Michelson-Morley experiment (done in air) is nonsense (クリ)
In air, light is propagated at c/n. So, the result of M-M experiment (done in air) is only natural.
In a book "Theory of Relativity" by Pauli, W 1958, it's written as follows (quoted from English version ; in 1-6). "Rather should one say that for an observer moving with medium, light is propagated as usual with velocity c/n in all directions".
There are two figures A and B that draw Sun and Mercury. A shows Mercury on the line of action of gravity of Sun extending from the left. Distance between two stars is 50. In B, Mercury is divided into two hemispheres, left and right. The distance between center of sphere (of A) and the center of gravity of two hemispheres each is 1. In B, denominators of formula for magnitude of gravity are 49 and 51. And squared are 2401 and 2601.
Magnitude of gravity is 2500 in A and 2501 in B. Size of sphere seems to be related to magnitude of gravity. Spherical shell theorem will not be valid. Main reason for perihelion shift of Mercury will be its size.
Note) In this post, only gravity of Sun is under consideration.
◎ Perihelion Shift of Mercury
There is a figure of Mercury. Mercury is drawn as a circle. Plus, the center of it and an arc are drawn. This arc passes through the center and is extending symmetrically upward and downward. This arc is part of circle centered at the center of Sun that is located on the right of this figure. Therefore, the area of Mercury divided by the arc is left > right. Thus, actual magnitude of centrifugal force of Mercury due to its orbital motion will exceed the magnitude calculated as a point. Probably, this will be the main reason for perihelion shift of Mercury.
Note : For planets with satellites, perihelion shif seems to be larger. This will be due to centrifugal force.
Note : There must be more unknowns in perihelion shift.
◎ Doppler Effect of Light
Frequency of incoming light varies with the motion of an observer. In the formula c = fλ, it is clear that the speed of light (for the observer) cannot be constant.
Four the same spheres connected to the ends of two rods are rotating on a plane (no friction). Asuume the bar as a cross and the whole as a disk. At any point on the rod, the magnitudes of the centrifugal force and centripetal force are equal, as shown by Newton's third law of motion. That is, centrifugal force (and centripetal) is not fictitious to an observer in any frame.
A mass point is placed in aether frame, but when it is forced to move other than uniform linear motion (including zero speed) relative to aether frame, it shows resistance called inertial resistance. Inertial resistance is commonly said to be inertial force. Inertial force will correspond to motion of the mass in aether frame, qualitatively, quantitatively.
Allow me to alter some of previous post. Previous setting was four spheres and two rods. Now,on two spheres and one rod (in X direction only), mass is two times (without deflection). Then,at close to the center, magnitude of centrifugal force and centripetal force will be about two times. Also, magnitude of centrifugal force and centripetal force will correspond to rotational speed.
About centrifugal force, allow me to post onece more. A disk and the same ten spheres (evenly spaced around the disk) are rotating on a plane (no friction). Spheres and outer edge of the disk are connected with strings of the same length. Each string will show the same tension. Tension will be a sign that centrifugal force is not fictitious.
Note) Centrifugal force and centripetal force will work on the string (on every point) as Newton's third law of motion.
Speed of gravity propagation is said to be the same to speed of light. But is it true ? Something can't be found in thought experiments ? How about Sun and Mercury ? Solar system is said to move in the direction called sun facing point (on the celestial sphere). So position from which gravitational force of Sun acting Mercury will be the position some back in time. If so, this effect will slightly acuumlate (like free falling).
In Encyclopaedia Britannica 1969, there is a passage as follows (in item "Gravitation" ; original text). "If the action of gravitation were not absolutely instantaneous"(omission)"All experiments and observations were, however, consistent with the law, from the short distances employed in laboratory experiments to the long ranges used in interplanetary calculations". It says, action will be instantaneous.
In my previous post (14), Mercury is divided into two spheres. But this thought experiment doesn’t seem to explain perihelion shift of Mercury. Because, a/49^2 + a/51^2 = 2a/50^2. Surprising ! And also, it does not disprove Newton’s spherical shell theorem ! So, my hope is shifted in another thought experiment on centrifugal force (2023-03-15).
In my previous post (14), Mercury is divided into two spheres. But this thought experiment doesn’t seem to explain perihelion shift of Mercury. Because, a/49^2 + a/51^2 = 2a/50^2. Surprising ! And also, it does not disprove Newton’s spherical shell theorem ! So, my hope is shifted in another thought experiment on centrifugal force (also in 14)..
In a figure, Mercury is shown as a circle. Plus, the center and an arc that through the center and is extending upward and downward (that is a part of orbit) are shown. This arc divides Mercury into left and right, and the area is left > right. This figure will show that actual magnitude of centrifugal force exceeds that calculated for Mercury as a point (see formula of centrifugal force). Perihelion shift of Mercury may be due to Mercury's size.
