Lagrange Points?

[crashcow]

I got talking on another forum I frequent, and someone brought up the following:

"If electromagnetism is that much stronger and so ubiquitous, Lagrange points couldn't be calculated using solely gravity as a variable. But they are. Ergo, electromagnetic activity is either not that strong or is not so ubiquitous. Lab studies show that it is that much stronger than gravity. Ergo, electromagnetic activity simply isn't that ubiquitous."

Now, I don't think Joseph-Louis Lagrange had any sort of inkling as to electromagnetism when he was busying himself with celestial mechanics back in the 18th century. But does this person's contention hold water? It sounds somewhat fishy to me, but it's not really up my alley. Could one of you fine posters here on the Thunderbolts forum weigh in on this for me?

Thanks,

Crashcow.

[crashcow]

...So I take it no-one has any thoughts on that matter? Oh well, I know I'm out of my depths, but - I'd kinda hoped someone might have had an idea or two.

[junglelord]

If electromagnetism is that much stronger and so ubiquitous, Lagrange points couldn't be calculated using solely gravity as a variable. But they are. Ergo, electromagnetic activity is either not that strong or is not so ubiquitous. Lab studies show that it is that much stronger than gravity. Ergo, electromagnetic activity simply isn't that ubiquitous."

Well for one simple thing, no force is in isolation.


Also the expression of just one force in isolation has NOT been proven...just told to us.
I see no proof that the EU is not correct.
The EU never said that gravity did not play its role.
They however say that electricity has no role....I do not buy that.

Maybe you are not aware of TT Brown?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jMYVmUz ... re=related

[junglelord]

Try this PDF.
http://www.universons.com/site_universo ... rotege.pdf

Sounds like Primary Angular Momentum

[crashcow]

I appreciate the effort junglelord, but it appears that .pdf file is password-protected.

[crashcow]

I appreciate the effort junglelord, but it appears that .pdf file is password-protected.

[nick c]

hello crashcow,

"If electromagnetism is that much stronger and so ubiquitous, Lagrange points couldn't be calculated using solely gravity as a variable. But they are. Ergo, electromagnetic activity is either not that strong or is not so ubiquitous. Lab studies show that it is that much stronger than gravity. Ergo, electromagnetic activity simply isn't that ubiquitous."

The mistake here, is assuming that it is an all or nothing proposition, electricity versus gravity.
Various EU theorists have attacked the Einsteinian notion of a geometric explanation of gravity, ie mass warping spacetime. They are not denying the existence of a gravitational (whatever it may be) force, nor that in certain situations (such as the present state of our solar system) it can play a dominant role.

For now, we can say that in a solar system pervaded by plasma, each
charged planet with a potential unlike that of the local plasma must have
its electric field bound up in a space-charge sheath of limited volume.
When no orbital conflict exists, the system operates serenely under the
direction of forces accounted for in conventional celestial mechanics.
http://www.kronia.com/thoth/thoth07.txt
highlight added

The existence of calculated Lagrange points is in no way a falsification of the Electric Universe.

nick c

[crashcow]

Thanks for the reply, Nick - like I said earlier, there was something about the post I quoted at the beginning of this thread that just didn't sit right with me. This fellow I've been dealing with has been... well, a bit absolute in his world-view... but I just couldn't figure out how it was that he thought bringing up Lagrange points was, in his mind, poking a hole in EU theory.

[solrey]

Apparently there is also an electromagnetic component to the Lagrangian points, as indicated in the abstract linked below.

“In addition, the ACE/SWEPAM instrument identifies IMF connection between the L1 point and the Earth’s bow shock by the presence of low-energy (272-372 eV) bi-directional electron flux.”

Bi-directional electron flux. Could this be caused by a rotating magnetic field within the L1 point?
“Electron flux” is another way to say electric current.

“We find similar distributions of radial and non-radial IMF orientations both close to the bow shock and at L1. This implies that the IMF configurations during upstream events are large-scale spatial structures with radii of curvature on the order of the Earth-L1 distance, i.e. 0.01 AU. These spatial structures are being convected through the L1 point into the Earth’s foreshock.”

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AGUFMSH51B..06R

The geometric configuration of the magnets in the image below, is very similar to the Lagrangian Points.





I wonder if this device would work better if the magnets/axis were relationally AT the Lagrangian Points. I've also noticed that certain 'magnet motors' utilize a magnet spacing that seems to be analogous to Lagrangian Points along the perimeter.

Given the relationship of the radial distance to 'power' ratio of gravitational and EM forces, it makes sense that there are similarities/overlaps in the geometry at various 'optimum' radii from the center of force/gravity. This geometry defines the orbits of the Suns satellites, it seems, within zones where the two, otherwise relatively weak forces, are optimized. Basic wave physics, pretty much.

