrote:
Let us assume that the total gravitational force acting on a freely moving test body in a galaxy is always exactly compensated by an artificial force. In this case the motion of the test body is subject to the principle of inertia. As a thought experiment let us further assume that except for the test body, the whole galaxy is artificially set into motion in a given direction (i.e. the same velocity vector is added to every part of the galaxy). The question arises whether this setting-into-motion of the galaxy affects our test body or not. Shoot a cannon from the earth. Then identify the mass and velocity parameters of the projectile that you would tweak to have the moon tag along with the recoiling planet or tag along with the projectile from the cannon. Sue... [...] |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Wolfgang G. Gasser" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
... Let us assume that the total gravitational force acting on a freely moving test body in a galaxy is always exactly compensated by an artificial force. In this case the motion of the test body is subject to the principle of inertia. Will you kindly refrain from "assuming" non-existant forces, such as qualitative "gravitational force" (ie "mass attraction"). For many years now a GFMI is online at www.paf.li/gfmi-e.pdf, where the variable, bipolar (in- & outrolling vortex) & substance-relevant gravitation can be observed & studied. How was Dark Matter calculated: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...7251463f6f78bf Nature doesn't know any mathematics & cannot be quantified (cf "Quantification Mathematics Modelling Scientific Method: The Central Problem of Global Civilization" in www.paf.li/Quantification.pdf. So please note that from natural knowledge "DM" can be observed as non-substantial & therefore invisible potential electricity at ~-5'000'000 °C, also being the core of all bodies from stars down to the energy balls ("atoms"). Cf the LQS of the EVU Part 2 in "The Primeval Phenomenon of Substance Formation" in www.paf.li/perceptions.htm#_Toc2338371. ++++ LQS = Logical Qualitative System EVU = Electric Vortex Universe; cf www.paf.li/perceptions.htm. GFMI = Gravitational Field Measuring Instrument: http://www.qualifying-science.com/do...roofofgfmi.pdf http://www.qualifying-science.com/do...ress2006a4.pdf (Engl paper Physical Congress 2006 St Petersburg) cf www.paf.li/gfmi-e.pdf; output of experiment in http://evu.paf.li, substance relevant in http://evu.paf.li/rrd/hg.html - Mercury http://evu.paf.li/rrd/cu.html - Copper http://evu.paf.li/rrd/sn.html - Tin http://evu.paf.li/rrd/pb.html - Lead |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wolfgang G. Gasser wrote:
Let us assume that the total gravitational force acting on a freely moving test body in a galaxy is always exactly compensated by an artificial force. In this case the motion of the test body is subject to the principle of inertia. As a thought experiment let us further assume that except for the test body, the whole galaxy is artificially set into motion in a given direction (i.e. the same velocity vector is added to every part of the galaxy). The question arises whether this setting-into-motion of the galaxy affects our test body or not. The answer according to the classical principle of inertia is: the test body is not affected by the galaxy. On the other hand, the test body is embedded in the gravitational field of the galaxy. Thus, the hypothesis that the test body is somehow affected by the setting-into-motion of the galaxy is also reasonable. See what Einstein wrote to Mach : http://www.xs4all.nl/~notime/inert/gravp544.html If there is nothing outside the galaxy, then Mach's principle suggests that the test body's velocity wrt the galaxy does not change while the whole galaxy is set into motion, because inertia depends on the other masses which here are only the parts of the galaxy. This also implies frame dragging because the frame of the test body is dragged by the galaxy. If inertia somehow depends on the other masses, shouldn't nearby masses have a bigger effect than more distant masses? A simple hypothesis is that the effect of a distant object on inertial motion of a test body is proportional to the mass of the distant object and inversely proportional to the distance, i.e. proportional to gravitational potential lost by the test body due to the distant object (what we can call the gravitational dependence on the distant object). This means that inertial motion of the test body is dragged by all these objects. The resulting drag can be calculated by weighted averages. Let us introduce a coordinate system where the mass center of a galaxy is at rest and define an 'inersis vector field' in the following way: the inersis velocity vector at any point is the average of the velocity vectors of all parts of the galaxy, weighted according to gravitational dependence. It is probably more complicated : Since 2/3 of the Universe has not made light contact with us and vice versa, it follows that 2/3 of the universe has not made inertial (= eq to gravitational) contact with us. This inertia is thus constantly increasing and making all objects shrink by gravitational length contraction. A clock is an inertiameter. Uwe Hayek. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mach's Principle and Negative Gravity | Too Many Kooks Spoil the Brothel | Astronomy Misc | 14 | September 6th 05 05:36 AM |
Frame dragging confirmed | moT | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | October 25th 04 01:10 PM |
The REAL Frame dragging Exp. | moT | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | October 25th 04 06:51 AM |
Frame Dragging Measure | Benign Vanilla | Misc | 5 | October 23rd 04 07:02 PM |
Dark matter and frame dragging | Ed Keane III | Astronomy Misc | 0 | January 28th 04 07:19 PM |