Social Icons

Featured Posts

1 Mei 2016

ALBERT EINSTEIN FAILED IN THREE CLASSICAL TESTS







“Einstein’s Law of Gravitation contains nothing about force. It describes the behaviour of objects in  a gravitational field – the planets, for example – not in terms of ‘ attraction ‘ but simply in terms of the paths they follow. To Einstein, gravitation is simple part of inertia; the movement of the stars and the planets arise from their inherent inertia; and the courses they follow are determined by the metric properties of space – or, more properly speaking,  the metric properties of the space-time continuum “  (Lincoln Barnett,  The Universe and Dr. Einstein, London, June 1949,  page 72 ).

26 April 2016

THEORY OF THE VERY BEGINNING UNIVERSE BEFORE BIG BANG





By 1930, other cosmologists, including Eddington, Willem de Sitter, and Einstein, had concluded that the static (non-evolving) models of the universe they had worked on for many years were unsatisfactory. Furthermore, Edwin Hubble, using the world’s largest telescope at Mt. Wilson in California, had shown that the distant galaxies all appeared to be receding from us at speeds proportional to their distances. It was at this point that Lemaître drew Eddington’s attention to his earlier work, in which he had derived and explained the relation between the distance and the recession velocity of galaxies. Eddington at once called the attention of other cosmologists to Lemaître’s 1927 paper and arranged for the publication of an English translation. Together with Hubble’s observations, Lemaître’s paper convinced the majority of astronomers that the universe was indeed expanding, and this revolutionized the study of cosmology.

A year later, Lemaître explored the logical consequences of an expanding universe and boldly proposed that it must have originated at a finite point in time. If the universe is expanding, he reasoned, it was smaller in the past, and extrapolation back in time should lead to an epoch when all the matter in the universe was packed together in an extremely dense state. Appealing to the new quantum theory of matter, Lemaître argued that the physical universe was initially a single particle—the “primeval atom” as he called it—which disintegrated in an explosion, giving rise to space and time and the expansion of the universe that continues to this day. This idea marked the birth of what we now know as Big Bang cosmology. (George Lemaitre)


Theory of The Very Beginning Universe Before Big Bang 

is the theory of Blank, Empty, like the secret in the story of Kung Fu Panda, and everything in the world is vibration.





Professor Ethan Siegel:The Biggest Question About The Beginning of Universe


George Lemaitre's primeval atom, where does it come from?








Share



23 April 2016

PHYSICS BEYOND THE STANDARD MODEL: CLASSICAL PHYSICS + NEW PHYSICS



How could there be 'A Standard' in physics but does not explain gravity?
  

In the Standar Model Physics 'nothing can travel  faster than light' is misleading. In the events of starlight at a night time, what you see in every day life is the apparent position of star, it is not true positon of star. .It is because starlight slow down by dust particle / Earth's atmosphere. But in the events of tides by the Moon, gravity do not affected by dust particles in the atmosphere of Earth and Moon. It is simple and clear up: Gravity can travel faster than light. So, the speed of Gravity is the speed limit in the universe (The Evidence 2016).

What's Classical Physics All About?

Classical physics is the physics of everyday pheonomena of nature, those we can observe with our unaided senses. It deals primarily with mass, force and motion. While its roots go back to the earliest times, to the Ancient Greeks such as Aristotle and Archimedes, it later developed into a cohesive system with the contributions of Galileo, Kepler and Newton. Classical physics achieved phenomental success, as the Calculus of Newton and Leibniz gave it the tools to tackle even even problems not imagined by its pioneers.

Around 1900, give or take a decade, surprising new experimental evidence, primarily about atoms and molecules, showed us that these small-scale phenomena behave in ways not anticipated by classical theory. This ushered in a new era called "modern" physics. New laws and methodology were developed to deal with the rapidly expanding experimental evidence. Relativity and quantum mechanics added new tools to the study of nature. These did not make classical physics "wrong", for the old laws were working just as they always had, within their limited scope—which was the study of large objects (not atomic scale ones) moving relatively slowly (not near the speed of light).

So classical physics is still the starting point for learning about physics, and constitutes the bulk of the material in most introductory textbooks. It is the theory underlying the natural processes we observe everyday. It is the key to understanding the motion of pulleys, machines, projectiles and planets. It helps us understand geology, chemistry, astronomy, weather, tides and other natural phenomena. 

Let's look at the key ideas of classical physics as they developed historically.

    1.Motion. The ancient greek philosophers thought a lot about motion. What makes things move? Why doesn't a thrown projectile move forever? What causes it to stop? Why does a stone fall when we drop it? The theories they invented to account for these things are now forgotten except to historians of science. But they were asking the right questions.

    2.The Heavens. All early civilizations paid attention to the motion of stars, sun, moon and planets in the sky. The regularity and predictability of these motions was recognized very early. Most thought these motions were special, having causes quite distinct from the causes of earthly motions of projectiles. Aristotle accepted this difference as a fundamental principle.

   3.The Physics of Aristotle. Aristotle's physics (a synthesis of ideas from many Greek philosophers) accepted the fixity (immobility) of the Earth. The Earth was assumed to be the center of the universe. The Greek theory of matter postulated that everything on Earth was made up of just four elements: earth, water, air and fire, and these had settled from an initial chaotic condition to a relativly stable situation with earth being at the lowest level (being heaviest), water above the earth, air above that, and finally there was a shell of invisible fire above everything. This hierarchy represented the four elements in their "natural place". The evidence for fire being above everything was the fact that fire leapt upward, and like all the elements, was seeking its "natural place" in the scheme of things. So unsupported things made of earthen materials fell down toward the earth. Water flowed down mountain streams to the oceans, and hot air balloons moved upward into the air.