In a figure, Mercury is shown as a circle. Plus, the center and an arc that through the center and is extending upward and downward (that is a part of orbit) are shown. This arc divides Mercury into left and right, and the area is left > right. This figure will show that actual magnitude of centrifugal force exceeds that calculated for Mercury as a point (see formula of centrifugal force). Perihelion shift of Mercury may be due to Mercury's size.
Moon is said to be moving away from Earth by several centimeters per year. As proposed formally, size of Moon will increase its centrifugal force (compared to calculated as a point). This additional amount will be divided in rotation of long axis and in extension of long axis of orbit of Moon. Is Mercury moving away from Sun too ?
[Size of Mercury increases gravity during orbital motion]
Mm/r^2 is formula for gravity. There are models for Mercury and Sun. When, 2Mm is 100 and r is 50, gravity is 0.04. Next, two half spheres of Mercury are lined up on the line of action of Sun's gravity. Mm is 50, r is 49 and 51. Then, gravity is 0.0400479.
[Size of Mercury increases centrifugal force during orbital motion]
See my post posted on March 15, 2023 (or around).
Perihelion Shift of Mercury (rewritten, from my post, posted on Sep 16 or around) （クリ)
There is a figure of Mercury and its orbit. Mercury is drawn as a single point. But actually, Mercury has a size, and this size will slightly increase magnitude of gravity and centrifugal force of Mercury. Now, limit our consideration to half of orbit from perihelion to aphelion. Increase in gravity will shift aphelion in the direction of revolution. On the other hand, increase in centrifugal force will shift aphelion in the opposite direction of revolution. In increase, gravity will exceed.
Size of Mercury will cause the difference in its gravity and in its orbit. It will rotate long axis and shift perihelion (in the direction of revolution).
But, will size of Mercury cause difference in its centrifugal force ? This difference probably correspond to the difference in motion that is caused by difference in gravity.
Size of Mercury will increase Mercury's gravity. The main result will be slight expansion of orbit, and followed by shift in perihelion. Therefore, centrifugal force also increases. Newton's third law of motion will be inviolable.
Allow me to rewrite my previous post (Sep 29 and around).
Shift of perihelion is constant. Then, a doubt arises. What is momentum of Mercury ? Is it increasing ? Is it decreasing ? Is there no increase or decrease ? I'd like to hear even hypothesis.
Two Mercurys are revolving. One is in the orbit of Mercury and the other is in the orbit of Venus. In the former, magnitude of shift of perihelion seems to be larger. This is probably because effect of Mercury's size is greater in the former.
Imagine Mercury is revolving in the orbit of Neptune. Size of Mercury seen from Sun is close to a single point. So, magnitude of perihelion shift as two-body problem will be slight. And are perturbations outstanding ?
Imagine that two Mercurys are revolving in the orbit of Venus and Neptune. At two perihelions, Mercury moves in the same vector (direction and speed) as Venus and Neptune. Magnitude of Mercury's shift of perihelion will be smaller than that of the two. Because size of Mercury is smaller than that of the two.
Towards Earth, two bodies with the same mass are in free fall. One is assumed to be a single point (with no size), and the other is a long pole (falling vertically). Also assumed that gravity of Earth is constant at g. As posted formerly, magnitude of gravity of Earth acting on two bodies will be former < latter slightly. As example, in my former post, it was 0.04 < 0.04000479. So latter continues to fall in advance. And,it seems that the shift of perihelion of Mercury is caused by its size.
Value of perihelion shift of Mercury is 5.75 seconds/year (observed). Of this value, 5.32 seconds/year is said to be caused by gravity (perturbation) of other planets. And remaining 0.43 seconds/year is attributed to general relativity. Here, a question arises. Why is perihelion shift (of each orbiting) the same regardless of the direction and distances of other planets that exert gravity on Mercury ?
In a site in English "Perihelion Precession of the Planets", there are tables on observed values and on theoretical values for perihelion shift on planets (of solar system). The same question arises.
If one centroid is an approximation, two centroids are also approximation. But an inequality 0.04 < 0.0400479 will be a problem presentation for Newton's spherical shell theorem.
Shift of Perihelion and Vernal Equinox of Earth (fake ?) (クリ)
A drawing shows Sun, Earth, and orbit of Earth. It also shows shift of perihelion of Earth (in the direction of revolution, annually) and shift of vernal equinox (in the opposite direction of revolution, annually). Shift of vernal equinox is said to be caused by precession of rotation axis (of Earth). Precession of rotation axis ? Really ? Shift of vernal equinox seems to be caused by extra centrifugal force due to size of the Earth. There is no other reason than that it seems to fit well.
Note: Perihelion is said to take about 110,000 years, and vernal equinox takes about 26,000 years to complete one revolution.
