Discussion by Robert Cheshire

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 2:17 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Discussion by Robert Cheshire

I think that this is an excellent discussion, the mathematics of the torsion and angular velocity are essentially in agreement with it. Robert Cheshire has spent months analysing the photographs in great detail, and discovered the Cheshire lines as attached. In the latest note I illustrated the mathematics with the spiral of Archimedes, but any spiral can be used except for the log spiral. The maths show that there is a rapidly spinning central core at which the angular velocity and torsion are both at a maximum. Both quantities dissipate to zero at the edges of the galaxy. The linear velocity of a star at the edges is essentially v = omega r, and is observed experimentally to be a constant. So omega goes to zero, r goes to infnity, v is observed to be constant. As far as I know, the velocity curve of the whirlpool galaxy is such that v is never zero, so the galaxy is never static. Robert Cheshire describes the fact that any orbit is due to torsion. In the solar system the orbits are conic sections, i.e. hyperbola, parabola, ellipse, and the conic section is precessing. The hyperbola and the hyperbolic spiral are parameterized in the same way, so we see already that the new equation of motion of general relativity works well.

MoreonSpiralGalaxies.doc

View article…

208(5) : Checking the Arc Length Along the Hyperbolic Spiral

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 1:08 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: 208(5) : Checking the Arc Length Along the Hyperbolic Spiral

This is eq. (1), evaluated by co author Horst Eckardt using Maxima. The conclusions of note 208(3) are unaffected. The result (1) from Maxima is diferent, however, from the result I found from a standard integral site called “SOS” and used in note 208(3). I prefer the Maxima result because it has been checked by many scientists over many years. Doug Lindstrom could use Mathematica or Maple to evaluate the integral (1). All three code packages should agree of course, and so should NAG, IBM ESSL, IBM MOTECC and so on. For such a simple curve (5) the arc length is a very complicated expression. The arc length is simply the length along the spiral. The main point of note 208(3) is to check the new equation of motion of general relativity obtained from the method of UFT207, and this equation made perfect sense for cases where the hyperbolic spiral is used. This spiral is theta = r0 / r and is analytically very simple. The equation of motion was checked analytically in another way in note 208(4).

a208thpapernotes5.pdf

View article…

207(8): The Complete Solution for the Orbital Connection

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 3:03 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: 207(8): The Complete Solution for the Orbital Connection

This note gives the complete solution for the orbital connection and gives:

partial f / partial t = (1/2) omega df / dtheta

The connection, torsion and Riemann curvature elements can be found for any orbit because df / dtheta can be found from the orbit and omega can either be observed directly or found by the analysis of UFT206. The mean angular velocity of a planet is of course well known with great precision. So I can now proceed to write up UFT207 with co author Horst Eckardt, who has contributed to a rigorous discussion.

a207thpapernotes8.pdf

View article…

Autobiography

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Friday, January 13, 2012 3:40 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Autobiography

A lot of credit is due to professional genealogists, in particular my cousin Stuart Davies of the Royal Celtic line and my late cousin Leonid Morgan, also my Havard cousin by marriage Dewi Lewis, and last but not least Sir Arthur Turner-Thomas, V. C., K. G. (Wales), G. C., who is the historian to my distant cousin, H. R. H. The Countess of Wessex. Also the work of my Evans cousin Chris Davies and his colleagues. I put together their work in one long line of sixty generations back to the fourth century and earlier, linking up with the work of Clement Bartrum on the early genealogies of ancient Britain. The Turner-Thomas site is a fantastic mine of information, and is called “Celtic Royal Genealogies”. Using the mathematics of power series one quickly finds that we are all related, especially in a small country like Wales, but also in the whole of Britain and so on. You have two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents and so on, so over thirty generations you have 2 power thirty = 1,073,741,824 parents. Thirty generations goes back about a thousand years, at which time the entire population of Wales was perhaps order 10 power 4 people. That means a lot of inter marriage and all related. The same is true for any country or even a continent. This indeed took several years of work by several excellent professional genealogists who were kind enough to help me, so there is documentary evidence for each link in the line. I am sure that the autobiography will be very popular for this reason alone. Their work is very accurate.

