The Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Page26, 3-2, Coulomb's law as EM-gravity; Sun & planets helical
motion in space/Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed 2017

Replies: 3   Last Post: Dec 7, 2017 5:59 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com

Posts: 18,233
Registered: 3/31/08
Page26, 3-2, Coulomb's law as EM-gravity; Sun & planets helical
motion in space/Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed 2017

Posted: Dec 7, 2017 2:23 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Page26, 3-2, Coulomb's law as EM-gravity; Sun & planets helical motion in space/Atom-Totality-Universe/ textbook 8th ed 2017


"Universe Today" magazine depicts Sun moving in space with planets following in a helix motion, in video.

Alright, as we look at the below videos of the Sun moving in Space and the planets moving in a helix around the Sun, skillful rendition of how the Sun and planets move through Space, we instantly recognize how deplete, how idiotic it is to think gravity is Newton's and General Relativity's kindergarten math, because the motion of Sun and planets through Space is the motion that needs the mathematics of EM theory of both Ampere and Faraday Laws combined. Not the math of the silly F = kAA/d^2 but the math of F = (kAA+jBB + hCC)/d^2 where we have at least three variables A and B and C involved to give strength to astrobodies to go around one another. When you watch the video of Universe Today (below), what it reminds one of, is the motion of electricity in a closed loop of wire.

If the Sun and planets gravity were based on mass, as in Newton or General Relativity, the Sun would have left, have departed the planets in their first attempt of an orbit around the Sun, and that not a single planet would have remained in orbit after a few years time was up. They would all be flying off into space, since the math of just kAA/d^2 is insufficient of force strength to hold them together.

Newton gravity and General Relativity math is all based on the formula kAA/d^2. The inverse square is fine and dandy. It is the numerator that is off by at least 2 more forces. The numerator needs two more terms as that of (kAA+jBB + hCC)/d^2. For one term in the numerator is not even a closed loop. The math of either a circle or ellipse where the second term, insures the motion make a full circuit around, just like in electricity, you need a full circuit. But as we saw in prior chapter, there is even a third term of a hCC, so that the proper force of gravity is (kAA + jBB + hCC)/ d^2.

The math of one term in numerator is a parabola math. Newtonian gravity and General Relativity are all parabola math, and the planets would have flown off the Sun in their first orbit.

Trouble is, the Sun is not stationary, and when Newton did his force of gravity, he assumed a stationary Sun. General Relativity is no better, for it too takes on the math of Newton, of 2nd Dimensional math. And there is no way you can apply that math for a Sun in motion in Space and the planets all following.

The force of gravity of Newton and GR are two weak a force to keep the planets going around the Sun as the Sun moves in space at 230 km/s.

Sun 230 km/s orbital speed around Milky Way
Mercury, 0.24 yr orbital period, 47.87 km/s orbital speed
Venus, 0.61 yr orbital period, 35.02 km/s orbital speed
Earth, 1 yr orbital period, 29.78 km/s orbital speed ?Moon , 27 days orbit, 1 km/s orbital speed
 

So I need to know if the Sun is moving through Space with the planets going around the Sun. And these sites tell me that it is a 60 degree inclination of the planets with respect to the Sun's forward motion. Now Saturn has a 30 degree inclination of its Rings relative to Saturn's forward motion.

Is the Solar System Really a Vortex? - Universe Today
https://www.universetoday.com/.../is-the-solar-system-really-a-vortex/?
Jul 8, 2012 ... Is this really how the Solar System works? (Rendering by DjSadhu) ... Solar system ?vortex? gif (by DjSadhu). What it purports to show is the ...
Vortex motion: Viral video showing Sun's motion through galaxy is ...
www.slate.com/.../vortex_motion_viral_video_showing_sun_s_motion_ through_galaxy_is_wrong.html?
Mar 4, 2013 ... No, Our Solar System is NOT a ?Vortex? ... Sometimes the planets really are ahead of the Sun as we orbit in the Milky Way, and sometimes trail ...
Why is the Solar Helical (Vortex) model wrong? - Astronomy Stack ...
https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/.../why-is-the-solar-helical-vortex- model-wrong?
ref: Youtube video The helical model - our solar system is a vortex ... That thing - universetoday.com/107322/is-the-solar-system-really-a-vortex - sums it up.
The helical model - our solar system is a vortex - YouTube

? 3:21
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jHsq36_NTU
Aug 24, 2012 - 3 min - Uploaded by DjSadhu
This is a non-conventional view of our solar system that is different from the standard 'flat ...
The Helical Model - vortex solar system animation | DjSadhu.com
www.djsadhu.com/the-helical-model-vortex-solar-system-animation/?
221 thoughts on ?The Helical Model ? vortex solar system animation?. Carol Levine says: December 18, 2012 at 4:04 pm. Thank you for that explanation. Really ...