Title of the page of the National astronomical observatory (of Japan) ephemeris computation office is shown below. Sorry for repeated addition.
暦Wiki/近日点の移動－国立天文台暦計算室
Shift of Perihelion and Vernal Equinox of Earth (question) (クリ)
A question arises. Aren't shift of perihelion and vernal equinox (of Earth) in the same direction and magnitude ? To me, it is probable but not certain. I'll leave it to the physicists.
In a web-site in English titled "Perihelion Precession of the Planets", there is a table on observed rates from Mercury (5.75 seconds/year) to Neptune (0.36 seconds/year). In these, direction of precession is the direction of planet's revolution, and these magnitude are assumed to be constant. Let's assume this table is true. So, this phenomenon will be caused by two bodies: planet each and Sun.
Adams and Le Verrier predicted the existence of Neptune and its position on the celestial sphere (from the precession of Uranus's position). But it was temporary and exceptional precession (perturbation).
Perihelion shift of Mercury is 575 seconds in 100 years. In wikipedia, there is a site titled “Perigee Shift” (in Japanese). In it, it’s stated that 532 of the 575 seconds are caused by perturbations due to gravity of other planets, and remaining 43 seconds are caused by the effects of general relativity. Simply adding up gravity of other planets ? Is this A THEORY ?
Moon occults (covers up) star A on the celestial sphere. In this occultation, there is a moment when star A, center of Moon, and an observer make a straight line. An artificial disk the same apparent diameter (as Moon) follows Moon at the same apparent speed (as Moon). And it occults star A in the same way (as Moon). If occultation time is the same, there will be no bending of light due to gravity.ｗ
Every mass point is either in motion or not. Motion is said to be relative, but this will be only appearance. For mass points in motion, there are motions in which vector of motion (magnitude and direction) vary and motions in which there are no varying. In motions varying, inertial force that vary (qualitatively or quantitatively) are recognized. In motions without varying, inertial force are not recognized.
The above will be depending on existence of a uniform isotropic aether in space. Every motion relative to aether (absolute rest frame) will be measurable by optical way easily.ｙ
Rotational momentum seems to be no matter. In the rotational motion of a body (imagine a disk), there is a state of speed zero (no rotation). And on both sides of it, there are plus and minus rotations. The two behave symmetrical ly. We can see the two Qualitatively and quantitatively.
But what about linear momentum ? Even in the linear motion of a body, there will be a state of speed zero (no moving). And on both sides of it, there will be plus and minus moations. The two behave symmetrically. However, we cannot see the two.
Speed of sound waves is constant only with respect to air, which is medium of propagation. Speed of light waves will probably be constant only with respect to aether, which is medium of propagation.
Therefore, calculating equation for frequency of light waves observed by an observer must be the same as culculating equation for frequency of sound waves observed by an observer.
Sound Waves, Light Waves and an Observer (summary) (中山)
Sound waves propagate through air, and light waves propagate through aether. Medium is uniformly isotropic, and speed of waves with respect to medium is constant. So, when a point-like wave source is stationary in medium, waves drawn on a plane are concentric circles. Therefore, if an observer is moving with respect to medium, speed of sound waves and light waves for the observer is not constant.
Note: Light waves using air as a medium propagate in the same way as sound waves.
Light propagates in two ways.
1) A reflector placed on moon’s surface is irradiated with laser light, and by reflected light, distance to Moon is measured. Error is a few centimeters. Laser light emitted from light source will follow emission theory for one second at least. This guess can be scored 90 points out of 100 points.
2) Various types of aberration. Light will follow reference frame of aether after passing through the region 1 above. This guess can be scored 120 points out of 100 points.
Note) In air,light propagates following to reference frame of air. So, MM experiments done in air is nonsense.
As posted preciously (one of which is on 2023-2-16), constancy of speed of light is impossible. Therefore, time dilation and Lorentz contraction are also impossible. Without a doubt.
Space is filled with aether. For light, aether acts as a medium (as a reference frame). In other words, light propagates at the same speed through aether. Regardless of the direction of propagation. Earth is moving at different speeds with respect to aether. Therefore, speed of light with respect to Earth is different
Aberration is a phenomenon completed in upper atmosphere. It is the same as refraction. Result of Airy's experiment (tube of telescope is filled with water) is only natural.
Due to aberration, it is said that visible position (direction) of celestial bodies shift beyond the direction of motion of Earth. No, shift will be behind the direction of motion of Earth. This will be clear by illustration of light rays in atmosphere.
Draw trajectory of position of a celestial body (on celestial sphere. returns to source every year). Ellipse of annual aberration will be warped by secular aberration. Daily aberration will be many small circles (365 pearls).