In a message dated 13/01/2012 09:39:45 GMT Standard Time, ver@cisp-publishing.com writes:

I am totally amazed by the amount of information in the autobiography ! Really incredible, how did you collect this information, must have taken several years ?

Regards

Victor

Victor Riecansky

Publisher

Cambridge International Science Publishing

www.cisp-publishing.com

ver@cisp-publishing.com

View article…

Velocity in Cylindrical Polar Coordinates

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Sunday, January 08, 2012 12:51 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Velocity in Cylindrical Polar Coordinates

The total linear velocity in cylindrical polar coordinates was used in the important papers UFT190 ff. It is:

v bold = d(r e sub r bold) / dt

where e sub r bold is the radial unit vector (unitless) and r the radial coordinate (metres). This is important because it was shown in Section 3 of UFT196 that the acceleration calculated from the ellipse in cylindrical polar coordinates does not contain a centrifugal part. This means that the Newton theory is deeply self inconsistent. All the calculations with velocity and acceleration are given there in cylindrical polar coordinates. They are by no means straightforward, which is why the problem with Newton was not discovered for three hundred years. Examination of basic concepts is a difficult task, so only a few scholars have done it down the centuries. AIAS is outstanding in that it addresses basic concepts without peer pressure to conform to dogma. The velocity squared is then

v squared = (dr/dt) squared + r squared (dtheta / dt) squared

which has the right S. I. units. This gives the kinetic energy m v squared / 2. The so called “centrifugal effective potential energy” is the second term, despite the fact that it is clearly the rotational kinetic energy. However, as shown in Section 3 of UFT196, it does not exist, the force calculated directly from the elliptical Newtonian orbit does not contain the centrifugal force. This is why I rejected Newton’s concept of force in favour of geometry (Keplerian and earlier philosophy). I would have failed my O levels at Pontardawe Grammar School if I had done that there. Now I can concentrate on the real truth.

In a message dated 07/01/2012 19:37:20 GMT Standard Time

PS: A similar problem occurs with the definition of velocity in polar cordinates. The radial component is in m/s but the angular component is in radiants/s. I guess that this is analoguous for the torsion and Riemann tensor elements.

Horst

Am 07.01.2012 15:35, schrieb EMyrone

I checked the comprehensive computer output by Horst Eckardt once more and I put the torsion elements into the right S.I. units in eqs. (1) and (2) of this note. There should be a 1 / c for T sup 1 sub 01 and a 1 / r for T sup 1 sub 12. This gives the right S. I. units of torsion – inverse metres. In the output they are in normalized or non SI units. Each torsion element is twice the relevant connection element. The output can be put in the right SI units by noting that the time derivative must contain a 1 / c wherever it occurs, and the angle derivative must contain a 1 / r wherever it occurs. I give the mathematical origin of the 1 / r in eq. (14), the definition of the divergence in cylindrical polar coordinates. The important result is that the torsion is non zero for the hyeprbolic spiral (the observed spiral of a whirlpool galaxy), but it is zero for the logarithmic spiral, which is not observed. So spacetime torsion produces a hyperbolic spiral as observed in astronomy, another major advantage of ECE theory. Eqs. (1) to (3) of this note are valid for all orbits of any kind and are in the right S. I. units.

View article…

Orbital Angular Velocity of the Earth

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Saturday, January 07, 2012 5:51 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Orbital Angular Velocity of the Earth

I think that this should be very accurately known these days. A simple calculation is that the earth rotates 360 degress in a year (3.2 ten power seven seconds). This gives 2.0 ten power minus seven radians per second for the angular velocity. This can be refined slightly but is a good estimate. Googling around will give a lot of information.

In a message dated 07/01/2012 12:42:50 GMT Standard Time

I agree, an experimental precise measurement of omega is required. My intent for raising this question was that we need some method for guessing or defining omega (or rdot) for a graphical representation of torsion. The classical equation in Marion and Thornton is eq. 8.15 (probably 7.15 in your issue) but depends on the potential which has been abandoned in the new theory. I propose taking the angular momentum in non-relativistic approximation:

L = m r^2 omega

Together with the orbital equation then we should have all what we need.