    Motion of things toward their natural place was called "natural" motion. Any motions that displaced things from their natural place was called "violent" motion. Natural motion happened for no other reason than the body's "desire" to get to its natural place. Violent motions were caused by forces. Natural and violent motions were mutually exclusive and could not occcur simultaneously. When a projectile was thrown (by action of a force) it moved in a straight line for a while (violent motion), until it used up the motion it had been given. Then it immediately moved in a straight line downward (natural motion), toward Earth. All motions on Earth were made up of a succession of straight line motions.

    4.The Ptolemaic Universe. Claudius Ptolemy (about 85 - about 165 CE), astronomer, synthesized earlier ideas about planetary motion into a geocentric (Earth-centered) model in which the sun and all the planets moved in circles around the Earth. Why circles? Because the Pythagorean numerology had declared circles the most perfect geometric figure, and Aristotelian physics declared everything outside of the earh to be in some sense "perfect". So all celestial motions were considered to be circles, or a superposition of circles. But naked-eye astronomers had accumulated rather good data on planetary positions over time, so Ptolemy's system had to be a complicated combination of circles (cycles and epicycles) to account for the data well. It did work, but it did only one job, predicting planet's positions in the sky, and it had some problems dealing with Mercury and Venus.

    5.Scholasticism. The Catholic Church dominated education in Europe. It tried to unite science and religion into a unified system of thought. St. Thomas Aquinus was one of the most visible in this effort, and the result was a system consisting of Aristotelian physics and Christian theology, called "Scholasticism." It accepted the Greek four element theory, the immobility of the Earth, Aristotle's physics and the Ptolemaic system. All of this was considered church dogma, to be accepted without question. This was the "science" taught in the schools when Galileo was at the University.

    6.The Copernican Revolution. Nicolas Copernicus (or Koppernigk; Polish: Kopernik) (1473 – 1543) is credited with the demise of the Ptolemaic planetary system. Copernicus' heliocentric (Sun-centered) model assumed that the Sun (not the Earth) was the center of the solar system, with all the planets moving in circles about the Sun, and Earth's moon moving in a circle around Earth. This model kept the idea of epicycles (it had to to account for observations), but fewer of them. Exactly six fewer—those planetary epicycles that had identical periods of 365+ days. (That's a clue to what's going on.) The Catholic Church denounced the idea, and banned Copernicus' book de Revolutionibus (1543), but Copernicus had died before the controversy erupted. Martin Luther also denounced the idea. Galileo publicly championed Copernicus' heliocentric model, so he took heat for it.

    7.The Experimental Revolution. Though the ideas of the Greeks, as expressed by Aristotle (384 BCE–322 BCE), persisted until the time of Galileo, there were many who seriously questioned much of it, and even did experiments to show that Aristotle was wrong. John Philoponus (490–570) (John the Grammarian) experimentally disproved Aristotle's assertion that heavy bodies fall faster than lighter ones. This experiment (dropping heavy and light balls from a height) was repeated by others, including Simon Stevin (1548/49–1620). Their work constituted a gradual revolution in how physics was done, one that showed the importance of deliberate experiments designed to study natural processes. Previous physics had mostly relied on passive observation of phenomena. One exception was the work of the Greek mechanicians, such as Archimedes, Ctestibius and Hero(n).

    8.Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) challenged Aristotelian physics with vigor, and suffered the consequences of arguing against the Catholic Church's Aristotelian teachings about physics. He showed that freely falling bodies accelerate (increase their speed). He made use of his "principle of superposition" to analyze motion of projectiles. He also effectively used this method of argument to explain why objects of different mass fall in the same way. His telescopic discoveries in astronomy are well known: four moons of Jupiter, sunspots, craters of the moon, and much more. Galileo is sometimes called the "father of experimental physics", but as we noted above, the experimental spirit arose earlier. Still, Galileo deserves credit for his total commitment to the experimental methods that paved the way for others.

    9.Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) spent many years trying to understand the reasons for the motions of planets, especially the orbit of Mars. Along the way he tried, and abandoned many hypotheses (proposed models) of the planetary system. His early guesses were in the "magical" or "mystical" tradition of astrology and numerology, but he was objective enough to realize that those approaches were not useful. His final, correct, solution was purely mathematical, his three laws of planetary motion. One major value of this model is that it introduced elliptical orbits for planets, doing away with all of the epicyles and other gimmicks of Ptolemy's and Copernicus' models.

    9.The Newtonian Revolution. Isaac Newton (1643 [1642 O.S.]–1727) knew the work of these pioneers of experimental science, and he sought to develop a larger and more comprehensive synthesis of their work, one that would unify the motions of things near Earth (falling bodies, projectiles) with the motions of planets in the heavens. He achieved this only after he invented mathematical tools to deal with the problem, tools that we now know as calculus. Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (1646–1716) invented another form of calculus at about the same time, one that was later found to be mathematically equivalent to Newton's version. Today calculus notation combines contributions of both men. Newton's solution to the problem of motion was his three laws of motion, combined with his universal gravitation theory. These introduced a refined definition of force, giving precise meaning to force and relating it, through his famous equation F = ma, to mass and acceleration. Newton's synthesis of these ideas is considered the first important theory in physics, and Newton may be justifiably called the first theoretical physicist. However you charactize his work, it set the standard and goal for physics to this day.

    10.Newton's style. Newton's theory changed the way scientists thought of nature. It introduced a view of force that many found hard to swallow. The idea that the force due to gravity could act between material bodies even at a distance, without them touching each other and without anything between them—well, that seemed an "occult" idea to some. Newton was pressured to explain "why" gravity worked that way. Newton declined to do that saying "I make no hypotheses." He was using the word hypothesis to mean "conjecture" or "explanation". He was content to simply describe how his theory worked, not why. Even though he was a deeply religious man, and even did alchemy and numerology, he wisely never mentions (nor uses) religious, magical or mystical ideas in his writings about physics. This is a style most scientists still follow in their work.

    11.The Mechanical Universe. Newton's mechanics presented a view of nature that was dominated by objects moving under the influence of forces. This view was soon applied to all sorts of phenomena, from the collision of billiard balls to the motions of mechanical parts in machines. It viewed everything as having underlying mechanical interactions. Once you knew the positions of bodies and the forces acting on them you could (using mathematics) predict what they would do as time goes on. Newton's mechanics pictured the universe as a huge clockwork, all of its component parts obeying Newton's laws. Those of religious inclination supposed that this meant that God devised those laws, created matter and then let the laws take over. The clockwork of the universe could then run forever without further attention, strictly following Newton's laws. What room did this leave for miracles? What use was prayer? In this universe, do we really have free will? It was a deterministic view of the universe. Those philosophical questions are still debated today, but physics goes on without troubling itself about philosophical questions, which are considered outside of its domain.

    12.Conservation Laws. In this short space I can't do justice to the "discovery" of the conservation laws of energy, momentum and angular momentum. These arose from the question of how best to characterize motion of a body. Should it be a quantity dependent on velocity (mv, called momentum) or should it be dependent on the square of the velocity (mv2, called "vis viva")? It turned out that both were necessary for a complete description of motion, and the vis viva morphed into kinetic energy, mv2/2. Finally we learned that in closed systems, total energy within the system remains constant (is conserved). Earlier we had learned that in such systems momentum is conserved, and so is angular momentum. In fact Kepler's third law anticipated the conservation of momentum, and one of Galileo's laws of motion anaticipated the conservation of energy. Nowadays we know that all conservation laws arise from the geometry of the universe, from symmetries of a physical system's geometric properties under certain kinds of transformation, translation in space, time, or rotation. It now appears that the conservation laws are the most fundamental and powerful laws of the universe, from which many other major laws may be derived. They have withstood all of the advances and revolutions of physics described below.

    13.Successes of Newton's Mechanics. One thing we expect of a good theory is that it suggests directions for further investigation, and that it is applicable to new information that comes along. One major success of Newton's mechanics was the kinetic theory of gases. By modeling gases as very tiny, perfectly elastic particles zipping around at high speeds, and colliding with the walls of their container, the empirical gas laws were found to be derivable from Newton's laws. For example, from Newton's laws you can derive the famous "ideal-gas law" PV = nRT, relating pressure, volume, amount of gas, the gas constant and gas temperature. By relaxing the "idealized" conditions to allow larger particles, and occasional collision of particles with each other one could even do better at modeling real gases and deriving their laws, in agreement with experiment.

(Read More)


What is gravity? 

Gravity is a Force in accordance with Isaac Newton's gravity,  the force that attracts a body towards the centre of the earth, or towards any other physical body having mass.Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation states that any two bodies in the universe attract each other with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

And let's add a few words to them to clear up:.Gravity is a force due to the effects of well balanced universe, and gravity is a force to maintain the well balanced of the Universe

How did our universe get to be so homogenous, beautiful and special ? Gravity is the builders the balance of universe.

How did our planet and atmosphere get to be so regular ? The formation of Earth’s atmosphere was caused by Earth’s gravity. Earth’s gravity is the builders of Earth’s atmosphere. Planet’s gravity is the builders of planet’s atmosphere.



Where Does Gravity Come From?

It is not impossible energy for Earth's gravity come from Earth's Radiation, The earth's radiation in this case is - all of the radiation / Earth's energy - including energy that come from earth's magnetism, and in the frame aether exist, because gravity itself  is the clue for the existing of undetectable of aether. Clear up : Gravity as evidence the existing of luminiferous aether,or ether.   In fact, Earth received energy in the form of radiation from the Sun. For the Earth to remain in balance the energy coming into and leaving the Earth must equal.



Earth's gravity come from Earth's energy, the energy of the  Earth's come from The Sun




The Certainty Principle

The certainty principle (2005) allowed to generalize and unify both the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (1927) and the Mandelshtam-Tamm relation (1945). It turned out to be applicable to any quantum systems, including relativistic quantum fields. One can even suppose, that it will finally turn out to be more fundamental than quantum mechanics and quantum field theory.

In the frame of the orthodox quantum theory the certainty principle can be considered as a mathematical theorem. Exactly this approach is assumed as a basis in this review. And with it the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the Mandelshtam-Tamm relation are derived as consequences of the certainty principle. Another interesting consequence appears to be a simple uncertainty relation for angle and angular momentum, which, nevertheless, was not known before.

To wide extent, the certainty principle is not only a mathematical theorem, but also a gnoseological principle. This principle substantially complements the philosophy of quantum mechanics.







The Principle of Polarity

“Everything is Dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled.” — The Kybalion



While THE ALL is the totality of existence, there exists within it polarity. While this illustrates how everything is still ONE, it does seem to also validate our everyday human experiences. Here we come to the experience we have of hot and cold, hard and soft, fast and slow, and all manor of opposites that are actually identical. It is by degrees that these seeming opposites are separated.

Looking at a thermometer, at what degree does it change from hot to cold? Each among us has some arbitrary point we would say it has gone from hot to cold, but it is all temperature. The continuum in which one end is hot and the other is cold and the experience we have at any given moment is somewhere in between. This is the case with all opposites, they are not actually separate, but poles upon the same continuum.

Science would say that there is temperature, mass, velocity, et al; which is an attempt at naming the continuum. Hot and cold is temperature, light and heavy is mass, slow and fast is velocity. Even in the contemporary, it has been shown to be true, even if it may not have been expressed in these exact terms.



The Laws of Reality


Viewing waves in the sea and on the beach, is a very interesting sight if at that time, we thinking about how physics-gravity in fluid dynamics-work there.

Waves in the sea moving up and down driven by the wind, and the pull of Earth’s gravity looks so beautifully to restore the balance of sea water.

A poet would probably be beautiful to describe in words, how the gravity waves work -will be like the hands of a mother who did not want his son away from her-by strong gusts of wind-and pulled back his son in his arms.

A wonderful experience, and it is real, it can be seen by anyone, and can be proven by anyone-that a force of gravity exists -how could trust to someone who says ‘gravity nothing about force’ … although that said it was known as a genius and great scientists in the world


(Continued)






Share




20 April 2016

EKSPERIMEN IMAJINER TIDAK LOGIS DAN BISA MENYESATKAN




Albert Einstein dikenal sangat pandai membuat eksprimen pikiran atau eksperimen imajiner (Thought experiments), dan pertama kali membaca eksperimen imajinernya, orang pasti terkesan, atau mungkin tidak langsung mengerti karena untuk memahaminya kita 'dipaksa' untuk berpikir. Dua atau tiga kali membacanya barangkali kita baru paham apa yang dimaksud atau tujuannya.

1 April 2016

TIME-DELAY OF LIGHT CAUSE BY REFRACTION, NOT GRAVITY




Time-delay of light cause by refraction, not Gravity. 
See Fig.above: Dlr (in red curve) is a litle bit longer than Dso (in white straight line)





Clocks in a gravitational force.


When comparing a clock under the influence of gravitational forces with one very far from such influences it is found that the first clock is slow compared to the second. To see this consider the same clock we used in the Special Theory of Relativity. For this experiment, however, imagine that the clock is being accelerated upward, being pulled by a crane. The clock gives off a short light pulse which moves towards the mirror at the top of the box, at the same time the mirror recedes from the pulse with even increasing speed (since the box accelerates). Still the pulse eventually gets to the mirror where it is reflected, now it travels downward where the floor of the box is moving up also with ever increasing velocity.

On the trip up the distance covered by light is larger than the height of the box at rest, on the trip down the distance is smaller. A calculation shows that the whole distance covered in the trip by the pulse is larger than twice the height of the box, which is the distance covered by a light pulse when the clock is at rest.

Since light always travels at the same speed, it follows that the time it takes for the pulse to go the round trip is longer when accelerating than when at rest: clocks slow down whenever gravitational forces are present.

This has an amazing consequence: imagine a laser on the surface of a very massive and compact planet (so that the gravitational field is very strong). An experimenter on the planet times the interval between two crests of the laser light waves and gets, say, a millionth of a second. His clock , however, is slow with respect to the clock of an observer far away in deep space, this observer will find that the time between two crests is larger. This implies that the frequency of the laser is larger on the planet than in deep space: light leaving a region where gravity is strong reddens. This is called the gravitational red-shift (see Fig. 7.9).



Figure 7.9:  The gravitational redshidft. Since clocks slow down in a strong gravitational field then light, whose oscillations can be used as clocks, will be shifter towards the red as it leaves a region where gravity is strong.






As for time dilation, the slowing down of clocks in the presence of gravitational forces affects all clocks, including biological ones. A twin trveling to a region where gravity is very strong will come back a younger than the twin left in a rocket in empty space. This is an effect on top of the one produced by time dilation due to the motion of the clocks. The gravitational forces required for a sizable effect, however, are enormous. So the twin will return younger...provided she survives.

 (physics.ucr.edu).


 "For this experiment, however, imagine that the clock is being accelerated upward, being pulled by a crane. The clock gives off a short light pulse which moves towards the mirror at the top of the box, at the same time the mirror recedes from the pulse with even increasing speed (since the box accelerates). Still the pulse eventually gets to the mirror where it is reflected, now it travels downward where the floor of the box is moving up also with ever increasing velocity.
 

On the trip up the distance covered by light is larger than the height of the box at rest, on the trip down the distance is smaller. A calculation shows that the whole distance covered in the trip by the pulse is larger than twice the height of the box, which is the distance covered by a light pulse when the clock is at rest.

Since light always travels at the same speed, it follows that the time it takes for the pulse to go the round trip is longer when accelerating than when at rest: clocks slow down whenever gravitational forces are present."


The thought experiment above is incorrect and misleading because it ignores the refraction of light. The speed of light will always be slowed when light passes through a layer of earth atmosphere.




"Since light always travels at the same speed,..."

This statement is misleading. Speed of light is not constant but slowing down causes by refraction. The time-delay of light cause by refraction, not gravity. 

An example in the case of sunlight, please see picture below:

A'-B is a straight line light of apparent position of the Sun, and A - B is a curved path of  true position of the Sun.. A curved path A - B is a litle bit longer than A' - B.


GPS Doen't Need, Doen't Use, and Does't Prove Einstein's Theory of Special and General Relativity.



Einstein's general theory of relativity was totally wrong.


1.Einstein's thought experiments are incomprehensive, illogical, and misleading.

2.Einstein's equivalence principle is false.

3.General relativity inconsistent with Special relativity about the existing of an aether.

4.Special relativity and General relativity ignored the refraction of light, so:

5.The deflection of light by the Sun is misleading. The deflection of light is caused by refraction, i.e.astronomical refraction and terrestrial refraction.

6.Gravitational redshift is misleading. Redshift and blueshift are caused by refraction, not gravity. When the celestial bodies become incasdescent as the temperature increases, they emit a red glow that we see as redshift. If the temperature continues to rise, the red glow turns to orange, then the yellow, and then the blue that we see as a blueshift, the blue glow then turns to white. The amount of radiant energy given off by such celestial bodies varied with wavelength and temperature. Such phenomena isn't Doppler effects. Thus, redshift isn't Doppler effect.

7.Gravitational lensing is false. Lensing is caused by refraction, not gravity.

8.There’s the Shapiro time delay. There’s gravitational time dilation. Gravitational time dilation is not correct. Because the revelation of universal law: 'the velocity of light is constant' (Special Reltivity) is misleading. Speed of light slowing down causes by refraction when the starlight passing through the Earth’s atmosphere.The time-delay of light cause by refraction, not gravity.

9.GPS doesn’t need, doesn’t use, and doesn't prove Einstein’s special and general theory of relativity.

