Note 415(2): The Orbit Equations of Relativistic m Theory

Note 415(2): The Orbit Equations of Relativistic m Theory

These are equations (18) and (19), which are the orbit equations in the most general spherically symmetric space defined by the infiitesimal line element (1). The conserved angular momentum in m space is given by Eq. (21), which is cross checked with the relativistic Euler Lagrange equations of m space. The m function from ECE theory can be used, as in UFT108, UFT190 and similar papers. The next step is to develop frame rotation theory in m space. This will define the spin connection in m space, and the vacuum force in m space. Knowing the spin connection, the complete field equations can be derived in m space. We also have available the antisymmetry laws of ECE2 theory, and the triple unification of gravitation, electromagnetism and fluid dynamics. All these major advances go well beyond the standard model in a richly woven tapestry of powerful new ideas.

a415thpapernotes2.pdf

Advertisements

415(1): The Lagrangian and Hamiltonian of m Theory

415(1): The Lagrangian and Hamiltonian of m Theory

These can be derived straightforwardly by calculating the Lorentz factor from the line element of m theory, Eq. (1). The orbit is obtained by solving the Euler Lagrange equations (13) and (14). The Euler Lagrange equations give the Leibniz equation of m theory, Eq. (29), and the conservation of angular momentum in m theory, Eq. (24). Eqs. (24) and (29) are solved numerically to give the relativistic orbit of m theory in the most general spherically symmetric space. The results should be consistent with previous work on m theory, for example UFT108, in which it was found that a shrinking orbit is given by Eq. (26). In UFT190 it was shown that the m function of ECE cosmology is Eq. (29). So ECE and ECE2 has gone far beyond the standard model in about seven hundred papers and books produced since 2003. ECE Schools of thought exist in essentially all the wold’s best universities.

a415thpapernotes1.pdf

414(9): Equations of Motion and Multiple Self Consistency Checks

414(9): Equations of Motion and Multiple Self Consistency Checks

This note gives a rigorous self consistency check for the free particle hamiltonian (6) using the ECE2 infinitesimal line element (1). This is a baseline calculation before embarking on m theory in UFT415. It is found that the relativistic equations (40) and (41) give r(phi) as in Eq (31), derived in two different ways giving the same results. This means that the numerical integration of Eqs. (40) and (41) must give the orbit (31). This provides a check for the numerical method. The orbit (31) is integrated to give Eq. (53) for the relativistic free particle in plane polar coordinates.The non relativistic free particle is described by Eq. (56). The m theory with m = 1 – r sub 0 / r gives the obsolete Einsteinian general relativity (EGR), and introduces additional terms in Eq. (17). Here r sub 0 is the obsolete Schwarzschild radius. It is known that m theory gives a shrinking orbit, so will be merged with the relativistic orbital theory of UFT414 in UFT415. So I will now proceed to writing up UFT414.

a414thpapernotes9.pdf

The correct rel. kinetic energy

The correct rel. kinetic energy

Subject: The correct rel. kinetic energy
To: Myron Evans <myronevans123>

Thanks again for this meticulous numerical checking. The lagrangian used in Note 404(4) was the complete lagrangian as defined in Eq. (17) and in Marion and Thornton chapter (14.113) of the third edition. This was one of two methods used to derive the relativistic Leibniz equation (29) and the relativistic angular momentum (31). The two methods gave exactly the same results. The Euler Lagrange variables were r and phi. The calculations are given in Eqs. (21) to (29). The relativistic angular momentum L is given in Eq. (31) and dL / dt gives Eq. (34). Eq. (29) derived in this way as as shown to be the same as Eq. (7), derived from the very fundamental kinematic equation (5). So to obtain the kinematic equation the complete lagrangian (17) must be used with Euler Lagrange variables r and phi. Eq. (7) can be transformed into Eq. (44) using Eqs. (37) and (38). Eq. (44) is the usual form of the relativistic Newton force as given for example in the problem section of Marion and Thornton, third edition, chapter fourteen, problem 38. The new insights given in Note 414(4) are Eqs. (37) and (38). Then Note 414(5) gives a triple cross check using the hamiltonian method. The complete relativistic hamiltonian H must be used, Eq. (1). This is a constant of motion so dH / dt = 0. This gives Eq. (6) of Note 414(5). When this is used in the relativistic force (7), the realtivistic Newton force Eq. (11) is obtained in a third way. so there is a triple cross check. The relativistic force equation has been derived in three ways, each giving the same result:

F = m gamma cubed dv / dt = -mMg / r squared.

As you know, we have used this equation in Cartesian coordinates in several previous UFT papers to give many interesting and original results. Finally the rotating frame method was applied to this equation, giving the relativistic version of paper UFT413. So a whole pile of new physics has emerged.

T = – m c^2 / gamma

or

T = (gamma-1) m c^2 ?

I obtain different results for both. In the second case an additional factor 1/gamma^2 seems to appear in the baseline calculation.

The results in the first case are

and in the second case:

The first case can be simplified with re-inserting gamma.
I will have to check this further.

Horst

Relativistic Spin Connection due to Frame Rotation

Relativistic Spin Connection due to Frame Rotation

Many thanks for such a fast response! I rechecked my calculation and agree. This is all most interesting, and have a very good holiday!

Relativistic Spin Connection due to Frame Rotation

It seems that there is a term -1/r missing i the relativistic spin connection. It should read:

For the numerical calculation I have to compute the equations from the definitions directly because they have to be resolved for r dot dot and phi dot dot at one side. Will see if I can do this today. Tomorrow I am going on holiday.

