Member John-Erik
MemberForum Replies Created
-
The article I have provided earlier contained no subscrift and superscrift. Therefore I also send a link to a PDF. See below.
Best regards _____________ John-Erik
-
Time dilation not needed is also supportedby the fact that (instead of SRT we can explain clock slowing due to speed) we can use the ether wind reducing 2-way light speed in the same way as was assumed in MMX. This explained in a post to ResearchGate. See link below.
Instead of GRT we can use the ether wind in the same way in radial direction. Instead of gravity potential we can use ether wind squared. We get an effect on 2-way light speed as second order effect for radial light only. (Einstein stated effect on 1-way light for light in all directions.) Therefore, effect on1-way light is much, much larger and equal to the escape velocity.
John-Erik
-
No Big Bang – no Pioneer anomaly
John-Erik Persson
Abstract
The relation between Newton’s mathematical gravity model and Fatio’s physical model is discussed. It is found that Fatio’s model can help us to get rid of the Big Bang absurdity and also explain the Pioneer anomaly.
Newton’s mistake
300 years ago, Newton said that he needed no hypothesis, and ignored Fatio’s idea. Therefore, he described the effect of gravity by mathematics, without explaining the cause of gravity. However, a deeper analysis reveals that the spherical symmetry in the field of gravity also demands a spherical symmetry in the body causing gravity. So, Newton did not observe a mathematical demand. The fact that gravity causes approximate spherical symmetry in large bodies makes it difficult to see the demand for perfect symmetry. Therefore, this property of gravity is hiding something to us, namely the fact that Newton’s law is an approximation by disregarding the fact that large real bodies only have approximately spherical form. This mistake means that Newton’s law is an approximation and not complete as a physical theory.
A physical theory should be usable also for aspherical bodies. To find such a theory we can split up the gravitating body into small volume elements and apply the law to each element. Then we can find the total effect by an integration. In this modified version we find a law that is independent of spherical symmetry – although a more difficult to use law. An interesting fact is that this modified law easily can be united with the physical mechanism, that was suggested by Fatio. We only have to assume that matter attenuates the flow (in all directions) of neutrino-like particles in proportion to density – probably by absorption of particles. So, if Newton had regarded Fatio’s idea seriously he perhaps would have found that a change in his model from multiplication to integration would open the way for unification with Fatio and thereby find a physical explanation. This unification means that we can explain the cause of gravity – not just describe the effect of gravity.
The idea of attenuation in Fatio’s model means a reduction of the number of particles leaving a gravitating body. The result of this reduction is an ether wind blowing in negative radial direction to the gravitating body, since the number of particles moving away from the body is less than the number of arriving particles. We therefore get an ether falling towards the gravitating body. This means that we have found the cause of gravity as composed of the number of arriving ether particles that not are compensated by particles moving in opposite direction. This (small) number of particles causes the ether wind and thereby also gravity. As a hypothesis we assume this ether wind to be equal to the escape velocity, v<sub>E</sub>.
Cosmological red shift
The cosmological red shift is assumed to indicate that distant celestial objects are moving away from us. This assumption would be true if the ether around the observed object had the same state of motion as in the observer’s position, but this is not the fact. Instead, something else is true, namely the fact that a not moving object is surrounded by an ether falling with speed v<sub>E</sub> towards the body and away from the observer. Therefore, light instead is generated with a blue shift, f’=f(1+v<sub>E</sub>/c) in ether’s frame and then observed as shifted red as f’’=f’(1-v<sub>E</sub>/c) by the observer. We can now see that the total effect in the observation becomes f’’=f(1-v<sub>E</sub><sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>). We get a second order Doppler effect in 1-way light. Second order red shifts are always red.
Red shifts are dominating in celestial observations. We can therefore conclude that the values on the radial ether winds are normally larger than the differences in speeds between objects. The radial ether winds are much larger, since a second order effect (of ether wind) is dominating over a first order effect (of body motion).
We have found an explanation to red shift without the Big Bang model. So, if Newton had regarded Fatio’s idea, 300 years ago, more seriously, we would not be disturbed by the absurd concept called Big Bang today.
The Pioneer anomaly
The radial ether wind changes the 2-way speed of light as c’’=c(1-v<sub>E</sub><sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>) in radial direction to the source of gravity. This means that c’’ is increasing with range due to decreasing escape velocity from the Sun. This increase in c’’ can simulate a decrease in the observed speed of the space station. Therefore, the Pioneer anomaly can be an illusion caused by a measurement error, since light speed is not constant. We know the escape velocity from the Sun and can easily calculate this effect. We find agreement to observations. Pioneer anomaly is misunderstood as a result of Newton’s mistake.