Gravity is just the EM force, and the mass term in gravity, is a collective-charge or collective-magnetism of mass. The greater the mass, the greater the chance of a larger net charge or magnetism.

The proof that Gravity = EM was a proof in the 20th century. Sometime in the 1970s or thereabouts. The proof came when it was known that Spiral Galaxies have most of their stars doing Solid Body Rotation. And although it took me to 2016 to make clear that gravity was EM, the proof was really in 1970s. And a crazy physics and astronomy community, being crazy, went chasing after Dark Matter and Dark Energy, when all the muddleheads needed to do was recognize, wow!, gravity is EM. Why do muddleheads invoke something totally alien for explanations when they could easily have said-- we have EM already, so, gravity is EM. Why not EM? The reason why not, is because most, not all, but most scientist have no logical mind, and this is seen in their education systems where no colleges and universities require their graduated scientists to have taken 2 years of college Logic, so that the scientist can think clear and straight.

Now I need to firmly understand whether the Sun in its motion of 230km/second traveling in space towards the star Vega, whether the Sun is doing Faradays law by being a bar magnet and causing the planets in their orbit plane, which is tilted 60 degrees from the Sun moving to Vega. Is the Sun a bar magnet and causing the planets to orbit around the Sun like a current in Faraday's law, where each planet is like electricity in moving around in that current track made by the Sun. Or, rather instead, is the Sun itself electricity, moving in the Milky Way galaxy and this electricity-Sun causing magnetism due to Ampere's law that makes the planets on their 60 degree tilt plane loop orbit around the Sun.

So, is the Sun Faraday's law with planets, or is Sun Ampere's law with planets. And the readers should already know it is both laws working in tandem. For in the last chapter we learned if one EM law is present, all 6 EM laws are present.

Let us use both Faraday & Ampere law upon Sun Re: Is Sun moving in Faraday's law or Ampere's law to Vega?

Actually, I do not see any reason we cannot use both laws simultaneously. I need to say the Sun is like a thrusting bar magnet in Faraday's law. And the Sun is like electricity moving in Space creating a magnetic field around it as the planets move in circle or ellipse orbits.

There is no reason of physics that Faraday's law is mutually exclusive of Ampere law. So, apply both to the Sun.

Was reading somewhere that the Sun in its forward motion to Vega, called the Apex of the Sun's Way, that is a very important concept-- Apex of the Sun's Way, that the speed was 230km/second and that the Sun bobs up and down. What causes the bobbing up and down, I wonder? Is it the effects of the EM of the planets like Jupiter upon the Sun?

And, I wonder if the Sun in its Apex of the Sun's Way is dragging along the Oort Cloud, or whether the Oort Cloud be left behind and the Sun will enter into a new Cloud as it heads for Vega.

Alright i need to get it out of my head, out of my mind, that when doing Faraday's law i am not doing Ampere's also. In fact when doing Faraday law i am doing all the EM laws all at once.

So the question is, the Sun moving through the Cosmic skies by Faraday and Ampere's laws, is answered by -- both. Both laws working simultaneously.

Now, our view and understanding of how Earth and planets revolve around the Sun takes a huge hit in a distorted understanding. In school and in the minds of most astronomers and physicists they think of the Sun as stationary and planets going around in ellipses or circles.

That is a huge distortion for the sun is hurdling fast in Space with the planets sometimes out in front of the Sun as shown in the video graphic website.

The Sun and planets are seen more like electricity moving in a invisible wire track of the cosmic heavens where each revolution of a planet gets out in front of the Sun once during the planet's revolution.

Helical motion of Sun + planets

On Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 1:25:36 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Now the shortest distance between two points on a cylinder is a helix.
>
> If we consider a liquid as a rope like structure and ions moving on this rope as a cylinder.
>


Ion motion in a magnetic field is helical motion.

