Frode
I am refering to the several books and articles which are now beginning to
expose the flaws in the well-established Newtonian formulas. This seems to
be on of the latest and evidently one of the more compelling and well
supported treatments of this issue. "Newtons Laws Are Full of Flaws" was one
of the earliest published accounts of this trend of modern physicists to take
on these inconsistancies of Newtonian Law. NASA, and its discoveries, is
often quoted as having to adjust its mathematical approach to these Laws to
correct for what is actually taking place in the relationships of space and
heavenly bodies. NASA physicists have known for quite some time that
Newtonian Laws are incorrect. They have to deal with the reality of these
relationships on a daily basis, and therefore, even though they haven't been
published on these aspects, the physicists of NASA have been working with the
corrected v!
alues of Newtonian Law for some time, (30 to 40 years at least).
This new source, thanks for the reference by the way, is indicative to the
snowballing that is beginning to take place amongst the educated physicists
who are not going to just stand by and let these faulty formulas continue to
be ignored.
Remember, it is very dangerous for physicists to turn their backs on Newton,
the god of modern physics. They risk jeopardizing their standing in the
circles of accepted physicists to suggest that Newton and his laws are not
perfect. The fact that more and more of them are doing so is a strong
indication that "...something is rotten in Denmark."
It sounds like this latest effort takes on the problem with a professional
attitude and well supported arguments.
The reason these flaws in Newtonian Laws has only recently been revealed is
because in the earth-bound existance of recent history Newton's Laws worked
just fine. It is when man started to explore the heavens and the universe
personally, and had to apply these laws to the actual relationships of
heavenly bodies and gravitational forces as we knew them, that these
discrepancies made themselves more evident. One such discrepancy was
discovered in the Earth/Moon gravitational relationship. What Newtonian Law
decreed as the zone of gravitational balance between the moon and the earth's
gravitational forces was considerably different from where NASA found this
balance zone to actually exist. All of NASA's calculations had to be
adjusted to accomidate for this discrepancy.
The mathematics of these formulas are not overwhelming. Simple arithmatic
can be applied to work out the formulas once the factors are known.
What the book "Newton's Laws Are Full of Flaws" does, is to point out where
Newton went wrong. The problem was when Newton used Kepler's Six Laws of the
Universe to develop his formulas on gravity. Evidently, Newton somehow
dropped a square sign on one of the factors of Kepler's equations, and then
he proceded to formulate his own Laws based on this tainted information.
Without obvious evidence to contradict these figures Newtonian Laws became
accepted as the standard by which many other assumptions were based. One of
these tainted assumptions was the value assigned to the force of gravity.
When this value was assigned to other heavely bodies and their relationships
to each other is when this flaw starts to become more evident. That is where
the Sun figures to have more gravitational pull on the earth's moon than does
the earth itself, and where the gravitaional zone of equilibrium between the
mo!
on and the earth seems to be misplaced.
The most interesting aspect of the book, "Newton's Laws Are Full of Flaws" to
me, is that it discovers where the initial mistake was made, corrects the
mistake by adding the square sign back into the Kepler equation, and then
refigures the math of the new formulas to show that the results then prove to
be precisely compatible with the actual observed evidences of gravitaional
influences, i.e., tidal effects, earth/moon zone of equilibrium, and the
earth having more gravitational pull on the moon than the sun.
However, this new formula also requires that a new and greater value has to
be assigned to the force of gravity.
All of the other accepted conclusions of the earth's mass and weight are
based on these flawed Newtonian Laws. From these flawed assumptions the
earth has to figure to weight a lot more than the 5.5 grams per cubic
centimeter that the earth's crust is figured to weigh. From the earth's size
it has to weigh a great deal more, according to the flawed Newtonian
formulas, to have the gravitaional influence that it appears to exude.
Therefore, these mistaken assumptions have had a domino effect on physicists
trying to explain where that weight comes from. When seismagraphic readings
of the earth's interior were introduced, showing an outer mantle, an inner
liquid layer, and a central core, physicists began to postulate how this
could be the case and still make up for the weight of the earth as requird by
Newtonian Laws.
Thus, the moulten lead concept of the inner liquid core was born. This
provided for the apparent liquid state of the inner layer while still
providing a substantial amount of weight to the amount needed, but this was
still not enough weight. So the inner solid core had to make up for the
difference in weight needed, and thus the titanium, or the likewise super
heavy material, which also had to be impervious to the heat of the molten
lead, was proposed to be the composition of the inner core which made up for
the needed additional weight of the earth, as required by Newton's Laws.
Thus, the entire model of the earth and it's composition, was developed to
satisfy a faulty formula, rather than conform to known facts and principles.
The conclusion of the book, "Newton's Laws Are Full of Flaws." is that the
only way that the earth can display this new corrected value assigned to
gravity, is that it has to be hollow! Otherwise it would weigh too much
according to it's diameter and average weight of the mantle.
This, to me, is the golden argument as to the cosmogony of the earth.
Norlan