Why doesn't gravity throw planets out of orbit?

[kris]

Hi,

This is my first post here, but been looking here for a while.
I'll try to explain my question as good as I can, for a lay-man whose native language is not english. Ok, here I go.



They claim gravity (waves) move at the speed of light. That means, the way I see it, that it takes about 8 minutes till earth gets the information for the position of the sun. Going towards the outer planets, this effect becomes even worse. Neptune would get the information only after 4 hours (i think).

Now, in a stationary system, this wouldn't be that big of a problem (i think - again ) but since the sun is allso moving around the galactic core AND our galaxy is speeding around with tremendous speed, shouldn't the retardation of the 'gravity information' throw the planets, starting with the outher planets first, throw the planets elipticly out of orbit?

This is of course a little thought experiment I had, assuming that Newtonian physics are the only physics working in this system.

[earls]

No. We're not starting at "no gravity" then waiting four hours for it to take effect.

There's already a long line of gravitons lined up since the beginning.

The locations of celestial bodies now are based on the mechanics of the delay.

It's not like we have eight minutes of darkness a day as we wait for the light to start hitting the earth. It's already "constant."

[junglelord]

I would purpose that a aether which exhibits longitudinal wave properties as the underlying matrix to which all fields and forces come, and within this open system, non linear, soliton, scalar manifestations would be the norm, which would exhibit collective behaviour and the so called limit of c would not exist. At the same time electrogravitic theory would account for the gravity well of the proton and the gravity hill of the electron. Furthermore one could manifest with an interrupted AC cycle and a high K dielectic with appropriate structure, a localized aether matrix, with observable and calculated gravity wells at the positive edge and gravity hills at the negitive edge.

My latest book is Antigravity Propulsion by Laviolette. Highly recommened. My Library consists of four books right now, The Electric Universe, The Electric Sky, The Aether Physics Model and Antigravity. They all agree in consistent theory and observation, that gravity, electricity, and the classical mess they sell as physics, is a dumbdown. To dip from the physics books of beyond classified technology is only possible with your mind and a few good books and several youtube examples....
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... f=8&t=1940

Ben Rich of Lochheed stated it would take an act of god to get this stuff out, so the rest is for your eyes only and will remain that way for a long time to come.

Cheers and wellcome

[MGmirkin]

Hi,
[...]
They claim gravity (waves) move at the speed of light. That means, the way I see it, that it takes about 8 minutes till earth gets the information for the position of the sun. Going towards the outer planets, this effect becomes even worse. Neptune would get the information only after 4 hours (i think).

Now, in a stationary system, this wouldn't be that big of a problem (i think - again ) but since the sun is also moving around the galactic core AND our galaxy is speeding around with tremendous speed, shouldn't the retardation of the 'gravity information' throw the planets, starting with the outer planets first, throw the planets elliptically out of orbit?

This is of course a little thought experiment I had, assuming that Newtonian physics are the only physics working in this system.

Thornhill does seem to be in agreement on the problem, and endeavours to shed light on the source and function of gravitation, see articles below.

(Newton’s Electric Clockwork Solar System)
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=q1q6sz2s

(Electric Gravity in an Electric Universe)
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=89xdcmfs

‘Instantaneous’ gravity

A significant fact, usually overlooked, is that Newton's law of gravity does not involve time. This raises problems for any conventional application of electromagnetic theory to the gravitational force between two bodies in space, since electromagnetic signals are restricted to the speed of light. Gravity must act instantly for the planets to orbit the Sun in a stable fashion. If the Earth were attracted to where the Sun appears in the sky, it would be orbiting a largely empty space because the Sun moves on in the 8.3 minutes it takes for sunlight to reach the Earth. If gravity operated at the speed of light all planets would experience a torque that would sling them out of the solar system in a few thousand years. Clearly, that doesn't happen. This supports the view that the electric force operates at a near infinite speed on our cosmic scale, as it must inside the electron.[23] It is a significant simplification of all of the tortuous theorizing that has gone into the nature of gravity and mass. Einstein’s postulates are wrong. Matter has no effect on empty space. Space is three-dimensional—something our senses tell us. There is a universal clock so time travel and variable aging is impossible—something that commonsense has always told us. But most important—the universe is connected and coherent.

The real nature of light

However, it leaves the question of what the speed of light means. This is where I part company with Sansbury and others who explain it in terms of a delayed response to an instantaneous signal. In my view, the crucial difference between the near-infinite speed of the electric force and the relative dawdle of light on any cosmic scale is that the electric force is longitudinal while light is an oscillating transverse signal moving slowly through a medium.