10.Black holes do not exist, the expanding universe and the big bang theory is incorrect.

11.About gravitational waves Einstein was wrong.There are no such things as curved/warped space. Space-time just a mathematical model.There are no gravitational waves or ripples in space-time. Where does energy for gravitational waves come from? Gravitational waves don’t carry any energy, so they’re just a formal mathematical construct with no real physical meaning (Nathan Rosen, 1955). Gravity is a real force, there are exist gravity waves, not gravitational waves.In the Earth’s atmosphere, gravity waves are a mechanism for the transfer of momentum from the troposphere to the stratosphere.

12.Dark matter and dark energy do not make sense. This time 2016 is the end of the 9 biggest unsolved mysteries in physics, 8 of 9 unsolved mysteries are caused by the failure of general theory of relativity.


IN THIS TIME 2016 WE NEED RIPPLE:Revolution In Physics Post-LIGO Experiment




New Release, today Wednesday April 6, 2016

Discoveries 2016: Should we reshaped the Modern Physics?

Description 


Albert Einstein was one of the greatest physicist.Therefore, it is hard to understand he made a mistake in his thought experiments-equivalence principle-moreover in his proving method to prove his hypothesis.In fact, we found something new. 

Did you know, Einstein's thought experiments are incomprehensive,illogical, and misleading? 

The equivalence principle is false, and Einstein's proving method for his hypothesis 'deflection of light by the Sun' isn't scientific and deeply wrong? Unfortunately, a revelation of universal law 'the velocity of light is constant' and gravitational redshifts also incorrect......Einstein's gravity was wrong, and Newton's gravity was correct.  But we know that our understanding of gravity is not complete. What is gravity? Gravity is not just something of a force that any two bodies in universe attract each other, but moreover, gravity is the force due to the effects of well balanced universe ..... .




Share


30 Maret 2016

THEORY OF GRAVITY


The ATLAS particle detector at the Large Hadron Collider
The standard model does not include an explanation of gravity, which most scientists believe is best described by general relativity theory. This theory claims that gravity is not a force that propagates across space but results from masses distorting the ‘fabric of spacetime’ in their vicinity in some mysterious way. Since ‘curved spacetime’ is a geometrical abstraction, relativity theory is merely a mathematical model and does not provide a realistic understanding of gravity.(The Farce of Modern Physic)


The Dynamic Theory of Gravity of Nikola Tesla explains the relation between gravitation and electromagnetic force as a unified field theory (a model over matter, the aether, and energy). It is a unified field theory to unify all the fundamental forces (such as the force between all masses) and particle responses into a single theoretical framework.

Introduction

Tesla's proposition that gravity is a field effect is being given more serious consideration by researchers. At the time of his announcement, his critique on Einstein's work was considered by the scientific establishment to exceed the bounds of reason. While this theory is disputed by some or simply ignored by others, it does not change the clear indication of the resurfacing of many supposedly "new" ether based theories by current scientists. Initially developed between 1892 and 1894 during the period in which he was conducting experiments with high frequency and high potential currents and electromagnetism, it was subsequently never officially published. Though these principles guided his future research and experiments, Tesla did not announce his theory until near the end of his life after he had been disillusioned by the war efforts. The Dynamic Theory of Gravity neither appears nor is mentioned anywhere in standard Tesla informative sites and reportedly, is still classified and unavailable under the FOIA.


Dynamic theory of gravity

Tesla published a prepared statement on his 81st birthday (July 10, 1937) critiquing Albert Einstein's theory of relativity. The following is a portion of that statement:

"... Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for the motions of the bodies as observed, and its assumption dispenses with space curvature. All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the ether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena."

"My second discovery was of a physical truth of the greatest importance. As I have searched the entire scientific records in more than a half dozen languages for a long time without finding the least anticipation, I consider myself the original discoverer of this truth, which can be expressed by the statement: There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment." — Nikola Tesla

While this statement asserted that Tesla had "worked out a dynamic theory of gravity" that he soon hoped to give to the world, he reportedly died before he publicized the details. There is still a halo of mystery around his death - even the exact date is not certain. It is speculated that his death may have been caused by too much "pressure" by agents in order to extract and obtain the secret documents regarding this theory.

Unfortunately few details were publicly revealed by Tesla about his theory. Available details argument against space being curved by gravitational effects, which leads some to believe Tesla failed to understand Einstein's theory is not about curved space at all, but curved space-time. However, there is disagreement about Tesla's exact understanding of Einstein's theories; Tesla was actively conducting tangible experiments during the time of Einstein's theoretical research. He underlined that time was a mere man-made reference used for convenience and as such the idea of a "curved space-time" was delusional, hence there was no basis for the Relativistic "space-time" binomium concept.


Tesla's aether concept

It is important to correctly comprehend Tesla's unique aether concept as several popular researchers in the field have not done. Tesla's aether is analogous to the classical aether "gas" theory.

"Long ago he recognized that all perceptible matter comes from a primary substance, or tenuity beyond conception, filling all space, the Akasha or luminiferous ether, acted upon by the life giving Prana or creative force, calling into existence, in never ending cycles all things and phenomena. The primary substance, thrown into infinitesimal whirls of prodigious velocity, becomes gross matter; the force subsiding, the motion ceases and matter disappears, reverting to the primary substance." (Grotz, 1997)

Tesla's aether is a rarefied gas having extreme elasticity. It allows ponderable matter to pass almost freely through it, waves in it are electromagnetic waves and electrostatic, gravitational and magnetic forces are all directly related to the aether. It is important to note that there are major errors in the works of several major Tesla researchers, they have incorrectly deduced from Tesla's pre-1900 lectures on alternate currents of high potential that Tesla said his aether could be "polarized" and made "rigid" through a particular high frequency alternator and single terminal coil (ex. 1892 lecture in London) and 2 metal plates which he "suspended" in the air making the space between them rigid "privately" on one another (ed. the Tesla Effect). 