There are many websites showing helical motion of Sun plus planets moving through Space.

I suspect Newton was never aware of the Sun moving in Space in a helix and the planets following.

When in science history, did anyone ever realize this and write it down? I suspect by mid 1900s was the first time.

Slingshot effect is really... Re: helical motion of Sun + planets.

And I should try to track down in astronomy history, the first time someone wrote down that the motion of Sun and planets was a helix geometry, whether it came before General Relativity or after. Because if it came before, we thence can see that much of modern physics is more accustomed to being a enterprise of propaganda and bandwagon rather than being a enterprise where Logic and Reasoning prevail.

General Relativity is like the quark or string nonsense of taking something so abstract as to be pointless in reality. So if you had the elevator analogy in GR, and right smack next to that analogy, you had the motion, the real time, real live motion of Sun with planets in tow moving in a helical pattern through Space, then you would have had to trashcan the General Relativity as obnoxious propaganda that only the dumbest of dumb could accept. GR cannot for a second abide with helical motion, for it makes no sense at all.

The only thing in Nature that does helical motion is ions in a magnetic field. That tells us immediately, gravity is Electro Magnetism. Gravity is associated with mass, because the more the mass, the more are there of elementary particles of charge and of magnetism, even though, overall the charge is considered to be neutral, still, the Charge and Magnetism is never neutral charge in the Sun and Planets and Galaxies, the **never fully neutral** charge of a large massive body and its magnetism is what is gravity. Take a look at a strong Neodymium Magnet and one of these crazy physics professor will tell you the magnet is electrically neutral for its charges are net zero, but look at all the power and strength of that magnetism in that tiny little magnet.

Charge and Magnetism lies in mass, and so, of course, we are going, at first in history, think that gravity is equal to mass, but that is a beguiling deception to think that mass is the principle behind gravity. The principle of gravity is that it is electromagnetism and only that force is strong enough to have solid body rotation as well as helical motion.

Everyone in the public thinks, oh, well NASA has done really well with their Newtonian math. But have they? Just recently, they found out that Juno cannot work properly because they built and designed it with Newtonian math, not realizing that gravity is more about magnetism and electricity, that ruined Juno's valves so it is stuck in orbit.

And now there is talk of a probe to the Sun, assisted by the slingshot effect of Venus, to boost the speed. Now what is the slingshot effect? Newtonian gravity and General Relativity are deaf, dumb and silent about the slingshot effect. What the slingshot effect is, is that second and third term in the numerator.

Summary:

The 6th law of EM theory;; the Coulomb and EM gravity law
L' = (i^2B - B^3- V^2i) / i^2B^2

What this law does, is set up Coulomb and gravity, by making Space be a magnetic field that puts a track into space and that matter follows these tracks and is pushed along in motion in these tracks-- what we call gravity. Think of EM Coulomb force as that the derivative of electric current is the creation of a magnetic field track of space and that mass matter in that electric field track space is pushed along in those tracks, with a force range of R to 1/R to 1/R^2 for notice the B term above is in first term 1/B, in second term B,  and 1/B^2 in third term. We know R is solid body rotation seen in a spinning phonograph vinyl record, and seen in stars of spiral galaxies near the nucleus of the galaxy, and where 1/R^2 is the familiar Old Physics Newton law of gravity (also General Relativity).

The idea of Gravity, is that it is a EM force that creates a track in Space, much like Ampere's law creates a magnetic field track, so the Sun creates tracks in space for planet Earth to follow in that track, but also, the Sun pushes planets like planet Earth in that track, much like Faraday's law pushes electricity around in a closed loop wire.


Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu


                ::\ ::|:: /::
                 ::\::|::/::
                     _ _
                    (:Y:)
                     - -
                 ::/::|::\::
                ::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
            . \ .  . | .   /.
           . . \. . .|. . /. .
              ..\....|.../...
               ::\:::|::/::
---------------      -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
---------------      --------------
               ::/:::|::\::
              ../....|...\...
           . . /. . .|. . \. .
            . / .  . | .   \ .

 
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/ ?whole entire Universe is just one big atom ?where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts in peace and quiet.     

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe        
Archimedes Plutonium



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2017. All Rights Reserved.