(A Real 'Theory of Everything')
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=gdaqg8df

We have direct evidence of the superluminal action of the electric force, given that gravity is a longitudinal electric force. Indeed, Newton's celebrated equation requires that gravity act instantly on the scale of the solar system. It has been calculated that gravity must operate at a speed of at least 2x10^10 times the speed of light, otherwise closely orbiting stars would experience a torque that would sling them apart in mere hundreds of years. Similarly, the Earth responds to the gravitational pull of the Sun where it is at the moment, not where the Sun was 8 minutes ago. If this were not so, the Earth and all other planets in the solar system would be slung into deep space within a few thousand years. Gravity is therefore an electrical property of matter, not a geometrical property of space.

(Antigravity?)
http://www.holoscience.com/news/antigravity.html

One is also tempted to point out a snippet from Stephen J. Crothers' recent Thunderblog on gravitational waves:

(Einstein's Elusive Gravitational Waves)
http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblo ... 07_sjc.htm

Einstein's gravitational waves do not have a unique speed of propagation. The speed of the alleged waves is coordinate dependent. A different set of coordinates yields a different speed of propagation. Einstein and his followers deliberately choose a set of coordinates that gives the speed of propagation as that of light in vacuum. There is no a priori reason why this particular set of coordinates is better than any other. The sole reason for their choice is to obtain the desired result. Such a method has no validity in science. Here is what the late British scientist Arthur S. Eddington pointed out in his book, The mathematical theory of relativity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2nd edition, 1960:

The statement that in the relativity theory gravitational waves are propagated with the speed of light has, I believe, been based entirely upon the foregoing investigation; but it will be seen that it is only true in a very conventional sense. If coordinates are chosen so as to satisfy a certain condition which has no very clear geometrical importance, the speed is that of light; if the coordinates are slightly different the speed is altogether different from that of light. The result stands or falls by the choice of coordinates and, so far as can be judged, the coordinates here used were purposely introduced in order to obtain the simplification which results from representing the propagation as occurring with the speed of light. The argument thus follows a vicious circle.

In other words, there is no specific observational evidence that the speed of gravity is the same as that of light in a vacuum. That was simply an introduced assumption based on nothing more than, shall we say, wishful thinking such that the maths should be simplified. That it has never been 'disproven' does not mean that it has ever been 'proven' either. It simply stands as an historical tradition...

A point to ponder.

Best,
~Michael Gmirkin

[Adam]

But the planets are moving with respect to the sun. What I mean is that the sun is not moving at all, relative to the planets.

In that case it does not matter how long it takes gravity waves to reach the planets, because the sun will be in the same place anyway.

Just offering my 2 cents, I've only discovered plasma cosmology 2 days ago and I expect I have a lot to learn

[MGmirkin]

But the planets are moving with respect to the sun. What I mean is that the sun is not moving at all, relative to the planets.

Ever heard of the barycenter?

(The Solar System Barycenter)
http://www.orbitsimulator.com/gravity/a ... enter.html

The Sun's not quite as stationary as we might think. All the planets give it a little tug as they orbit it. While it doesn't stray TOO far from dead center, it does move slightly with respect to the barycenter and with respect to the planets. Over-idealizations aside.

Don't ask me how I remember this. Heard it mentioned somewhere. Makes sense, I suppose. It tugs on the planets. The planets tug on it.

And the whole system is moving through space... in some direction or other around or through the Milky Way.

~Michael Gmirkin

[kris]

thanks for the replies guys, specially Michael, that was very usefull

[Aardwolf]

The fact that all planets should orbit the barycenter of the whole system, is IMO, the single largest problem with the gravity only theory. Because to use this (correct) barycenter would cause the planets to lose their stable orbits in mere thousands of years. Orbits can still only be correctly calculated as 2 body systems, but this is hardly representitive of the actual state of the solar system. Newton was aware (and very unhappy about) this problem and physicists have been trying to solve it ever since, rather than just accept their model is fundamentally flawed.

Bring this up in main stream physics and they tell you it's just a matter of time and computing power before it's solved. It will never be solved until they accept it needs a repulsive force as well as an attractive force to counteract the pertubations.

Refusal to even acknowledge this falsification of the gravity only theory is quite bizarre.

[junglelord]

Again, I highly recommend a Unified Field Theory that involves Electrogravitics....this is the EU.
Classical physics will not account for a proper EU theory.
To get the full idea one must unify gravity with electricity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdbpMOWGYGk


Laviolette's subquantum kinetics is a wonderful model.
According to the work of TT Brown and the Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion,
the B2 is antigravity. The flame jets are TT Browns Ion generators, which create the electro-gravitic field around the ship.

