Jokela Theory of Gravity, Radioactivity & Everything

[Chickenmales]

Hello JouniJokela,

You stated somewhere that Froude's number for all the planets was 1. I finally got around to learning about Froude's number and I'm very interested in this. So, I was wondering which values you used to calculate this number for the planets. I.e. did you use the diameter of the planets themselves or the distace from the planet to the sun? Did you use the planets gravity or the sun's gravity. I'm assuming the velocity would be the planet's velocities.

Seems to me that if this isn't explainable by current theories then it points to some new physics... But that's obvious.

Thanks.

[JouniJokela]

Hi, Sorry about forgetting this thread for a while.

Thanks for interest;

You stated somewhere that Froude's number for all the planets was 1. I finally got around to learning about Froude's number and I'm very interested in this. So, I was wondering which values you used to calculate this number for the planets. I.e. did you use the diameter of the planets themselves or the distace from the planet to the sun? Did you use the planets gravity or the sun's gravity. I'm assuming the velocity would be the planet's velocities.

I think I have now completed this;
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... H_07102016

Froude number 1 or "Froude's law" says that the inertia and field have a certain balance. This balance is the point where the froude number is one. So my observation that planets move with velocity "Froude number 1" explained me that Gravity can have purely kinetic cause. And that's really is the case.

You can calculate G=g/AU,, where AU = astronomical unit; distance from Earth to sun, but caution; at Perihelion! so this is not the AU-average.

Now i have developed this electromagnetic theory so far, that I have managed to calculate the Planck's constant from the speed of light -Only! The link is to that paper, and you can also look this discussion;

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questi ... d-of-light

Here you can found my most complete contribution;
https://www.researchgate.net/project/QE ... everything

There is some hand written stuff etc. I don't claim its some absolute truth. I am allready aware about many mistakes and false paths, but I uploaded it, as I think it might help to follow my thougts.

[JouniJokela]

Maybe these interactions in the Earth's plasma surface have same interest here too;

https://www.researchgate.net/project/QE ... everything

Just made better analysis from the Thermosphere Gas derivates on hight 60-250 km
The attached files shows that there truly is anomalies, which supports the Fusion theory. (Read; Theory of everything- The Chemie)
The circle diagrams must be read so, that the sun is at 12, The Earth's orbital movement is on direction "morniing", also 6 and the Earth rotates clock-vice.
The temperature is presented in the scale. Bigger radius = higher temperature. Each line presents Hight in km.
The Gas derivates are no made Latitude-longitude comparable to these diagrams, and are shown on interesting points; 05 and 09
The most interesting thing, is Shown on the first page; Thich blue line presenting H (Hydrogen) shows, how the Gas-amount-growth (derivate) sinks at 120- > 110 km height. So it means that Hydrogen is disappearing somewhere?! Well that could be gone to water, but the Helium shows similar anomaly. And it's definetly wierd, accorrding to the old theories, but exactly what can be predicted with the presented fusion theory. Also temperature-curve follows this theory. (endothermic)

Link to direct data;
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _derivates