Tesla believed his aether to be an insulating medium and after studying the lectures in detail it becomes apparent that he is in fact talking about polarizing and solidifying the air, not the aether. Also his aether is said to be carriers immersed in an insulating medium as supposedly quoted from one of his high frequency lectures. This is incorrect as reading it properly it states that the air is the carriers and the insulating medium is the aether. In 1894, Tesla invented a special bulb (which was the ultimate result of his research in vacuum tubes; the unipolar "targetless" bulb) which augmented this technology to create "tubes of force" which could be used for motive power (what Tesla later cited as "veritable ropes of air"). Note that the tubes of force is only a theory and without proof should not be taken seriously.



WHAT IS GRAVITY ? 


The Force Due To The Effects Of Well Balanced Universe

Nicola Tesla was right, Einstein was wrong.There are no such things as curved/warped space. Space-time just a mathematical model.There are no gravitational waves or ripples in space-time. Where does energy for gravitational waves come from? Gravitational waves don’t carry any energy, so they’re just a formal mathematical construct with no real physical meaning (Nathan Rosen, 1955). Gravity is a real force, there are exist gravity waves, not gravitational waves.

In the Earth's atmosphere, gravity waves are a mechanism for the transfer of momentum from the troposphere to the stratosphere. Gravity waves are generated in the troposphere by frontal systems or by airflow over mountains. At first, waves propagate through the atmosphere without appreciable change in mean velocity. But as the waves reach more rarefied (thin) air at higher altitudes, their amplitude increases, and nonlinear effects cause the waves to break, transferring their momentum to the mean flow.This process plays a key role in studying the dynamics of the middle atmosphere. The clouds in gravity waves can look like altostratus undulatus clouds.(wikipedia)

Cirrus and Altostratus undulatus clouds

Undulated cloud in Christchurch, New Zealand. 


Albert Einstein was one of the greatest physicist.Therefore, it is hard to understand he made a mistake in his thought experiments-equivalence principle-moreover in his proving method to prove his hypothesis.In fact, we found something new. 
Did you know, Einstein's thought experiments are incomprehensive,illogical, and misleading? The equivalence principle is false, and Einstein's proving method for his hypothesis 'deflection of light by the Sun' isn't scientific and deeply wrong? Unfortunately, a revelation of universal law 'the velocity of light is constant' and gravitational redshifts also incorrect......The Evidence 2016, should we reshaped the modern physics?

Kindle eBook: The Evidence 2016

 

 

Share



25 Maret 2016

THE SOUND OF HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF .....




 caglecom


From Einstein’s Theory to Gravity’s Chirp

The path from a revolutionary set of equations to the detection of gravitational waves was strewn with obstacles and controversy, explains the physicist Daniel Kennefick — and the struggle continues.

“There are no gravitational waves … ” … “Plane gravitational waves, traveling along the positive X-axis, can therefore be found … ” … “ … gravitational waves do not exist … ” … “Do gravitational waves exist?” … “It turns out that rigorous solutions exist … ”

These are the words of Albert Einstein. For 20 years he equivocated about gravitational waves, unsure whether these undulations in the fabric of space and time were predicted or ruled out by his revolutionary 1915 theory of general relativity. For all the theory’s conceptual elegance — it revealed gravity to be the effect of curves in “space-time” — its mathematics was enormously complex.

The question was settled once and for all last week, when scientists at the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (Advanced LIGO) reported that they had detected gravitational waves emanating from the violent merger of two black holes more than one billion light-years away. Picking up the signal — a tiny flurry of contractions and expansions in space-time called a “chirp” — required extraordinary technical finesse. But it also took 100 years for scientists to determine what, exactly, Einstein’s theory predicts: not only that gravitational waves exist, but how they look after crossing the cosmos from a coalescing pair of black holes — inescapably steep sinkholes in space-time whose existence Einstein found even harder to swallow.

Daniel Kennefick, a theoretical physicist at the University of Arkansas, began his career as a graduate student working with LIGO co-founder Kip Thorne to unravel the predictions of general relativity. Fascinated by the contentious history of gravitational-wave research, Kennefick began a sideline as a historian; he is the author of the 2007 book Traveling at the Speed of Thought: Einstein and the Quest for Gravitational Waves, and last year he co-authored An Einstein Encyclopedia. In discussions before and after Thursday’s big announcement, Kennefick recounted the journey leading up to it and explained where theorists must go from here. An edited and condensed version of the conversation follows.


QUANTA MAGAZINE: How exciting was last Thursday’s announcement for you?

Courtesy of Daniel Kennefick

Daniel Kennefick, a theoretical physicist and Einstein scholar at the University of Arkansas.

DANIEL KENNEFICK: I couldn’t believe how exciting it was. It’s great, given the very controversial history of the field, that it’s such an incontrovertible detection. They didn’t have to dig the signal out of the noise as many of us expected they would; you could really see it in the data with your own eyes. And from a theorist’s point of view, one is thrilled that the theoretical predictions were so close to reality. There was the signal, and there was their prediction of what the waveform from the merger of two black holes would look like overlying it.

How would you characterize the history of gravitational-wave research that led up to this moment?

There’s no doubt that a big characteristic has been controversy — a series of controversies. Controversy over whether gravitational waves exist. Do they really exist? Do they carry energy? Do they exist in a way that we can hope to detect? Even just ontologically: What is reality? Are you measuring something here or are you kidding yourselves?

And that’s been true from the very beginning. The first mention of gravitational waves that we have from Einstein is of him saying they don’t exist. Gravitational waves were a very bold, daring idea that started to enter people’s heads 100 years ago, and yet there’s always been that sense of uncertainty. One question will be answered but a new question will come up.

How does the phrase in your book title — “traveling at the speed of thought” — capture this uncertainty?