Horst

Am 10.09.2018 um 11:46 schrieb Myron Evans:

Relativistic Spin Connection due to Frame Rotation

This note calculates the relativistic spin connection by assuming that the frame rotation applied to the relativistic Newton equation produces the spin connection and vacuum force. The result is that simultaneous solution of Eqs. (21) and (22) gives the orbit. It will be very interesting to see whether or not this is a shrinking orbit.

414(7).pdf

Relativistic Spin Connection due to Frame Rotation

Relativistic Spin Connection due to Frame Rotation

This note calculates the relativistic spin connection by assuming that the frame rotation applied to the relativistic Newton equation produces the spin connection and vacuum force. The result is that simultaneous solution of Eqs. (21) and (22) gives the orbit. It will be very interesting to see whether or not this is a shrinking orbit.

a414thpapernotes8.pdf

Scientist Robbed of Nobel in 1974 Finally Wins $3 Million Physics Prize — And Gives It Away

Scientist Robbed of Nobel in 1974 Finally Wins $3 Million Physics Prize — And Gives It Away

I looked up the conventional h index of Jocelyn Bell Burnell. It is very low so this Milner award is politics as usual. Fifty years after the discovery this seems to have been the result of wildly irrational political pressure based on crude historical distortion by the media. It is not based on any objective criterion. The original paper announcing the discovery of pulsars consisted of about five authors, Hewish et alii, and Bell herself did not want the Nobel Prize because Hewish was the supervisor and she was the Ph. D. student. She said that Ph. D. students should not be awarded Nobel Prizes. I do not agree with that at all, but this shows that she did not expect to win a Nobel Prize. The media built up the myth about her being cheated out of a Nobel Prize. In my opinion a Nobel Prize is vastly overblown in importance. I remember the discovery of pulsars in the sixties when I was at Pontardawe Grammar School. The objective criteria of impact are hits, page views, distinct visits, visits, gigabytes downloaded and so on, combined with h and g indices and combined with total output of an author, combined with the quality of readership of the work,and above all, Baconian correctness and the elimination of anthropomorphism. In that case the AIAS / UPTEC group blows all opposition away so a Milner prize should be awarded to the AIAS / UPITEC group or if that is not allowed by petty rules, to individual members. In my time, the seventies, a Ph. D. student would not normally be allowed to publish on his or her own, but I was allowed to publish before I earned my Ph. D., being one of the best graduate students in chemistry in Britain. Even at that time my work was regarded as being worthy of an F. R.S. and Nobel Prize. If a Nobel Prize had been awarded I would have been more than happy to share it with my Ph. D. supervisor Mansel Davies and later with my group experimentalist Gareth Evans. We were all Baptists with a healthy scepticism of the Nobel Prize system, or any royalist system. MMD described the Nobel prize system as a club like any other and was a Nobel Prize advisor in chemistry, a friend of Linus Pauling. He remained a friend after Pauling was booted out of Stanford in a McCarthyist purge. Jocelyn Bell as born in Lurgan, Nothern Ireland and failed her eleven plus so went to a Quaker school in York. In my time women students had exactly the same opportunity as men, I was the top first, the second and third in line who graduated with a first class degree were women from the South Wales valleys who did not want to stay at the EDCL. During my Ph. D. I won three prestigious post doctoral fellowships in open competition: SRC; ICI European and an NRCC Fellowship to work with the Nobel Laureate Herzberg in Canada. I should have been appointed a research associate with tenure straight from Ph. D. but the EDCL system was terminally corrupt and the EDCL was later closed. I was forced to keep competing for prestigious Fellowships until I ran up a world record of them. I was not given tenure because I had exposed corruption at Swansea (Autobiograohy VolumeTwo) My autobiography shows that the system at EDCL and at Swansea was so corrupt and vindictive and petty minded that it would not recognize merit if it were stuffed up its nostrils, and no one would put right the corruption. I found that to be terminally disgusting – to refuse to recognize home grown talent in a young student, a sow eating her piglets. The disgust and contempt comes out very strongly in my poetry. I have a contempt for anything that corrupts the Baconian ideal with anthropomorphism,any individual, any group, any politician.

I think that the AIAS / UPITEC group could be nominated for a Breakthrough Prize for many contributions making a profound impact on science, if the rules allow. If not, nominations could go in for members of the group, for Nobel prizes and Breakthrough Prizes. In order for this to happen there must be assessors who really know the work. I was nominated by Royal Swedish Academician Bo Lehnert, perhaps others, for a physics prize, probably more than once, for the discovery of B(3) at Cornell in 1991. A book by Lehnert and Roy appears in my "Contermporary Chemical Physics " series. Jean Pierre Vigier recognized that B(3) means finite photon mass, thus overturning standard physics. Since then almost a thousand papers and books have sprung from that discovery of B(3), and the first successful unified field theory based in a rigorously objective way on Cartan geometry. Lehnert was attacked by a harasser called Bruhn, who posted a letter to Lehnert interfering in the Nobel Prize process. Bruhn made attempts to distort Cartan geometry, but failed. Cartan geometry has remained unchanged so Bruhn has been ignored. Distortions of Cartan geometry subsequently appeared in a commandered Wikipedia article. Bruhn was refuted many times and disappeared in 2008.

Scientist Robbed of Nobel in 1974 Finally Wins $3 Million Physics Prize — And Gives It Away

Scientist Robbed of Nobel in 1974 Finally Wins $3 Million Physics Prize — And Gives It Away

Scientist Robbed of Nobel in 1974 Finally Wins $3 Million Physics Prize — A…

Jocelyn Bell Burnell shocked the physics world when she discovered radio pulsars. But the Nobel committee gave t…

Advertisements