Conclusions
We have made a hypothesis by assuming a radial ether wind to be equal to the escape velocity and found that we can explain the following:
- Gravity to be
caused by the ether wind. - The
cosmological red shift caused by a second order Doppler effect produced in
1-way light. We do not need the Big Bang hypothesis. - The Pioneer
anomaly caused by a second order Sagnac effect changing 2-way light speed
and thereby cause a measurement error creating an illusion of a retardation
in the space station. We do not need to assume the hypothesis of an
unknown gravitational effect. - Newton made a
devastating mistake by ignoring Fatio’s valuable hypothesis. This mistake
has confused scientists for 300 years.
Newton was a religious person and that fact can explain that he regarded mathematics very high and therefore rejected Fatio’s earth-bound idea. Perhaps we should blame the scientific society, instead of Newton, since there seems to be a common mistake in science of regarding the messenger more important than the message. So, the fact that Newton was world famous and Fatio was not may be crucial for the outcome. See the references.
References
- Gravity to be
-
No Big Bang – no Pioneer anomaly
John-Erik Persson
Abstract
The relation between Newton’s mathematical gravity model and Fatio’s physical model is discussed. It is found that Fatio’s model can help us to get rid of the Big Bang absurdity and also explain the Pioneer anomaly.
Newton’s mistake
300 years ago, Newton said that he needed no hypothesis, and ignored Fatio’s idea. Therefore, he described the effect of gravity by mathematics, without explaining the cause of gravity. However, a deeper analysis reveals that the spherical symmetry in the field of gravity also demands a spherical symmetry in the body causing gravity. So, Newton did not observe a mathematical demand. The fact that gravity causes approximate spherical symmetry in large bodies makes it difficult to see the demand for perfect symmetry. Therefore, this property of gravity is hiding something to us, namely the fact that Newton’s law is an approximation by disregarding the fact that large real bodies only have approximately spherical form. This mistake means that Newton’s law is an approximation and not complete as a physical theory.
A physical theory should be usable also for aspherical bodies. To find such a theory we can split up the gravitating body into small volume elements and apply the law to each element. Then we can find the total effect by an integration. In this modified version we find a law that is independent of spherical symmetry – although a more difficult to use law. An interesting fact is that this modified law easily can be united with the physical mechanism, that was suggested by Fatio. We only have to assume that matter attenuates the flow (in all directions) of neutrino-like particles in proportion to density – probably by absorption of particles. So, if Newton had regarded Fatio’s idea seriously he perhaps would have found that a change in his model from multiplication to integration would open the way for unification with Fatio and thereby find a physical explanation. This unification means that we can explain the cause of gravity – not just describe the effect of gravity.
The idea of attenuation in Fatio’s model means a reduction of the number of particles leaving a gravitating body. The result of this reduction is an ether wind blowing in negative radial direction to the gravitating body, since the number of particles moving away from the body is less than the number of arriving particles. We therefore get an ether falling towards the gravitating body. This means that we have found the cause of gravity as composed of the number of arriving ether particles that not are compensated by particles moving in opposite direction. This (small) number of particles causes the ether wind and thereby also gravity. As a hypothesis we assume this ether wind to be equal to the escape velocity, v<sub>E</sub>.
Cosmological red shift
The cosmological red shift is assumed to indicate that distant celestial objects are moving away from us. This assumption would be true if the ether around the observed object had the same state of motion as in the observer’s position, but this is not the fact. Instead, something else is true, namely the fact that a not moving object is surrounded by an ether falling with speed v<sub>E</sub> towards the body and away from the observer. Therefore, light instead is generated with a blue shift, f’=f(1+v<sub>E</sub>/c) in ether’s frame and then observed as shifted red as f’’=f’(1-v<sub>E</sub>/c) by the observer. We can now see that the total effect in the observation becomes f’’=f(1-v<sub>E</sub><sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>). We get a second order Doppler effect in 1-way light. Second order red shifts are always red.
Red shifts are dominating in celestial observations. We can therefore conclude that the values on the radial ether winds are normally larger than the differences in speeds between objects. The radial ether winds are much larger, since a second order effect (of ether wind) is dominating over a first order effect (of body motion).