For a few seconds after emission, propagation of light will follow emission theory, and then follows the aether reference frame (as written before). In other words, from the aether reference frame, speed of light will vary, and energy of a photon will also vary. It is said that energy of light is proportional to its frequency.
Note) The above will be possible to explain accuracy of measuring the distance to Moon (by laser) and aberration without contradiction.
In space, spaceship is floating (not accelerating). From this spacecraft, multiple probes begin a uniform linear motion towards assigned star on celestial sphere. A light source set on the probes that shines at a certain frequency is visible from the spacecraft.
Is the assumption that propagation of light in two ways (written before) correct ? If correct, frequency of probe's light (reaches the spacecraft) that emitted from before and after a few light-seconds distance will be different (although in rare cases it may not be different). The two, emission theory and aether will revovebe as phoenixes.
Annual aberration and daily aberration mean motion of Earth (with respect to aether). Aether is real existence. On the other hand, if the distance to the light source isnot too far (no, even the distance to the Moon also !), propagation of light will follow emission theory. Relativity will fade away, and both aether and emission theory will revive. Someday as phoenixes.
In outer space, frequency and wavelength of incoming lights from two stars (from opposite directions on the celestial sphere) are measured. To the measurer, speed of two incoming lights will be different. And it will mean the motion (in the direction of light path) of the measurer with respect to aether.
Note) If the measurer moves in the direction of light path, frequency and speed of two incoming lights will vary. Because, wavelength of two incoming light does not vary.
Rods of length 4r and 2r are rotating horizontally in the shape of a cross. Assume that four tip of the rod each has mass point of mass m, and the mass of the rod is zero. Tension (centrifugal force) acting on the rod is a true force.
The formula for centrifugal force is F = m v^2/r. And as Newton's third law of motion shows, centrifugal force is an action and centripetal force is a reaction. The magnitude of the force is the same. The two are true forces.
Tension is centrifugal force, an effect of Newton's third law of motion, and centripetal force is a reaction. The two are true forces. Rotational motion can be boiled down to accelerated motion and non-accelerated motion (including absolute rest). Frame will be the celestial sphere and the aether.
Accelerated motion and inertial force correspond qualitatively (also, in the direction of celestial sphere and of aether) quantitatively. This will lead to zero inertial force in non-accelerated motion. Without exception. In addition, let us assume that non-accelerating motion includes absolute rest.
In outer space, frequency and wavelength of incoming lights from two stars (from opposite directions on the celestial sphere) are measured. To the measurer, speed of two incoming lights will be different. And sum of speed of two lights will be 2c (or close to 2c : constant). In post 55, it is forgotten to note. Sorry.
Accelerated Motion and Non-Accelerated Motion (again) (クリ)
Difference between the two motions above will be the difference of motion with respect to aether frame. A mass point moving in accelerated motion is accompanied by inertial force, that corresponds qualitatively and quantitatively. A mass point moving in non-accelerated motion (uniform linear motion) is not accompanied by inertial force.
A saying are trying about inertial force and gravity. What can we say by comparing the two words ? Inertial force is inertial force, gravity is gravity and both are true forces ! That seems to be all that can be said. This is a short report.
On the ground, a passenger car is moving with uniform acceleration to the right. In the car, a body hanging from the ceiling with a string is swinging to the left. The angle can be explained qualitatively and quantitatively using equations based on Newton's laws of motion. What about equivalence principle ? Is there anyone who can ?
Allow me to repeat the previous question,regarding two situations ◎ below. Two situations ◎ can be explainend qualitatively and quantitatively using formulas based on Newton’s laws of motion. The question is, can equivalence principle explain these also ? Is there anyone who can ? .
◎ Forces of the same magnitude are acting on a mass point from the left and right directions. Types of forces are tension, gravity, and inertial force. Since there are no combinations of inertial forces and inertial forces, there are five combinations of forces (ignoring the difference between left and right).
◎ A body is sliding down inclined surface (no friction).
Formula for the law of universal gravitation is F=GMm/r^2. Value r is the distance between centers of gravity of the two bodies (let's call them spheres L and R). If r is 50, the squared is 2500. It is the first diagram.
Now, this is the second diagram. On horizontal straight line, spheres L, R1, and R2 are lined up. If distance between L and R1 is 49, and distance between L and R2 is 51, the squared are 2401 and 2601. If these two are added and divided by 2, value 2501 is gotten, which is slightly larger than 2500. In other words, the formula of universal gravitation doesn't care about the size of the two sources of gravity, but in reality, there will be a difference, even if it's a little ? Is Newton's spherical shell theorem not perfect ? Is this the main cause of apsidal precession ?
Note) 2500 and 2501 are coefficients in numerator of the formula.
Note) Masses of R1 and R2 are each 1/2 of the mass of R in the second diagram.
Note: Assume that R1 and R2 are hemispheres of R (distance of center of gravity is 2).