When Einstein wrote his paper [predicting gravitational waves] in 1916, he thought he had discovered three different kinds of gravitational waves. Earlier that year, when he thought the waves didn’t exist, he had been using the wrong coordinate system. He changed to a different coordinate system at the suggestion of a colleague, and that allowed him to see more clearly that there were waves. But this coordinate system is itself kind of wavy, and so it turned out that two of the waves he thought he was looking at were really just flat space seen in a wavy coordinate system; they’re not real waves at all.

[The English astronomer and physicist] Arthur Stanley Eddington responded to Einstein’s paper in 1922, and he was interested in the question: Do gravitational waves travel at the speed of light? The answer is that they do, as we now know for sure. Eddington did his calculation to show that, and he realized that the two other types of waves, the spurious ones, could travel at any speed depending on what coordinate system you use, and so he said these fake waves “travel at the speed of thought.” It’s a charming phrase because on the one hand it shows the skepticism — “traveling at the speed of thought” as something that’s not real. And on the other hand it shows the importance of skepticism, because after all, there aren’t three types of gravitational waves; there’s only one kind.

And then Einstein changed his mind again in 1936 and said gravitational waves don’t exist. What happened?

Einstein and his assistant Nathan Rosen set out to find an exact [rather than approximate] gravitational-wave solution, and they discovered a problem. No matter how they tried to set up their coordinate system, they always found a “singularity” somewhere in space-time. A singularity means a place where we can’t assign a number to how big the wave is there. Now the truth is, this singularity was only a coordinate singularity; it’s not a real problem with gravitational waves.

Think about the North Pole. If I ask you what is the longitude of the North Pole, you’ll say, “Well, all lines of longitude run through the North Pole.” Our system of measurement breaks down there, but that doesn’t mean the North Pole doesn’t exist or you can’t go there. Physically, it exists. So Einstein and Rosen were confused. They thought that since there was a singularity there, this provided a proof that gravitational waves couldn’t exist. So they wrote this paper and they sent it off to the Physical Review. And the referee wrote a 10-page report pointing out the possibility of a mistake, and that was sent back to Einstein. He reacted very angrily and just withdrew the paper.

And some people started arguing that even if gravitational waves did exist, it wouldn’t be possible to feel them.

In 1955, Nathan Rosen tried to argue that gravitational waves don’t carry any energy, so they’re just a formal mathematical construct with no real physical meaning. A good way to think about that is, if I’m out in the ocean and there’s an enormous ocean swell, I might not even be aware that it’s there, because I’ll rise up with the wave and then sink back down with it, and so will everything around me. If gravitational waves are like that deep ocean swell, do they really interact with us or do we all just move together up and down in the swell? That was a big debate in the ’50s.

How did that question get resolved?

Rosen’s argument was brought up at a conference in 1957 in Chapel Hill, N.C., and very fortunately a man named Felix Pirani, who sadly just passed away, came to the conference. He had decided to look at how general relativity works, using a very practical approach that got around this whole problem of the coordinate system, and he showed that the waves would move particles back and forth as they pass by.

Richard Feynman heard Pirani’s talk and said, in essence, “Well, since we know that the particles move, all we have to do is imagine a stick, and on the stick we can put some beads. As the wave passes by, the beads will move back and forth, but the stick will stay rigid because the electromagnetic forces in the stick will try to keep the atoms and electrons in the same positions as they were previously. So the beads will drag against the stick, and the friction will produce energy. And the energy must have come from the gravitational wave. So I conclude that the wave has energy.” So this famous “sticky bead” thought experiment convinced a lot of people that there wasn’t any reason for the skepticism that Rosen had advanced. And then people like Joe Weber started trying to detect gravitational waves shortly after.

But people still didn’t know whether there would be any astrophysical sources of gravitational waves strong enough to detect, right?

Right. Einstein wrote that it was unlikely that anyone would ever find a system whose behavior would be measurably influenced by gravitational waves. He was pointing out that the waves from a typical binary star system would carry away so little energy, we would never even notice that the system had changed — and that is true. The reason we can see it from the two black holes is that they are closer together than two stars could ever be. The black holes are so tiny and yet so massive that they can be close enough together to move around each other very, very rapidly. Since Einstein didn’t believe in the existence of black holes, he just couldn’t conceive of a system that could behave in such a way that you would be able to see the gravitational waves.

Karl Schwarzschild found the black-hole solution to Einstein’s equations in 1916, the same year Einstein predicted gravitational waves. Why didn’t Einstein believe in black holes after that?

Black holes themselves have a very controversial and complex history, and LIGO’s detection was the first really complete proof of the existence of black holes. In 1916 Einstein thought Schwarzschild had just discovered a physical simplification: Just as one would treat the Earth as a point mass [with its mass concentrated to a point] for simplicity, they thought the “Schwarzschild solution” — what we now call a black hole — treated the sun as a point mass just for convenience. They didn’t think it would ever be a real thing, where you would have the mass concentrated to a point. They thought that was impossible, outrageous. By the 1930s it was beginning to dawn on people, “You know, it’s not entirely clear to us that the theory prevents that from happening.” Gradually, people like Robert Oppenheimer, the famous director of the Los Alamos Laboratory for the Manhattan Project, began to show that it was possible for a star to collapse into itself until it actually created something that really did look like the Schwarzschild solution. And that work was taken up in the 1960s by John Wheeler’s group, of which Kip Thorne was one of the students, and they and others developed the theory of black holes.

How did people then figure out what the gravitational waves produced by merging black holes would look like on Earth?