We have found an explanation to red shift without the Big Bang model. So, if Newton had regarded Fatio’s idea, 300 years ago, more seriously, we would not be disturbed by the absurd concept called Big Bang today.
The Pioneer anomaly
The radial ether wind changes the 2-way speed of light as c’’=c(1-v<sub>E</sub><sup>2</sup>/c<sup>2</sup>) in radial direction to the source of gravity. This means that c’’ is increasing with range due to decreasing escape velocity from the Sun. This increase in c’’ can simulate a decrease in the observed speed of the space station. Therefore, the Pioneer anomaly can be an illusion caused by a measurement error, since light speed is not constant. We know the escape velocity from the Sun and can easily calculate this effect. We find agreement to observations. Pioneer anomaly is misunderstood as a result of Newton’s mistake.
Conclusions
We have made a hypothesis by assuming a radial ether wind to be equal to the escape velocity and found that we can explain the following:
- Gravity to be
caused by the ether wind. - The
cosmological red shift caused by a second order Doppler effect produced in
1-way light. We do not need the Big Bang hypothesis. - The Pioneer
anomaly caused by a second order Sagnac effect changing 2-way light speed
and thereby cause a measurement error creating an illusion of a retardation
in the space station. We do not need to assume the hypothesis of an
unknown gravitational effect. - Newton made a
devastating mistake by ignoring Fatio’s valuable hypothesis. This mistake
has confused scientists for 300 years.
Newton was a religious person and that fact can explain that he regarded mathematics very high and therefore rejected Fatio’s earth-bound idea. Perhaps we should blame the scientific society, instead of Newton, since there seems to be a common mistake in science of regarding the messenger more important than the message. So, the fact that Newton was world famous and Fatio was not may be crucial for the outcome. See the references.
References
- Gravity to be
-
The ether is the reference, but I never said that it is a frame.
MMX is useless since available ether wind is around 0.3 km/sec – not 30 km/sec. Totation not translation.
MMX is not needed since 30 km/sec is detected in Earth motion in surrounding ether defined by Sun. This was done in aberration in VLBI observations on pulsar signals.
John-Erik
-
Shiva
Yes, the result is medium spaced density. No, this means zero light, since the differences are very small in relation to medium density.
All
I do not believe in density that is large near the body. Instead, I think matter absorbs a small part of ether particles. Therefore, not so many particles are leaving the body than the number of arriving particles. This means that the small number of ‘missing particles’ is gravity and also creates an ether wind in radial direction.
If ether tells matter how to move’ we can guess that the radial ether wind is equal to the escape velocity.
Assuming a radial ether wind means that:
COSMOLOGICAL RED SHIFT IS CAUSED BY ETHER MOTION – NOT BODY MOTION.
A falling ether means that 2-way light speed is changed for radial light. So:
PIONEER ANOMALY IS AN ILLUSION CAUSED BY A CHANGE IN 2-WAY LIGHT SPEED.
John-Erik
-
David
You can find more details here:
Science Journals (gsjournal.net)
https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Essays/View/8874
John-Erik
-
David
You assumed the ether as a reference frame. The ether must be the reference, but this ether must not be a frame. This is the wrong conclusion by everyone. The ether can have a state of motion changing from point to point. A field. If ether particles are absorbed (to a small extent) in matter not so many particles are leaving a gravitating body, as are approaching so we get an ether wind in negative radial direction. This ether wind is the cause of gravity. Gravity is the small number of ether particles not compensated by a flow in opposite direction.
Tell me what you think about the following:
- Ray or beam
- Tilting in reference arm in MMX and in stellar aberration.
- Compensation in the measurement arm in MMX.
- Sagnac effect in pulsar signals.
Those are important questions. A) Radial ether wind can explain red shift without BIG BANG. B) Pioneer anomaly as an illusion, since 2-way light speed becomes increasing with range from Sun.<div>
With best regards from __________ John-Erik
</div>
-
To all regarding Scientific American article about time dilation:
The tests does not confirm time dilation. Instead the article demonstrates that the speed in Cesium clocks is dependent on the clock’s speed in relation to the ether. Time dilation is a mistake introduced by Potier. He stated that light must take a longer way in MMX transverse arm, after a reasoning based on particles.
Instead a reasoning based on waves leads to the same wave front in both arms. So, we can use Galiean transform without time dilation.
3 errors in MMX
1) Potier in reference arm
2) Maxwell did not observe that available effect in horizontal plane is 0.46 km/s (rotation), not 30 km/s, (translation) of our planet. He also missed the fact that we have a vertical ether wind of 11.2 km/s (equal to escape velocity). Too low sensitivity.
