## Discussion of 363(1)

I have gone through the protocol, and will write it out as Note 363(2). This is a good method of approximation and gives sensible results, in that the spin connections are very small as is expected, because the precession is very small in the solar system. By now there are many ECE and ECE2 theories of precession, all simpler than the obsolete Einstein theory, and as accurate.

Orbital Precession due to a Fluid Vacuum or Aether

I checked the note and tried a different way of approximations for Omega. The eqs. (16,17) can be considered as two equations with two unknowns v[r,N], v[theta,N]. Then these Newtonian velocity components can be re-expressed by the fluid velocities v[r,P] and v[theta,P]. This is eq. o4 in the protocol.

Then several approximations can be made. Assuming Omega_101 = Omega _202 = 0 gives eqs. o6. These can be resolved for the spin connections: o7. Obviously the spin connections depend on the ratio of velocity components. Inserting the definitions shows that these depend on the radial components and their derivatives: o12. Inserting precessing orbits then gives the results o15. With the approximaitoncos(x*theta)=cos(theta),

sin(x*theta)=sin(theta)your result (34) follows with Omega_202=0.

Modifying this tocos(x*theta)=cos(theta),

sin(x*theta)=x*theta

sin(theta)=thetagives an x^2 in the approximation o17, perhaps a better approximation

Horst

Am 29.11.2016 um 14:42 schrieb EMyrone:

This note shows that orbital precession is due to the spin connections (34), which come from the assumption of a fluid vacuum or aether. So orbital precession in this theory is an effect of the aether, vacuum or spacetime within the framework of ECE2 unified field theory.

No trackbacks yet.