Improved Relativity Theory and Doppler Theory of Gravity

A Paper entitled "Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and Doppler Theory
of Gravity (DTG)" is available in the following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2007IRT.pdf
Also other papers on my theory are available in my website:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/index.htm

Ken Seto

On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 06:07:26 -0700, kenseto
wrote:


A Paper entitled "Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and Doppler Theory
of Gravity (DTG)" is available in the following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2007IRT.pdf
Also other papers on my theory are available in my website:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/index.htm

Ken Seto

Ok, Ken.

Show us how to obtain the perihelion precession from equation 14.

I'm especially curious to know how you intend to replicate the
observed relativistic effects with a K/r potential...

On Oct 12, 9:40 am, Eric Gisse
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 06:07:26 -0700, kenseto
wrote:



A Paper entitled "Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and Doppler Theory
of Gravity (DTG)" is available in the following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2007IRT.pdf
Also other papers on my theory are available in my website:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/index.htm

Ken Seto

Ok, Ken.

Show us how to obtain the perihelion precession from equation 14.

I'm especially curious to know how you intend to replicate the
observed relativistic effects with a K/r potential...

You follow the same procedure as Newtonian physics.
IRT can be used to determine the perihelion precession and to
determine the relativistic effects with K/r potential.

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:47:19 -0000, kenseto
wrote:

On Oct 12, 9:40 am, Eric Gisse
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 06:07:26 -0700, kenseto
wrote:



A Paper entitled "Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and Doppler Theory
of Gravity (DTG)" is available in the following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2007IRT.pdf
Also other papers on my theory are available in my website:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/index.htm

Ken Seto

Ok, Ken.

Show us how to obtain the perihelion precession from equation 14.

I'm especially curious to know how you intend to replicate the
observed relativistic effects with a K/r potential...

You follow the same procedure as Newtonian physics.

Then it is wrong since a Newtonian does not feature precessing for a
test body in orbit of a single mass.


IRT can be used to determine the perihelion precession and to
determine the relativistic effects with K/r potential.

IRT is wrong then. A K/r potential cannot handle the following:

* Quadrupole radiation while excluding dipole radiation.
* The right /sign/ for radiation.
* Gravitational lensing [for K = GM, it is off by a factor of 2]
* Time dilation / gravitational redshift.
* Plus a crapload of other, more subtle, effects.

This is why you have resisted putting IRT in a mathematical form for
the last 13 years of posting - as soon as you do that, it will be torn
to shreds by those who are educated.

On Oct 12, 6:07 am, kenseto wrote:
A Paper entitled "Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and Doppler Theory
of Gravity (DTG)" is available in the following link:http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2007IRT.pdf
Also other papers on my theory are available in my website:http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/index.htm

Ken Seto



Kenny boy

Have you thought submitting to Galilean Electrodynamics ?

On Oct 12, 10:57 am, Dono wrote:
On Oct 12, 6:07 am, kenseto wrote:

A Paper entitled "Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and Doppler Theory
of Gravity (DTG)" is available in the following link:http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2007IRT.pdf
Also other papers on my theory are available in my website:http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/index.htm

Ken Seto

Kenny boy

Have you thought submitting to Galilean Electrodynamics ?

It already been published in Galilean Electrodynamics.
BTW have you learned the rule for matrix multiplication yet? Do you
know that the unit of measurement of time must be universal before
matrix multiplication can be used??????
Also have you learned that the SR effect on the GPS clock is not
symmetrical compared to the ground clock????

On Oct 14, 6:52 am, kenseto wrote:
On Oct 12, 10:57 am, Dono wrote:

On Oct 12, 6:07 am, kenseto wrote:

A Paper entitled "Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and Doppler Theory
of Gravity (DTG)" is available in the following link:http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2007IRT.pdf
Also other papers on my theory are available in my website:http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/index.htm

Ken Seto

Kenny boy

Have you thought submitting to Galilean Electrodynamics ?

It already been published in Galilean Electrodynamics.


Yes, I know. You should try it again.


BTW have you learned the rule for matrix multiplication yet?

Yes. I knew it all along. It is you who flunked 9-th grade algebra,
remember?


Do you
know that the unit of measurement of time must be universal before
matrix multiplication can be used??????

No, no one but you knows THAT. You are quite unique, Kenny-boy.

kenseto wrote:
A Paper entitled "Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and Doppler Theory
of Gravity (DTG)" is available in the following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2007IRT.pdf

Your "theory" still suffers from problems that were pointed out
long ago. Take, for instance, you definition of relative
velocity on p. 4:

v = \lambda (f_aa - f_ab),

along with your definitions of the speed of light,

c = f_aa \lambda

and \gamma,

1 / \gamma = F_ab / F_aa.

Now, f_aa is the "[i]nstantaneous frequency measurement of A's
standard light source as measured by A", and F_aa is the
"[f]requency of a standard light source in A's frame as measured
by A." There is no reason at all not to equate these two
arbitrary "standard" light sources, so that f_aa = F_aa. Then,
unless something is very wrong, f_ab = F_ab. Then you have,
assuming your \gamma is the same as everyone else's \gamma:

f_ab / f_ab = \sqrt ( 1 - v^2 / c^2 )
= \sqrt ( 1 - (\lambda (f_aa - f_ab))^2 / (f_aa \lambda)^2 ).

Square both sides, multiply by f_aa^2, and expand the squa

f_ab^2 = f_aa^2 - f_aa^2 + 2 f_aa f_ab - f_ab^2,

or

2 f_ab^2 = 2 f_aa f_ab

which means that f_aa must equal f_ab. In other words, just as
before, your equation for v only works if v = 0.


As another example of a fundamental problem, look at Eq. 11 on p.
6, which purportedly gives the energy of a single particle:

E = M_0 \lambda^2 f_aa^2.

This means that you can change a particle's energy just by
choosing a different "standard" light source. That is absurd.

--
Thomas M. Sommers -- -- AB2SB

T.M. Sommers wrote:

As another example of a fundamental problem, look at Eq. 11 on p. 6,
which purportedly gives the energy of a single particle:

E = M_0 \lambda^2 f_aa^2.

This means that you can change a particle's energy just by choosing a
different "standard" light source. That is absurd.

Ignore this bit. I don't know what I was thinking.

--
Thomas M. Sommers -- -- AB2SB