3) Maxwell did not observe that the effect in the measuring arm (2 antiparallel forces) is compensated by the control of atomic separation (2 antiparallel forces). Unobservable effect in measuring arm.
MMX is useless and we only need the wave model for light. Details are available in an article to PHYSICS ESSAYS June 2021 that can be ordered from my RESEARCHGATE profile. Search on my name!
With best regards from _______________ John-Erik
-
David
The aberration in very long base interferometry (VLBI) means that pulsar signals arrives at telescopes in opposite sides of our planet with a time difference of 4.2 microsec. The aberrations disappears when calculations are moved to the frame of our sun. The explanation to this phenomenon is not the change of position, but instead due to the change of speed. So, this is a Sagnac effect and we find that:
- Stellar aberration
- Sagnac in 1913
- Sagnac in VLBI
All these 3 phenomena have detected 30 km/sec in Earth motion as a first order Sagnac effect where MMX failed by detecting second order effect. The explanation is that anti-parallel forces between atoms provide a compensation for anti-parallel forces in light in MMX.
David
What do you think about:
- Ray and beam
- Useless MMX
- Importance of Sagnac
Focus on important things.
Regards
-
What I said about stellar aberration cannot be applied to gravity, since gravity is not moving. Gravity is a stationary condition defined by a relation between particles moving in all directions with speed c.
Hallo David.
I have no more alternativs for light than wave and particle. If you have a third option please tell me.
Space can be empty, but the ether must have physical properties to explain gravity and light transmisson.
-
A devastating mistake was made in 1882 by using beam instead of ray in MMX. This created the illusion of wave front tilting in the reference arm and therefore a ‘half’ effect. The result was the absurd Lorentz transform instead of logical Galilean transform. So, light does not take a longer way due to transverse effect. The result of this error was individual aging.
Sometimes stellar aberration has also been explained by wave front tilting due to ether wind. The correct interpretation is observer’s motion – not ether motion. Copernicus said that we must regard our position in relation to the Sun when we make astronomical observations. In the same way we must regard our velocity in relation to light velocity, since light is a moving phenomenon.
So, we have much to learn regarding the wave model – and the transition from Newton’s particles to Maxwell’s waves is not finished yet.
-
Light speed is constant, but in relation to what? Something must define that constant and something must be called ether. Therefore, the same ether must also be defining the reference for speed. Light is a behavior of the ether. So, we must use the wave model for light and our problem is that we do not understand the wave model and therefore we use something better understood – namely particles. This is the wave-paticle confusion.
Another confusion is space-ether confusion. Space is the container of the ether.
The wave model demands 2 models for light propagation. The real motion of light is a vector sum (beam), but the important concept is instead the apparent motion (ray) that we can observe based on phase, since phase detection (and generation) means that ether wind inside the wave fronts becomes irrelevant. Therefore, in most cases we must use the wave vector plus only the component in ether wind falling in light’s direction.
We find that phase-based systems (telescopes, collimators and interferometers) we have made a fatal mistake by thinking that we can use the vector sum (or beam) instead wave front orientation (or ray). So, we can see, by using telescopes on light, the light appears to follow a straight line (ray) although ether wind may change. If we instead use focused light and detect max intensity (beam) we see that light’s direction depends on ether wind.
-
Error in second line. Should be:
…longitudinal to light motion…(or normal to wave fronts)
John-Erik
-
Jerry
The reference arm in MMX is transverse to light direction so light moves inside the plane of the wave fronts in this arm. the meassuring arm is longitudinal to wave fronts.
Potier suggested that light takes a longer way due to the ether wind meaning an effect in the reference arm equal to half the effect in the measuring arm. This was influenced by partricle-based ideas and in error. If we strict follow the wave model we get NO effect in reference arm. Therefore, NO time dilation according to detailed reasoning I have described many times. We must use the same wave front in BOTH arms. See this article:
https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Essays/View/8874
I have also explained that the wave model can explain all light phenomena with the wave model, so we do NOT need the particle model for light. The wave model can also explain how hydrogen radiation can be contineous although we only observe the interference frequencies. All these ideas are presented in a 7 page article to PHYSICS ESSAYS June 2021 (The wave-particle dilemma in light). The article is copyrighted so no public files. However you can order personal file over ResearchGate if you write my name on RG.
With best regards from _______________ John-Erik