[nick c]

Celestial mechanics in the solar system is ultimately an n-body problem, but the special configurations and relative smallness of the perturbations have allowed quite accurate descriptions of motions (valid for limited time periods)...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... dy-problem

Some background on the N body problem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-body_problem
http://www.scl.ameslab.gov/Publications ... -Body.html
http://www.astro.utu.fi/conf/NBody2008/
http://www.stanford.edu/class/cme212/assignment3.pdf

If the electric field within the Earth changes, the amount of this dipolar distortion will change and the force of its gravity will change. Charge exchange among planets is the key to the orbit stabilizing mechanism in an electric solar system. The ‘clockwork’ of the solar system is governed by gravity and its stability provided electrically.

What we need to find is a means of transferring charge between planets that may provide an orbit stabilizing influence.
[...]
Gravitational Mysteries Noted in Astronomy Magazine

Astronomical Unit (AU) Inflation

”The latest measurements by Pitjeva and Standish suggest the AU is increasing about 23 feet (7 meters) per century. But the AU should not change at all!” EMOND provides a mechanism that can be tested because the Earth’s orbit expansion should be a discontinuous function with discrete ‘jumps’ following major solar storms and at Venus’ inferior conjunction. At present the measurements have only been done between the Earth and Mars, which doesn't rule out the possibility that the Sun's mass (M) is changing. In that case, all planetary orbits should change proportionally and simultaneously. This is an important experiment to carry out when a radio transponder is placed on another body in the solar system (other than the Moon).

Mercury’s Perihelion

Newton’s laws do not explain the rate of precession of Mercury’s perihelion. It is offered as ‘proof’ of the validity of Einstein’s theory of gravity. However, Einstein’s theory does not explain gravity so we must ask if EMOND can provide the answer. Perhaps so, since subtle changes in the orbit of Mercury will occur as a result of variable charge transfer from the solar wind due to the planet’s eccentric, tilted orbit. (See More on Mercury’s Mysteries). Mercury is close to the Sun and should experience a decreasing orbital eccentricity by charge exchange with the solar wind.

Lunar Eccentricity

The Moon’s orbit is becoming more elliptical at a rate three times faster than can be explained by tidal factors. The Moon is at the solar wind plasma potential, judging by its lack of any substantial plasma sheath. So it has no significant damping of eccentricity via charge exchange with the solar wind. Meanwhile, for some months each year at full phase the Moon passes through the Earth’s plasma sheath, which will give a nudge to the Moon’s orbit by transferring charge from the Earth. The repeated electrogravitic ‘nudge’ in the same region of the Moon’s orbit will cause an unaccounted for increase in eccentricity.

The ‘Pioneer Anomaly’

Tracking data has shown that both Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft have slowed at a constant rate while travelling out of the solar system in opposite directions. I solved this anomaly in 1999 in terms of the Electric Sun model. It is the only model that explains why the decelerating force remains constant with distance from the Sun, something that gravity or any other diminishing inverse square law force cannot do.

Oddball Orbits

It has long been known that comets have “oddball orbits” that do not obey Newton’s law of gravity. The anomalous accelerations are due to the motion of an electrically discharging body in the Sun’s weak, radial electric field. In recent years “anomalous orbital energy changes” have also been observed for spacecraft that flew by the Earth for a gravity assist. In their time away from the Earth, the spacecraft establish a charge polarization with respect to the solar wind. When they again encounter the Earth, their masses will have changed. The effect on spacecraft acceleration with respect to the Earth is of the same variable nature as the “non-gravitational” acceleration of comets with respect to the Sun.

http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=q1q6sz2s

nick c

[Aardwolf]

It's quite amusing to see masses of calculations to demonstrate various way to approach the n-body problem. Invariably they say it's solvable (or will be) and only acknowledge that the solar system may be unstable over large periods of time. Of course that can't make any sense because I thought it was the main stream belief that the planets have been in their current formation for billions of years. The forcasted instability should also be applicable looking backwards, which means the system is either much younger than they say (it would need to younger than few hundred thousand years) or we happen to live in a time when the planets have chaotically, and fortuitously, organised themselves into currently stable elliptical orbits.

They also allude to the pertubations being minor, but that's just pertubations caused by the orbiting interaction between the planets and other orbiting bodies. If the calculations are done correctly the orbits should be around the collective mass of the system which at times can move the barycenter significantly above the suns surface. That hardly a minor effect and should introduce serious orbital disruptions in relatively short periods of time.

[junglelord]

Something not considered is the negitive permittivity and permeability forces which occur as a result of viritual charge becoming real.

This is possible due to the variability of the galactic output and our position as we spiral spin. The real effects of virtual photons due to the strain of the massive bodies on the aether field will be something to consider in both military and galactic paradigms from the classical mess. This is the best example of the classical mess. Only by totally reconsidering the quantum dimensions and the quantum constants of the structure of space, will we arrive at a proper understanding of resonance and how virtual forces become real.
http://www.etheric.com/LaVioletteBooks/Book-SQK.html
http://www.16pi2.com/

We could begin with a primer on the terminology of charge.
http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ele-edu.html