[Birkeland]

Spacecraft 'could surf gravitational tubes' to make solar travel more efficient

Telegraph, 11 Sep 2009

Gravitational corridors could help spacecraft travel the solar system like ships carried on ocean currents, making longer and cheaper journeys possible, it has been claimed.

Scientists in the US are trying to map the twisting "tubes" so they can be used to cut the cost of space travel.

Each one acts like a gravitational version of the Gulf Stream, created from the complex interplay of forces between planets and moons.

Depicted by computer graphics, the pathways can look like strands of spaghetti that wrap around planetary bodies and snake between them.

The pathways connect sites called Lagrangian points where gravitational forces balance out.

Professor Shane Ross, from Virginia Tech university, said: "The idea is there are low energy pathways winding between planets and moons that would slash the amount of fuel needed to explore the solar system.

"These are freefall pathways in space around and between gravitational bodies. Instead of falling down, like you do on Earth, you fall along these tubes.

"Each of the tubes starts off narrow and small and as it gets further out it gets wider and might also split.

"I like to think of them as being similar to ocean currents, but they are gravitational currents.

"If you're in a parking orbit round the Earth, and one of them intersects your trajectory, you just need enough fuel to change your velocity and now you're on a new trajectory that is free."

Riding one of the gravitational currents was unlike exploiting the "slingshot" effect of a planet or moon's gravity, a routine space travel technique, he explained.

"Its not the same as a slingshot," said Prof Ross. "Slingshots don't put you in orbit round a moon, whereas this does."

Just one US mission so far has made use of the concept. The Genesis spacecraft was launched in 2004 to capture solar wind particles and return them to Earth. Following the gravitational pathways allowed the amount of fuel carried by the probe to be cut tenfold.

The mission ended in failure, but only because a parachute failed on landing.

The corridors were especially useful for voyaging between a planet's moons, said Prof Ross, speaking at the British Science Festival at the University of Surrey in Guildford.

"Once you get to another planet that has its own tubes you can use them to explore its moons," he added. "You could travel between the moons of Jupiter essentially for free. All you need is a little bit of fuel to do course corrections."

The trade off was time, he said. It would take a few months to get round the Jovian moon system.

However, interplanetary travel would always require some fuel, Prof Ross pointed out. Attempting to get a free tube ride from Earth to Mars would take thousands of years.

[solrey]

Twisting tubes.
look like strands of spaghetti that wrap around planetary bodies and snake between them.
Each of the tubes starts off narrow and small and as it gets further out it gets wider and might also split.

According to "mainstream", gravity is a "warp" in the fabric of "spacetime".
So how does a warping of spacetime around a massive object produce "strands of spaghetti that wrap around planetary bodies and snake between them"?

Sounds more like Birkeland current filaments to me. I'm sure riding the electrical "flux" tubes (Birkeland currents) between massive bodies and/or their Lagrange points would produce a bit of electromagnetic acceleration on a probe.

Einstein's field equations are essentially a plagiarization of 10 of Maxwell's 20 original equations describing electromagnetism. He basically just plugged the gravitational constant into 10 equations describing magnetism, substituting magnetism for gravity in the maths, while ignoring the electrical components. He conjured up the "stress-energy pseudo-tensor" in order to preserve conservation of energy and momentum in the maths because he used the weak force of gravity in equations meant for the 39 orders of magnitude stronger force of magnetism.
Einstein was a plagiarist hack.
Just my 2c's.

[Birkeland]

According to "mainstream", gravity is a "warp" in the fabric of "spacetime".

Yes, gravity is the twisted fabric of empty nothing applied to relative motion. Very difficult to detect relative motion of empty concepts that warps. Like searching for the letter S in space.

So how does a warping of spacetime around a massive object produce "strands of spaghetti that wrap around planetary bodies and snake between them"?

They've got the math to prove it. It's in the equations. You can se mathematical spaghetti curving, wrapping, slowly snaking around and voila: fitting perfectly around the bible.

Sounds more like Birkeland current filaments to me.

Heretic! There is no such concept mentioned in the cosmological bible.

I'm sure riding the electrical "flux" tubes (Birkeland currents) between massive bodies and/or their Lagrange points would produce a bit of electromagnetic acceleration on a probe.

Back to the real world: Dr. Roald Sagdeev implies something similar in this lecture

Einstein's field equations are essentially a plagiarization of 10 of Maxwell's 20 original equations describing electromagnetism. He basically just plugged the gravitational constant into 10 equations describing magnetism, substituting magnetism for gravity in the maths, while ignoring the electrical components. He conjured up the "stress-energy pseudo-tensor" in order to preserve conservation of energy and momentum in the maths because he used the weak force of gravity in equations meant for the 39 orders of magnitude stronger force of magnetism.
Einstein was a plagiarist hack.
Just my 2c's.

Have a look at THIS