A key problem was imposing the condition that there are no waves coming into the binary black hole system from infinitely far away, only waves going out to infinity. But that’s actually very hard to do, because you usually need a completely different mathematical formalism to describe the very distant gravitational field —at “infinity” or out here at Earth — than you need to describe the black holes themselves. People would try to do this calculation in the 1950s and ‘60s and they would get wrong answers. In some cases, they would get an answer that the black holes were gaining energy rather than losing it, because they made a mistake and had incoming waves bringing energy in from infinitely far away. So what happened in the course of the 1960s was that people like Roger Penrose, the great English relativist, did research on the structure of space-time. And Penrose discovered that there’s more than one infinity at the edge of space and time, and you have to pick the right infinity on which to impose your conditions. And then other people introduced techniques from fluid dynamics. These are just examples of many different conceptual and formulaic breakthroughs that had to be made.


caglecom


And then the next step was predicting the particular signals that LIGO’s detectors might pick up.

At one of my very first group meetings in Kip’s group as a young student — this was 1991 or so — he came in with a big sheet of paper, and he had typed up everything that needed to be done on the theory side if LIGO was going to work. Because the whole reason you can detect the signal is that it has this characteristic sweep, and you filter the data against it. But you can only filter if you know what the signal looks like, and since you’ve never seen it before, you can only know what it looks like if the theorists tell you. And so Kip said, I want everybody in the group to work on this. And that’s what we did.

You’d like to have a prediction of the waveform from the beginning of where LIGO could conceivably see the signal to the final stage where the black hole has settled back down again and is not emitting any more waves. But there’s no single method that can give you the whole thing. For the first stage, you can use approximation methods that were already around at that time, but it was realized that several orders of magnitude more levels of approximation would be needed, and this was very daunting. And then when the black holes are merging, the gravity is insanely strong, and so you need numerical methods, where you do the calculation on a supercomputer. There were a whole bunch of groups who were trying to do that, and they were confronted with serious challenges. They couldn’t evolve the two black holes over more than a tiny amount of time, which wouldn’t help at all. And so a few years ago, they basically decided, “We just don’t have a choice. We’ll keep changing our coordinate systems until we find something that works that doesn’t crash on us.” And a guy called Frans Pretorius found a way to do it, and the methods took off from there.

There’s this hope that LIGO will “open up a new window on the universe” by detecting gravitational waves from previously unknown astrophysical objects. Considering the effort that went into recognizing the signal from a black-hole merger, how will we be able to see the unexpected?

Yes, the real excitement would be to find something we didn’t expect. One possibility is that the unexpected might help us out by being a very large signal. Our hopes for that have been dampened somewhat, because the original LIGO was online for quite a while and if the signal were very large it might have seen it. It does look like the unexpected is not going to be easy, so how do we dig the signal out of the noise?

One answer is that there are certain kinds of techniques that people have been looking at where you don’t commit yourself to knowing precisely what the signal looks like, but you just look for certain kinds of regularities — for instance, maybe this unexpected signal is at least a periodic signal. And LIGO is certainly doing that. They even have an “Einstein@Home” project, where they’ll send a piece of LIGO data to your home computer if you sign up for this, and your computer will help look for simple things like that. Another approach is to use machine learning to try to teach machines to look for signals. You start with what you know, but there is some hope that over time these techniques might grow and develop to where they become sufficiently flexible to catch things that aren’t what you expect.

What do you take away from this story?

I am struck by the collective nature of the endeavor. It had to be a collaborative effort; each step was sufficiently difficult that it had to link to the next step. And collective efforts come with vitriol and disputes. People shouted at each other. But the finer qualities of human nature won out. People got over their anger. Einstein got over his anger. People admitted they were wrong. And eventually, as a community, we got there.




LIGO most likely detected the shocks or vibrations of the Earth itself in which all celestial objects within the entire universe would mutually adjusting themselves as they are shifting around all the time under the influence of mutual gravitational attractions among themselves. Without any doubt that the existence of gravitaional waves which has turned out to be a BLUFF indeed.(KFC)


Share

23 Maret 2016

A HOLE IN THE UNIVERSE: IS THAT A CONFIRMATION FOR US ?


The history repeats itself, the famous of LIGO discovery in 2016 just repeated an error -  experiment is made based on belief - in the famous eclipse experiment of 1919.


There’s basically a hole in the universe -- a region where there’s much less matter than there should be. And we don’t know why it’s there.



 "For sure, there are regions of space with far less matter — stars, gas, dust, and even dark matter — than average. In fact, there are other voids that are of comparable magnitude that have been discovered since. One could cause this effect by a large region that was completely empty of galaxies, which is the “hole in the Universe” option that many reporters (and, ahem, press releases) flock to. But it could also be caused by something far less spectacular: a minor underdensity over a larger volume/longer slice of the Universe. Until we do a dedicated, 3D cosmic map (using spectroscopy to verify the redshift of the observed galaxies) over the region of interest, we won’t know for certain how these galaxies are distributed. But as far as what you’ve heard, there may not be an interesting void there at all, much less a region with no matter of any type." (Is This Actually A Hole In The Universe?-ForbesCom)


Why all the galaxies and stars near the hole do not follow the curved path of the hole? A hole in the universe as proof that in reality there is no such thing as warped space.

There are completely empty of galaxies, and many of galaxies arround it, one looks like redshifts and the other looks like blueshifts. So, how can one is expanding and the other not expanding? It is as proof that the expanding universe is not correct and proof that there are no gravitational redshifts but cosmological redshifts/blueshifts that cause by the refraction of light, not by gravity.
 
"A very big hole" in the universe truly a confirmation by the universe itself / self-proving that the general relativity theory, the expanding universe, and big bang theory  was wrong.




The Big Bang Theory

A Flawed Concept









2016: New Era The Honesty In Science

The art how to force and stay funded


Einstein's Waves Is Made Based on Belief

In science fiction, space and time warps are a commonplace. They are used for rapid journeys around the galaxy, or for travel through time. But today's science fiction, is often tomorrow's science fact. (Stephen Hawking)

So, in this book below showing the facts how the general relativity theory misled physicists and astronomers for more than 100 years - opened eyes the scientific community in the world with a simple explanations and interesting analysis - that's all for the new generation of scientists and the future of science.




Share


 
Blogger Templates