Horst

Am 07.01.2012 12:51, schrieb EMyrone

I think that the astronomers still measure angular velocity through Kepler’s second law of 1609, equal areas in equal times. They must have supercomputers to do this with phenomenal accuracy in the solar system. Knowing this, dr / dt can be found from the chain rule:

dr / dt = (dr / dtheta)(dtheta / dt)

and in the solar system dr / dtheta is found from the observations of a precessing ellipse, the precession of the perihelion corrected by supercomputer for the gravitational effects of other objects, and other corrections. All the concepts that we have used are spectacularly correct, and congratulations on the computer algebra. These are all major advances in cosmology.

View article…

Astronomical Measurements of the Angular Velocity

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Saturday, January 07, 2012 4:53 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Astronomical Measurements of the Angular Velocity

I think that the astronomers still measure angular velocity through Kepler’s second law of 1609, equal areas in equal times. They must have supercomputers to do this with phenomenal accuracy in the solar system. Knowing this, dr / dt can be found from the chain rule:

dr / dt = (dr / dtheta)(dtheta / dt)

and in the solar system dr / dtheta is found from the observations of a precessing ellipse, the precession of the perihelion corrected by supercomputer for the gravitational effects of other objects, and other corrections. All the concepts that we have used are spectacularly correct, and congratulations on the computer algebra. These are all major advances in cosmology.

View article…

Calculating the Precession

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Sunday, December 25, 2011 12:02 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: Calculating the Precession

To Dr. Horst Eckardt:

This is again very interesting, in the previous papers the Newtonian theory was used with x = 1. For the astronomers the following method can be used to calculate the precession with their computers and supercomputers. We can write this paper up in due course in the new year. So everything in standard physics is Christmas crackers, which is slang for “completely mad”. This is why the phys lab at Pontardawe Grammar was locked away above the woodwork room, a cupboard on its own.

View article…

203(2): Geometrical Meaning of the Theory of Photon Mass

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Friday, December 23, 2011 4:42 AM
Author: metric345
Subject: 203(2): Geometrical Meaning of the Theory of Photon Mass

This note defines the geometrical origin of Newton’s orbital theory in terms of the observations. It is shown that Newton’s theory is essentially geometrical, not in the sense of the obsolete Einstein theory but in the sense that Newton’s theory derives from a precessing ellipse in the limit x = 1, where x is the precession constant. The total energy E, kinetic energy T and potential energy V are geometrical quantities. The de Broglie equation is used to account for the fact that the photon is relativistic, it travels essentially at c. In this sense, special relativity is used to recognize that the Planck energy is the total relativistic translational kinetic energy of the particulate photon, i.e. the relativistic translational kinetic energy plus rest energy. For a photon with mass the latter is very small but not zero. The Einstein energy equation, from which gamma m c squared is derived, deals only with translational motion because it is a restatement of the relativistic translational linear momentum, p = gamma m v. With these careful definitions and estimates, the photon mass is derived from observation in a direct way, and is of the order of ten power minus fifty seven kilograms for one photon deflected by the sun.

a203rdpapernotes2.pdf

View article…

Numerical solution for photon mass

Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Thursday, December 22, 2011 10:54 PM
Author: metric345
Subject: Numerical solution for photon mass

This is an excellent and important result!

In a message dated 22/12/2011 21:55:58 GMT Standard Time

I tried a Newton iteration method of Maxima tho solve the exact equation for m, but it did not converge. However a simple “trial by hand” works. Rewriting the equation to

delta theta – 2*integral… = 0

and evaluating the left hand side for m must lead to a “residuum” of zero. The residuum is graphed in the figure. The mass has been re-scaled to units of 10 power -57 for numerical stability. The result is

m = 1.859 * 10^-57 kg,

about 10% larger than in the simplified calculation. I think you predicted this range of precision for the approximation.

Horst

View article…

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.