Notices
Results 1 to 9 of 9
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Janus

Thread: Is F and F' a couple of force and reacting force?

  1. #1 Is F and F' a couple of force and reacting force? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    PRC China
    Posts
    53
    Let's suggest that F is the sun's gravity due to Sirius and F' is the Sirius's gravity from sun.
    Newton's theory tells us that F and F' have the same value:GM1M2/RR; with oppsite direction in the same line.
    Since the response speed of gravity is light speed but not infinite
    and both sun and sirius is moving independently , due to time delay effect
    F and F' will not be symmetrical
    .
    The direction of F is from today's sun to the position where sirius stayed 8 years ago and the direction of F' is from sirius pointing to the location belonging to sun 8 years ago.

    This tells us F and F' aren't in the same line!
    On the other hand it's impossible for two stars in different scales to lost their mass synchronously
    in any periods by shinning. Especially one is growing and another is dying.Therefore the value of F and F' will be never equal. F=GM1M2'/R1R1; F'=GM1'M2/R2R2
    Both value and direction is wrongly reported by Newton's gravity law, do I have enough reasons to doubt that something must be wrong with the third law of Newton or his gravity law?
    太阳天狼星.jpg


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Since the response speed of gravity is light speed but not infinite
    That is incorrect. Static gravitational fields act instantaneously, it is only changes in the gravitation field which propagate at the speed of light.
    Your scenario is thus indeed perfectly symmetric, and nothing is violated.

    Both value and direction is wrongly reported by Newton's gravity law, do I have enough reasons to doubt that something must be wrong with the third law of Newton or his gravity law?
    No, but it seems we have plenty of reasons to doubt your understanding of basic physics. You have repeatedly demonstrated serious deficits in your knowledge of even elementary principles.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    PRC China
    Posts
    53
    The Speed of Gravity: What the Experiments Sayby Tom van Flandern
    The Speed of Gravity - What the Experiments Say

    Abstract:
    Standard experimental techniques exist to determine the propagation speed of forces. When we apply these techniques to gravity, they all yield propagation speeds too great to measure, substantially faster than lightspeed. This is because gravity, in contrast to light, has no detectable aberration or propagation delay for its action, even for cases (such as binary pulsars) where sources of gravity accelerate significantly during the light time from source to target. By contrast, the finite propagation speed of light causes radiation pressure forces to have a non-radial component causing orbits to decay (the 揚oynting-Robertson effect?); but gravity has no counterpart force proportional to to first order. General relativity (GR) explains these features by suggesting that gravitation (unlike electromagnetic forces) is a pure geometric effect of curved space-time, not a force of nature that propagates. Gravitational radiation, which surely does propagate at lightspeed but is a fifth order effect in , is too small to play a role in explaining this difference in behavior between gravity and ordinary forces of nature. Problems with the causality principle also exist for GR in this connection, such as explaining how the external fields between binary black holes manage to continually update without benefit of communication with the masses hidden behind event horizons. These causality problems would be solved without any change to the mathematical formalism of GR, but only to its interpretation, if gravity is once again taken to be a propagating force of nature in flat space-time with the propagation speed indicated by observational evidence and experiments: not less than 2x1010 c. Such a change of perspective requires no change in the assumed character of gravitational radiation or its lightspeed propagation. Although faster-than-light force propagation speeds do violate Einstein special relativity (SR), they are in accord with Lorentzian relativity, which has never been experimentally distinguished from SR at least, not in favor of SR. Indeed, far from upsetting much of current physics, the main changes induced by this new perspective are beneficial to areas where physics has been struggling, such as explaining experimental evidence for non-locality in quantum physics, the dark matter issue in cosmology, and the possible unification of forces. Recognition of a faster-than-lightspeed propagation of gravity, as indicated by all existing experimental evidence, may be the key to taking conventional physics to the next plateau.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Emdrive View Post
    by Tom van Flandern
    Oh for God's sake. Should this thread be moved straight to Trash as well.

    Please, please please go an learn some science.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    PRC China
    Posts
    53
    Do you think "The first mover" is a kind of trash or nonsense or a wonderful sound from heaven?
    Search "EmDrive" on web ,would you like to give Mr. Shawyer some advises to stop such stupid researching work and close his laboratory and return home just praying "The first mover"、"the second mover"、"the third mover"……?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Emdrive View Post
    The Speed of Gravity: What the Experiments Sayby Tom van Flandern
    The Speed of Gravity - What the Experiments Say
    What a load of crap.
    Here it is again: static fields act instantaneously. Non-static fields ( gravitational waves ) propagate at the speed of light. This is scientific fact. Refer here :

    Speed of gravity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    As for Tom van Flandern and his claims, refer here :

    Tom Van Flandern - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Emdrive View Post
    Do you think "The first mover" is a kind of trash or nonsense or a wonderful sound from heaven?
    Search "EmDrive" on web ,would you like to give Mr. Shawyer some advises to stop such stupid researching work and close his laboratory and return home just praying "The first mover"、"the second mover"、"the third mover"?
    You already posted this nonsense on another thread. I suggest you stop spamming.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,247
    Moving to Pseudoscience.


    Markus Hanke likes this.
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Here is a formal refutation of Van Flandern's claims for gravity.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9909087
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Pushing force only real force?
    By Pixie of key in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 16th, 2011, 01:53 AM
  2. strong force and electromagnetic force
    By w3ird0 in forum Physics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 14th, 2011, 10:50 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 29th, 2008, 10:32 AM
  4. New Force
    By AlexP in forum Physics
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: August 22nd, 2007, 02:08 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •