Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1
**Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory**

Presented by Robert Louis Kemp Super Principia Mathematica Part #3 - May 19, 2012 Presented to: Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) Part #2 - May 5, 2012 Part #1 - March 24, 2012 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

2
**Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved**

This presentation is dedicated to Steven Rado, one of the great Aether theorist of the world; that past away in January 22, 2012; this year at the age of 91. Steven Rado started doing physics at 50 years of age, and worked diligently for forty one (41) years, developing a complete “Aether Theory of Everything”; and working to develop a model that would prove Einstein wrong. Steven Rado was one of the original members of the National Philosophy Alliance (NPA); and helped to develop the general consensus of the organization. Steven Rado in 1994 wrote the book Aethro-Kinematics. And in 2010 Rado, wrote a second volume, Aethro-Dynamics. I, Robert Kemp, met Steven Rado in 1997, and we interacted and discussed physics for fifteen (15) years, up until his death just months ago. Rado and I would meet at the Denny’s Restaurant in Beverly Hills CA., for lunch from time to time to discuss physics. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

3
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Robert Kemp – ( Present) – (American) Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion The Super Principia Mathematica is in general a “Theory of Everything (TOE)” described in several volumes. The book series is named the “Super Principia Mathematica – The Rage to Master Conceptual & Mathematical Physics”, because the goal of the work is to present physics similar to the way that Sir Isaac Newton introduced his new concepts of physics in his Philosophiae Naturalis Principia – The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, published in the year 1687; but with a 21st Century style. Kemp, believes that the Mathematics of Physics, are the tools that God gave man that he may understand, describe, and predict the great works of God’s created universe. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

4
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion In this discussion, the Super Principia, introduces a Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory, which is a model of gravitation, that employs the best of what works from the historical models of Kepler, Galileo, Descartes, Huygens, Newton, Fatio, Bernoulli, Maxwell, Einstein, Schwarzschild, Friedmann, and Rado, and combines them into a complete conceptual and mathematical model, which accurately describes 21st Century physics and experiments of Gravity. In this discussion, the Super Principia, presents a complete a Gaseous Aether Theory. Also, in this discussion, the Super Principia, furthermore, presents a Gradient Gravitation Field Vortex Theory. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

5
**Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved**

Historical Outlay and Justification for the Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory Part #3 - May 19, 2012 Part #2 - May 5, 2012 Part #1 - March 24, 2012 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

6
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1250 BC**

Moses – (1391 BCE – 1271 BCE) – (Jewish) Proposed Big Bang Theory of Creation Moses wrote down the first theory of the universe’s creation; proposing that the universe, was created by an Intelligent Designer known as God, and is documented in the book of Genesis, the Bible, the Torah, and the Koran. Moses proposed that the universe is made of one material known as darkness and another material known as light. Moses proposed that in the universe there is a “firmament” a sort of “Aether” material that separates fluids, from other fluids. Moses proposed that the stars, planets, and moons were made from, and orbit in this firmament. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

7
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1250 BC**

References [1] Nelson Regency, A Regency Bible from Thomas Nelson Publishers Inc., 1990; King James Version (KJV). Genesis – Chapters 1 - 6; pp.1 - 8 [2] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

8
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1609**

Johannes Kepler – ( ) – (German) Three Laws of Elliptical Planetary Motion The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the Sun at one of the two foci. 2. A line joining a planet and the Sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time. 3. The square of the orbital period of a planet is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit. Kepler, was the first to produce an analytical “Geometric Model” of gravitation that accurately matched experimental observations. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

9
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1609**

Kepler’s “First Law” of Elliptical Planetary Motion The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the Sun at one of the two foci. Copyright © Super Principia Mathematica Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

10
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1609**

Kepler’s “Second Law” of Elliptical Planetary Motion A line joining a planet and the Sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

11
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1609**

Kepler’s “Third Law” of Elliptical Planetary Motion The square of the orbital period of a planet is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit. According to Kepler, the “Third Law” is a connection of proportionality and harmony, between geometry, sacred geometry, cosmology, astrology, harmonics, and music, through “Musica Universalis” “Musica Universalis” is a concept which claims, that the “sacred harmonies” proportions in the movements of celestial bodies, is a universal law; which states that mathematical harmony is the key that binds all parts together. Kepler’s “Third Law” of Harmonies Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

12
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1609**

Kepler’s “Third Law” of Elliptical & Circular Planetary Motion The square of the orbital period of a planet is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit. Kepler’s “Third Law” constant of proportion, for the Earth, planets, and Sun, based solar system, is essentially the same for all planets, and other objects orbiting the Sun. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

13
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1609**

Kepler’s “Third Law” of Elliptical & Circular Planetary Motion The square of the orbital period of a planet is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit. Kepler’s “Third Law” is a constant of proportion, and is theoretically and mathematically the same for both circular and elliptical orbits; described by the time or gravitational orbital period. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

14
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1609**

References [1] Johannes Kepler, New Astronomy, translated by William H. Donahue, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr., ISBN [2] Johannes Kepler, The Harmony of the World. Tr.: Dr Juliet Field. Pub. by The American Philosophical Society, ISBN [3] [4] [5] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

15
**Proposed Gravitation Theory – ca. 1632**

Galileo Galilei – ( ) – (Italian) Homogeneous Gravitational Field Space & Time Kinematics Galileo's application of mathematics to experimental physics was very innovative for his day. Galileo proposed that a freely falling body, would fall with a “Uniform Acceleration” g(Gravity), in a “Homogeneous Medium”, as long as the resistance of the “medium” through which the body was freely falling, remained negligible; and in the vacuum of space, the resistance of “space” to free falling is zero. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

16
**Proposed Gravitation Theory – ca. 1632**

Homogeneous Gravitational Field Space & Time Kinematics Galileo proposed that the “distance”, an object travelled, freely falling in a “Homogeneous Medium”, with a “Uniform Acceleration”, starting from rest, is directly proportional, to the square of the elapsed “time”, of free fall. Space acts on Matter! Galileo proposed that the squared “velocity”, an object travelled freely falling in a “Homogeneous Medium”, with a “Uniform Acceleration”, starting from rest, is directly proportional, to the “distance”, of free fall. Space acts on Matter! Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

17
**Proposed Gravitation Theory – ca. 1632**

References [1] Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, translated by Stillman Drake, University of California Press, 1953 (revised 1967). Also Modern Library paperback [2] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

18
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1633**

Rene Descartes – ( ) – (French) Circular Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion A vortex, for Descartes, is a large plenum of circling band of material particles, especially the orbits of the planets or the motions of comets, by situating them (usually at rest) in these large circling “vortex” bands. The plenum is comprised of a network or series of separate, interlocking vortices. In our solar system, for example, the matter within the vortex has formed itself into a set of stratified bands, each lodging a planet, that circle the sun at varying speeds. As for the creation of the vortex system, Descartes reasons that the conserved quantity of motion imparted to the plenum eventually resulted in the present vortex configuration (Pr III 46). [2] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

19
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1633**

Circular Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Descartes: “As described in Pr III 140, a planet or comet comes to rest in a vortex band when its radial-directed, outward centrifugal tendency to flee the center of rotation is balanced by an equal tendency in the minute elements that comprise the vortex ring.” Descartes' explanation of the phenomenon of gravity, or heaviness: “If the planet has either a greater or lesser centrifugal tendency, than the small “minute particle” elements in a particular vortex, then it will, respectively, either ascend to the next highest vortex, (and possibly reach equilibrium with the particles in that band) or be pushed down to the next lowest vortex.” Descartes predicts that the “minute particles” that surround the earth account for terrestrial gravity in this same manner (Pr IV 21–27).[2] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

20
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1633**

Circular Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Descartes reasons that God first partitioned the plenum into equal-sized portions, and then placed these bodies into various circular motions that, ultimately, formed the three elements of matter and the vortex systems. Descartes, states; “The minute material particles that form the vortex bands consist of either the atom-sized, globules (secondary matter) or the “indefinitely” small debris (primary matter) left over from the impact and fracture of the larger elements; or (tertiary matter), in contrast, comprises the large, macroscopic material element.” (Pr III 48–54). This three-part division of matter, along with, his three laws of nature, are responsible for all cosmological phenomena in Descartes' system of gravity.[2] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

21
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1633**

Rene Descartes Laws of Nature That God is the First Cause of movement and that He always preserves an equal amount of movement in the universe The First Law of Nature: that each thing as far as in it lies, continues always in the same state; and that which is once moved always continues to move The Second Law of Nature: that all motion is of itself in a straight line; and thus things which move in a circle always tend to recede from the center of the circle that they describe The Third Law of Nature: that a body that comes in contact with another stronger than itself, loses nothing of its movement; if it meets one less strong, it loses as much as it passes over to that body[1] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

22
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1633**

References [1] The Philosophical Works of Descartes – Translated by Elizabeth S. Haldane and G.R.T Ross – Volume 1 – Pages ; Cambridge University Press 1968 – 32 East 57th Street, New York, NY 10022 [2] Slowik, Edward, "Descartes' Physics", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = < Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

23
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1662**

Robert Boyle – ( ) – (Irish) Kinetic Theory of Planetary Motion Boyle's law, published in 1662, describes the inversely proportional relationship, between the absolute pressure, and volume of a gas; if the temperature is kept constant within a closed system. According to Boyle: “For a fixed amount of an ideal gas kept at a fixed temperature, P [pressure] and V [volume] are inversely proportional (while one doubles, the other halves).” Boyle's law is based on experiments with air, which he considered to be a fluid of particles at rest in between small invisible springs. Boyle's interest was to understand air as an essential “Aether” element of life. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

24
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1662**

Kinetic Theory of Planetary Motion Boyle’s law is an Ideal Gas Law, for a closed system, which states that at constant temperature, for a fixed mass, the absolute pressure and the volume of a gas are inversely proportional; where the product of absolute pressure and volume is always constant. At normal conditions such as standard temperature and pressure, most real gases behave qualitatively like an ideal gas. Many gases such as air, nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, noble gases, and some heavier gases like carbon dioxide can be treated like ideal gases within reasonable tolerances. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

25
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1662**

References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

26
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1666**

Robert Hooke – ( ) – (English) Attraction Theory of Planetary Motion Hooke in 1660, discovered the “Law of Elasticity” which describes the linear variation of tension forces with extension in an elastic spring. Hooke's law simply states, that strain is directly proportional to stress Hooke's “Law of Elasticity” is an approximation that states that the extension of a spring is in direct proportion with the load “force” applied to it. Many materials obey this law as long as the load “force” does not exceed the material's elastic limit. Hooke described that Tension forces can be modeled, as an elastic force that acts to return a spring to its natural length. Such springs exert forces that push when contracted, or pull when extended, in proportion to the displacement of the spring from its equilibrium position. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

27
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1666**

Attraction Theory of Planetary Motion Hooke in his 1670 Gresham lecture, explained that gravitation applied to "all celestial bodies" and added the principles that the gravitating power decreases with distance and that in the absence of any such power bodies move in straight lines. Hooke's 1666 Royal society lecture "On gravity" added two further principles – that all bodies move in straight lines till deflected by some force and that the attractive force is stronger for closer bodies. "I will explain," says Hooke, in a communication to the Royal Society in 1666:[2] That all the heavenly bodies have not only a gravitation of their parts to their own proper centre, but that they also mutually attract each other within their spheres of action. That all bodies having a simple motion, will continue to move in a straight line, unless continually deflected from it by some extraneous force, causing them to describe a circle, an ellipse, or some other curve. That this attraction is so much the greater as the bodies are nearer. As to the proportion in which those forces diminish by an increase of distance, I own I have not discovered it...." Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

28
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1666**

References [1] [2] [3] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

29
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1673**

Christiaan Huygens – ( ) – (Dutch) Centripetal Force Theory of Planetary Motion Huygens improved upon Galileo Galilee experimental techniques, demonstrated that the regular motion of pendulums, could be used for accurate timekeeping. Huygens in 1673 published his mathematical analysis of pendulums; and was the first to derive the formula for the period of an ideal mathematical pendulum with a mass-less cord or rod, in a homogeneous gravitational field. Huygens also observed that two of his pendulum clocks mounted next to each other on the same support often became synchronized, swinging in opposite directions. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

30
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1673**

Centripetal Force Theory of Planetary Motion Huygens derived the “Centripetal Force Law”, exerted by an object rotating in a circular motion, attached to a string. Huygens posited that planetary motion, and the Rene Descartes “Circular” Gravitational Vortex Theory, followed the “Centripetal Force Law”. Huygens proved that Descartes' Third Law of Motion for the elastic collision of two bodies was wrong, and formulated the correct laws. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

31
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1673**

References [1] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

32
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Isaac Newton – ( ) – (English) Gravitational Attraction Theory of Planetary Motion Newton believed that God Created the Universe Newton writes: (Philosophiae Naturalis) Principia – The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy in Three (3) Volumes, by age of 44 years old Newton describes, Three (3) Laws of Motion Newton refutes, Rene Descartes Vortex Theory of Gravitation Newton describes, Law of Gravitational Attraction Force & Modifies Johannes Kepler’s Third Law of Harmonies Equation Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

33
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Newton’s Three (3) Laws of Motion Newton’s First Law of Motion: “Every body continues in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a right line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it.”[1] First Law of Motion – Super Principia Mathematica: “Relative to an Inertial frame of reference, a body preserves a state of uniform momentum, kinetic energy, squared velocity, and velocity, in a straight line equal distances in equal times, unless it is compelled to change its state of uniform motion by an unbalanced external or internal force acting on the body.” Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

34
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Newton’s Three (3) Laws of Motion Newton’s First Law of Motion: – can be described mathematically by the square of the Center of Mass Velocity, of an Net Inertial Mass system. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

35
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Newton’s Three (3) Laws of Motion Newton’s Second Law of Motion: “The change in motion is proportional to the motive force impressed; and is made in the direction of the right line in which that force is impressed.”[1] Second Law of Motion – Super Principia Mathematica: “The rate of change in momentum is directly proportional to force applied, and the change in the direction of the momentum occurs in the same direction as the applied force.” Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

36
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Newton’s Three (3) Laws of Motion Newton’s Third Law of Motion: “To every action there is always opposed and equal reaction: or the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts.”[1] Third Law of Motion – Super Principia Mathematica: “To any interaction between bodies there is always an opposite and equal force; the interaction forces that bodies exert upon each other are always equal and in opposite directions.” Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

37
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Newton Refutes Descartes Gravitation Vortex Theory Newton claims Rene Descartes Gravitation Vortex Theory, does not work because; Descartes' Rotational Tangential Velocity of the Gravitational Vortex, is inversely proportional to the distance, as measured from the center of the vortex; and this result does not fit Kepler’s Third Law of Harmonies. Newton claims Rene Descartes Gravitation Vortex Theory, does not work because; Descartes describes that the Centrifugal Force of the Gravitational Vortex, is inversely proportional to the distance, as measured from the center of the vortex; and this result alone, does not fit Kepler’s Third Law of Harmonies. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

38
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Newton Refutes Descartes Gravitation Vortex Theory Newton’s Gravitation Vortex Theory Predicts: Rotational Tangential Velocity of the Gravitational Vortex, is inversely proportional to the square root of the distance, as measured from the center of the vortex; and this result fits Kepler’s Third Law of Harmonies. Newton’s Gravitation Vortex Theory Predicts: The Centripetal Force of the Gravitational Vortex, is inversely proportional to the square of the distance, as measured from the center of the vortex; and this fits Kepler’s Third Law of Harmonies. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

39
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Newton Refutes the Vortex Theory of Gravitation Newton requirements, for a Vortex Theory of Gravitation to work: “The hypothesis of vortices is beset with many difficulties. If by a radius drawn to the sun, each and every planet is to describe areas proportional to the time, and periodic times of the parts of the vortex must be as the squares of the distances from the sun.” “If the periodic times of the planets are to be as the 3/2 powers of the distances from the sun, the periodic times of the parts of the vortex must be as the 3/2 powers of the distances.” “If the smaller vortices revolving about Saturn, Jupiter, and the other planets are to be preserved and are to float without agitation in the vortex of the sun, the periodic times of the parts of the solar vortex must be the same.”[2] Newton declares that a Vortex Theory of Gravitation will not work: “The axial revolutions of the sun and planets, which would have to agree with the motions of their vortices, differ from these propositions.” “The motions of comets are extremely regular, observe the same laws as the motions of the planets, and cannot be explained by vortices. Comets go with very eccentric motions into all parts of the heavens, which cannot happen unless vortices are eliminated.”[2] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

40
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Newton Refutes the Vortex Theory of Gravitation Newton declares that a Vortex Theory of Gravitation will not work: “Moreover, in this proposition I have tried to investigate the properties of vortices in order to test whether the celestial phenomena could be explained in any way by vortices. For it is a phenomenon that the periodic times of secondary planets that revolve about Jupiter are as the 3/2 powers of the distances from the center of Jupiter; and the same rule applies to the planets that revolve about the sun.” “And, thus if those planets are carried along by vortices revolving about Jupiter and the sun, the vortices will also have to revolve according to the same law.” “But the periodic times of the parts of the vortex turned out to be in the squared ratio of the distances from the center of the motion, and that ratio cannot be decreased and reduced to the 3/2 power, unless either the matter of the vortex is the more fluid the further it is from the center, or the resistance arising from a deficiency in the slipperiness of the parts of the fluid (as a result of the increased velocity by which the parts of the fluid are separated from one another) is increased in the greater ratio than the ratio in which the velocity is increased. Yet neither of these seems reasonable.”[3] “It is therefore up to philosophers to see how that phenomenon of the 3/2 power can be explained by vortices.”[3] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

41
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Gravitational Attraction Theory of Planetary Motion Newton Modifies Kepler’s Third Law of Harmonies: Net Inertial System Mass Body: Newton/Kepler Third Law of Gravitational Harmony: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

42
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Isaac Newton Theory of Gravitation Book 3 Proposition 6 Theorem 6: “All bodies gravitate toward each of the planets, and at any given distance from the center of any one planet the weight of any body whatever toward that planet is proportional to the quantity of matter which the body contains.” Book 3 Proposition 6 Theorem 6 Corollary 5: “The force of gravity is of a different kind from the magnetic force. For the magnetic attraction is not proportional to the quantity of matter attracted. Some bodes are attracted by a magnetic more than in proportion to their quantity of matter, and others less, while most bodies are not attracted by a magnetic at all. And the magnetic force in one and the same body can be intended and remitted (i.e. increases and decreased) and is sometimes far greater in proportion to the quantity of matter than the force of gravity; and this force, in receding from the magnetic, decreases not as the square but almost as the cube of the distance, as far as I have been able to tell from certain rough observations.” Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

43
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Isaac Newton Theory of Gravitation Book 3 Proposition 7 Theorem 7: “Gravity exists in all bodies universally and is proportional to the quantity of matter in each.” Proposition 60 Theorem 23: “If two bodies (S) and (P), attracting each other with force inversely proportional to the square of the distance, revolve about a common center of gravity, I say that the principle axis of the ellipse which one of the bodies (P) describes by this motion about the other body (S) will be to the principle axis of the ellipse which the same body (P) would be able to describe in the same periodic time about the other body (S) at rest as the sum of the masses of the two bodies (S+P) is to the first of two mean proportional’s between this sum and the mass of the other body (S).” Book 3 Proposition 8 Theorem 8: “If two globes gravitate toward each other, and their matter is homogeneous on all sides in regions that are equally distant from their centers, then the weight of either globe toward the other will be inversely as the square of the distance between the centers.” Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

44
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Gravitational Attraction Theory of Planetary Motion Newton Law of Gravitational Attraction Force: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

45
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

Isaac Newton Theory of Gravitation “Thus far I have explained the phenomena of the heavens and of the sea by the force of gravity, by I have not yet assigned a cause to gravity.” “Gravity toward the sun is compounded of the gravities toward the individual particles of the sun, and at increasing distances from the sun decreases exactly as the squares of the distances as far out as the orbit of Saturn, and is manifest from the fact that the aphelia of the planets are at rest, and even as far as the farthest aphelia of the comets, provided that those aphelia are at rest. I have not yet been able to deduce form phenomena the reason for these properties of gravity, and I do not “feign hypotheses”.” “For whatever is not deduced from phenomena must be called hypothesis; and hypothesis whether metaphysical or physical, or based on occult quantities, or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy.” “In this experimental philosophy, propositions are deduced from the phenomena and are made general by induction. The impenetrability, mobility, and impetus of bodies, and the laws of motion, and the law of gravity have been found by this method.”[4] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

46
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1687**

References [1] The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy/Newton, a new translation by I.Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman, University of California Press 1999; Book 1 [2] The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy/Newton, a new translation by I.Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman; Book 3 General Scholium, pages [3] The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy/Newton, a new translation by I.Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman; Book 2 Section 9, pages 787 – 788 [4] The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy/Newton, a new translation by I.Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman; Book 3 General Scholium, pages 943 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

47
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1690**

Kinematics Gravity Theory of Planetary Motion Nicolas Fatio de Duillier – ( ) – (Swiss) Fatio, in (1688 – 1690), wrote a letter to Huygens, in which he outlined his own gravitational theory. Soon after that he read its content before the Royal Society. This theory, on which he worked until his death, is based on minute particles which push gross matter towards each other. Fatio, in 1690, gave an account on his theory of a “mechanical explanation of gravitation” before the Royal Society, whereby he tried to connect Huygens' theory of gravity with that of Newton’s theory of gravity, with that of a Kinetic Aether Theory. He had a relationship with Isaac Newton, and was very impressed by Newton's gravitational theory. In 1691, Fatio, planned to prepare a new edition of Newton's Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, but never finished it. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

48
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1690**

Kinematics Gravity Theory of Planetary Motion Fatio Kinetic Theory of Gravitation – main points: Fatio in 1690, assumed, that the "push force" exerted by the particles on a plain surface is the sixth part of the force, which would be produced if all particles are lined up normal to the surface. Fatio now gave a proof of this proposal by determination of the force, which is exerted by the particles on a certain point zz. Fatio derived the formula (p = ρv2zz/6). Fatio’s (1690) solution is very similar to Daniel Bernoulli’s (1738); However, Bernoulli's value is twice as large as Fatio's value, formula for the kinetic theory of gases (p = ρv2/3). Fatio's combined Huygens' theory of gravity with that of Newton’s theory of gravity. Fatio only calculated the value (mv) for the change of impulse after the collision, but not (2mv) and therefore got the wrong result for an elastic collisions. However, Fatio’s result is correct in the case of totally inelastic collisions. Fatio’s theory not only, proposed a mechanical explanation for Newton's gravitational force in terms of streams of tiny unseen particles (ultra-mundane corpuscles) impacting on all material objects from all directions; , but for explaining the behavior of gases as well.[1] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

49
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1690**

References [1] [2] [3] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

50
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1738**

Fluid Pressure Theory of Planetary Motion Daniel Bernoulli – ( ) – (Swiss) Bernoulli, proposed that in a flowing ideal fluid, the sum of the forces of the static pressure, due to the random motion of the atoms plus the dynamic pressure, due to the motion of the fluid, is a Constant. Bernoulli, published that a moving fluid exchanges its kinetic energy for pressure, in the form of the principle of the conservation of energy, applied to fluids in motion. Bernoulli, proved by experiment and mathematics, that for a closed and conserved system, as the velocity of a fluid increases, its static pressure decreases and vice versa. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

51
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1738**

References [1] [2] [3] [4] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

52
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1748**

Kinematics Gravity Theory of Planetary Motion Georges Le Sage – ( ) – (Swiss) Le Sage in 1748, claimed that he was the first one, to develop a complete Kinetic Theory of Gravitation. However many commented later, on Le Sage’s Gravitation Theory, and that by comparison with Fatio’s Gravitation Theory; Le Sage’s theory contributed absolutely nothing new to Fatio’s theory, and that Le Sage’s theoretical and mathematical ability, did not reach Fatio's level. Le Sage proposed that any two material bodies partially shield each other from the impinging corpuscles, resulting in a net imbalance in the pressure exerted by the impacting corpuscles on the bodies, tending to drive the bodies together gravitationally. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

53
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1748**

Kinematics Gravity Theory of Planetary Motion Le Sage Kinetic Theory of Gravitation – main points: Le Sage called the gravitational particles ultramundane corpuscles, because he supposed them to originate beyond our known universe. The distribution of the ultramundane flux is isotropic and the laws of its propagation are very similar to that of light. Le Sage argued that no gravitational force would arise if the matter-particle-collisions are perfectly elastic. Le Sage proposed that the particles and the basic constituents of matter are "absolutely hard" and asserted that this implies a complicated form of interaction, completely inelastic in the direction normal to the surface of the ordinary matter, and perfectly elastic in the direction tangential to the surface. To avoid inelastic collisions between the particles, Le Sage supposed that their diameter is very small relative to their mutual distance. Le Sage suggested that the ultramundane corpuscles might move at the speed of light, but after further consideration he adjusted this to 105 times the speed of light. Le Sage also attempted to use the shadowing mechanism to account for the forces of cohesion, and for forces of different strengths, by positing the existence of multiple species of ultramundane corpuscles of different sizes. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

54
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1748**

References [1] [2] [3] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

55
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1861**

James Clerk Maxwell – ( ) – (Scottish) Electromagnetic Vortices Theory of Planetary Motion I have found great difficulty in conceiving of the existence of vortices in a medium, side by side, revolving in the same direction about parallel axes. The contiguous portions of consecutive vortices must be moving in opposite directions; and it is difficult to understand how the motion of one part of the medium can coexist with, and even produce, an opposite motion of a part in contact with it. The only conception which has all aided me in conceiving of this kind of motion is that of the vortices separated by a layer of particles, revolving each on its own axis in the opposite direction to that of the vortices, so that the contiguous surfaces of the particles and of the vortices have the same motion. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

56
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1861**

Electromagnetic Vortices Theory of Planetary Motion In mechanism, when two wheels are intended to revolve in the same direction, a wheel is placed between them so as to be in gear with both, and this wheel is call an “idle wheel”. The hypothesis about the vortices which I have to suggest is that a layer of particles, acting as idle wheels, is interposed between each vortex and the next, so that each vortex has a tendency to make the neighboring vortices revolve in the same direction with itself.. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

57
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1861**

Electromagnetic Vortices Theory of Planetary Motion Let the large spaces above and below represents the vortices, and let the small circles separating the vortices represent the layers of particles placed between them, which in our hypothesis represent electricity In all phenomena involving attractions or repulsions, or any forces depending on the relative position of bodies, we have to determine the magnitude and direction of the force which would act on a given body, if placed in a given position It appears therefore that the stress in the axis of a line of magnetic force is a tension, like that of a rope. If we calculate the lines of force in the neighborhood of two gravitating bodies, we shall find them the same in direction as those near two magnetic poles of the same name; but we know that the mechanical effect is that of attraction instead of repulsion. The lines of force in this case do not run between the bodies, but avoid each other, and are dispersed over space. In order to produce the effect of attraction, the stress along the lines of gravitating force must be a pressure. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

58
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1861**

References [1] On Physical Lines of Force (1861) by James Clerk Maxwell, Philosophical Magazine, Volume 21 & 23 Series 4, Part I & II; Part III & IV [2] [3] [4] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

59
**Most Famous “Failed” Aether Theory Test – ca. 1887**

Albert Michelson – ( ) – (American) Edward Morley – ( ) – (American) Failed “Stationary Aether” Theory of Planetary Motion Physics theories of the late 19th century, theorized that, just as water waves need a medium to travel, and sound waves require a medium to move through such as air or water, and likewise, light waves in a vacuum require a medium, the "luminiferous aether". The Michelson–Morley experiment was performed in 1887, and published in an article in the American Journal of Science, by Albert Michelson and Edward Morley at what is now Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. Its results are generally considered to be the first strong evidence against the theory of a luminiferous aether, and started a branch of research that eventually led to special relativity. The most immediate effect of the experimental results, at the time, was to put an end to Lord Kelvin's Vortex theory, which said that atoms were vortices in the “Stationary Aether”. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

60
**Most Famous “Failed” Aether Theory Test – ca. 1887**

Failed “Stationary Aether” Theory of Planetary Motion According to the “Lord Kelvin Vortex Theory”; If the Earth is traveling through a “stationary aether” medium, a “light” beam reflecting back and forth parallel to the flow of aether would take longer than a “light” beam reflecting perpendicular to the aether because the time gained from traveling downwind is less than that lost traveling upwind. The “Null Result” would be a delay in one of the “light beams” that could be detected when the beams were recombined through interference. Any slight change in the spent time of the “light beam” would then be observed as a shift in the positions of the interference fringes. If the aether were stationary relative to the Sun, Michelson expected that the Earth's motion would produce a fringe shift 4% the size of a single fringe. However, there was no such fringe shift detected! Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

61
**Most Famous “Failed” Aether Theory Test – ca. 1887**

Albert Michelson – ( ) – (American) Edward Morley – ( ) – (American) References [1] [2] [3] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

62
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1915**

Albert Einstein – ( ) – (Jewish) Space-time Geometric Theory of Planetary Motion General Relativity (GR) is a theory of gravitation that was developed by Albert Einstein between 1907 and According to general relativity, the observed gravitational attraction between masses results from their warping of space and time; in which gravitational interaction is mediated by deformation of space-time geometry. Einstein posited that in the presence of matter, space and time becomes non-Euclidean, and matter warps the geometry of space-time and these effects are, as with electric and magnetic fields, propagated at the speed of light. In Einstein's theory of gravity, matter acts upon space-time geometry, deforming it, and space-time geometry acts upon matter. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

63
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1915**

Comparison Einstein’s and Newton’s Gravitation Theory Newton's theory of gravity provided no identifying mediator of gravitational interaction. Newtonian gravitation is described, when the mass distribution of a system changes, its gravitational field also instantaneously adjusts. Therefore the theory assumes the speed of gravity to be infinite. Newton’s theory assumed that gravitation acts instantaneously, regardless of distance. In Newton's theory of motion, matter acts upon matter, and space acts on matter, but is not acted upon. Einstein’s theory of gravity offers light propagation as the mediator of gravitational interaction. Einsteinian gravitation is described, when the mass distribution of a system changes, its gravitational field adjusts in a finite propagation speed, equal to the speed of light (c). Therefore the theory assumes the speed of gravity to be finite. Einstein’s theory assumes that gravitation acts following a duration of time and over distance. In Einstein's theory of gravity, matter acts upon space-time geometry, deforming it, and space-time geometry acts upon matter. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

64
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1915**

Space-time Geometric Theory of Planetary Motion Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

65
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1915**

Mathematics of Space-time Geometric Warping Source of Curvature of Spherical Gravitational Field Potential ― Map/Patch/Manifold “Field Equation” Geodesic Arc Length Distance Map/Patch/Manifold Angle Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

66
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1915**

References [1] [2] [3] Robert Louis Kemp. “Super Principia Mathematica – The Rage To Master Conceptual & Mathematical Physics – The General Theory of Relativity.” ISBN , Flying Car Publishing Company, July 2010, page 30 [4] [5] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

67
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1916**

Karl Schwarzschild – ( ) – (German) Black Hole Theory of Planetary Motion Schwarzschild, is best known for providing the first exact solution to the Einstein field equations of general relativity, for the limited case of a single spherical non-rotating mass, which he accomplished in 1915, the same year that Einstein first introduced general relativity. Einstein was pleasantly surprised to learn that the field equations yielded exact solutions. In 1916, Einstein wrote to Schwarzschild on this result: “I have read your paper with the utmost interest. I had not expected that one could formulate the exact solution of the problem in such a simple way. I liked very much your mathematical treatment of the subject.” Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

68
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1916**

Black Hole Theory of Planetary Motion The Schwarzschild solution, which makes use of Schwarzschild coordinates and the Schwarzschild metric, leads to the well-known Schwarzschild radius, which is the size of the event horizon of a non-rotating black hole. Schwarzschild's spherically symmetric solution contains a coordinate singularity, on a surface of the black hole event horizon. In Schwarzschild coordinates, when considering that space and time expands, there is a mathematical singularity that lies on the sphere of a particular radius, called the Schwarzschild radius. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

69
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1916**

References [1] [2] [3] [4] Robert Louis Kemp. “Super Principia Mathematica – The Rage To Master Conceptual & Mathematical Physics – The General Theory of Relativity.” ISBN , Flying Car Publishing Company, July 2010, page 18 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

70
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1922**

Alexander Friedmann – ( ) – (Russian) Homogeneous and Isotropic Theory of the Universe In 1924 Friedmann published a set of equations in physical cosmology, that govern the expansion of space-time in homogeneous and isotropic models of the universe within the context of general relativity. The Friedmann equations were derived from Einstein's field equations of gravitation, and can be solved exactly in presence of a perfect fluid with equation of state, with a certain mass density and pressure. The Friedmann equations start with the simplifying assumption that the universe is spatially homogeneous and isotropic. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

71
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1922**

Homogeneous and Isotropic Theory of the Universe Friedmann modified Einstein's equations to relate to the evolution of a scale factor (a) related to the pressure and energy of the matter in the universe. The Friedmann equations are derived by inserting the metric for a homogeneous and isotropic universe into Einstein's field equations for a fluid with a given density and pressure. There are two (2) independent Friedmann equations for modeling a homogeneous, isotropic and expanding universe. Where (k) is the normalized spatial curvature of the system equal to −1, 0, or +1: Friedmann – Uniform Motion in the Universe Equation: Friedmann – Non-Uniform Accelerated Motion in the Universe Equation: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

72
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1922**

References [1] [2] [3] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

73
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1994**

Steven Rado – ( ) – (Hungarian) Aether Kinematical Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Aethro-Kinematics renders an alternate mechanical solution for the polarization of light, and it reinstates Maxwell's gaseous “pressure” model of the Aether. Aethro-Kinematics resumes the original task of exploring all 'action at a distance forces' as fluid dynamical behavior of the all-pervading Aether. In Aethro-Kinematics, Aether is taken as an all-pervading gas at an ultra-microscopic order of magnitude. The constituents of this medium, the “Aethrons”, are in constant random motion with perfectly elastic collisions, analogous to the atoms of an ideal gas. This system obeys the simple laws of the Kinetic Theory of Gases. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

74
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1994**

Aether Kinematical Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Rado states, that Newton also left open the question regarding the origin of the rotation of gravitational systems. Rado states, in the general theory of relativity Einstein attempted to eliminate the Newtonian concept of force all together by postulating that it is the 'geometrical nature of space' to curve around a massive object. Rado states, this curvature of space is supposed to be responsible for the elliptical orbital motions of the planets. Rado states, that Einstein also leaves the mystery unsolved regarding the initial rotation of gravitational systems. Aethro-Kinematics explains Galileo's Principle, Huygens' centripetal acceleration, Kepler's Laws of planetary motion, Newton's gravitational attraction and the origin of rotational gravitation using a single fluid-dynamic theory of the Aethereal Sink-Vortex Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

75
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1994**

Aether Kinematical Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Rado states, the ideal fluid of the Aether, it follows that the dynamic flow pattern of the Donut-vortex which evolved under the constant isotropic pressure of the Aether, is a highly condensed permanent state of the medium in permanent equilibrium between all components of dynamic and static pressures. Rado states, this is then the AETHRO-DYNAMIC description of a natural tendency of the all-pervading Aether: The condensation of its kinetic energy into the dynamic forms of elementary particles, binding forces, electromagnetic fields, atoms, molecules, crystalline structures, etc. this is a natural, evolutionary condensation of kinetic energy into ponderable matter. Rado states, therefore, since the internal kinetic energy of the Aether is proportional to the average speed, (c) of the Aethrons, any forceful annihilation of these equilibrium units or the conglomerations of the different units, called mass, (m), is equivalent with the release of their internally condensed kinetic energy which is described by the well known mathematical formula: E = mc2 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

76
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1994**

Aether Kinematical Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion (a) As the illustration shows, any relative motion between two layers of an isotropic medium can generate local turbulence. The different speeds of the layers shown at the left are equivalent with the opposing relative velocities shown at the right side. (b) Under suitable circumstances this relative motion can act as a torque and induce rotational motion. This form of disturbance is called vorticity and it is quite common in moving fluids, especially within the fluid of a large scale vortex, where, due to its differential rotation, each layer of the medium represents a different angular velocity. (c) While the torque of the relative motion of the layers acts continuously, a centrifugal tendency of rotation comes into existence. This is simply the nature of motion, that each particle tends to move on a straight path and therefore tends to get out of a circular one. (c & d) This centrifugal tendency opens up the center of the beginning vortex and creates a local rarefaction in the middle, which then gradually develops into a sink. It follows, that both from the top and bottom of the plane of the vortex, the fluid starts drifting toward the rarefied area of the sink. Let us now assume, that by chance, the flow from the top has a slight advantage and the two drifts of opposite directions collide somewhat below the plane of the vortex. The result is a self organized unit of matter, a donut “sink” vortex. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

77
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1994**

Aether Kinematical Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Rado states, As an introduction to the investigation for the causality, origin and maintenance of the gravitational sink-vortex, consider first the possibility, as we have learned about vortices in hydrodynamics, that a similar pattern, once it's formed in the Aether, has no reason to dissipate into randomness again, unless its dynamic structure is destroyed by another dynamic structure.. Rado states, The permanency of any dynamic condensation of Aether (donut-vortex) is based on the equilibrium state between the dynamic (internal flow) and the static (external) pressure of any system-unit submerged in the isotropic medium Rado states, once formed the vortex does not evolve any further as units, but conglomerate by interconnecting each other's circulations. This procedure of interconnection, itself is also condensing, and therefore consuming. And all similar procedures of conglomerations are further consumptions Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

78
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1994**

Aether Kinematical Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Rado states; “Hence in 1619 Johannes Kepler empirically discovered the ultimate mathematics of the Aethro-dynamic Sink-Vortex and their rotational gravitation throughout the whole universe. Saying anything more on this subject would be superfluous.” Rado states; “This result suggests the inherent kinematic function of the sink vortex, which combines both the centripetal force of universal gravitation by the radial component of the flow and the unknown force represented by Kepler's third law as the tangential component of the spiral. Hence, combining the laws of universal gravitation and universal rotation, the law of the sink-vortex gives the law of Rotational Gravitation.” Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

79
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1994**

Aether Kinematical Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Rado states; “Theoretically the territory of the vortex is infinite, but its effectiveness to accelerate particles ends at a distance in space where the centripetal effect of the sink combined with the isotropic pressure of the external medium are less than the force needed for the centripetal acceleration of the spiraling orbits of the atoms. In fluid-dynamics such a rotating system is called a spiral vortex. In this analogy it is more clarifying to use the name, sink vortex.” Rado states; “It should be emphasized here, that the inverse square law, expressing the effect of the sink, has not been derived from empirical facts, as Newton had achieved his Law of Universal Gravitation from Kepler's empirical formula. This law is constructed conceptually from the isotropy of the propagation of disturbances in an isotropic ideal gas together with the geometrical axiom, that the surface area of the sphere is proportional to the square of its radius.” Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

80
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1994**

References [1] [2] [3] Aethro-Kinematics by Steven Rado Publisher: Aethron Press (June 30, 1994) ISBN-10: , ISBN-13: [4] Aethro-Dynamics by Steven Rado Publisher: Aethron Press (June 2009) ISBN-13: [5] Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

81
**Unified Gravitational Vortex Kinetic Aether Gas Theory**

Part #3 - May 19, 2012 Part #2 - May 5, 2012 Part #1 - March 24, 2012 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

82
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion The “Aether” is another term for the “Vacuum Energy” that permeates all of the “Free Space” or “Space-time” of the “Universe”. The Aether also known as Non-Baryonic Matter, Quintessence, Vacuum Expectation Value Energy, Ground State Energy, Zero Point Energy, Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs), and Dark Matter is a gas that behaves like an ideal gas, that can be described fundamentally with the Kinetic Theory of Gases. The constituents of the “Aether Gas” are the “Aetherons.” And therefore the “Aetherons” are also the constituents of “Space” or “Space-time.” An Aetheron is an elastic spherical volume of space known as the Q-Sphere, that consists of and Outer Shell Exterior Aetheron, and an Interior to the spherical volume Aetheron; that is in random motion within the interior with an average speed equal to the speed of light. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

83
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion The Aetherons of the Aether Gas interact only with they collide. The Vacuum Energy Aetherons are not particles per se, but that the vacuum is made of constituent Aetherons which exhibit particle and wave type behavior. The “Aetherons” exist only pairs. And there is no such thing as a single Aetheron. This Aetheron pairing could be responsible for the elastic wave behavior? The Q-Sphere Aetheron and the interior Aetheron can change places or states. For any Net Inertial Mass body some Aetherons of the vortex that make up that mass body are Isotropic (direction independent and random) and some Aethrons are anisotropic (direction dependent). There is an enormous amount of Aetherons that make up a proton, electron, or photon. And yes the electron aetherons do interact in an interlocking way with the protons! Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

84
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Energy is exchanged when the Interior Aetheron collides with the inner wall of the Exterior Aetheron. The “Aetherons” are not particles nor are they waves, but the “Aetherons” exists in elastic spherical volumes where the radius of the volume is directly proportional to the mass. This also means that the larger the volume of space the more “Aether” or “Aetherons” occupy that volume of space. The larger the liner (radial) “space” or volume “space” the larger the quantity of Aether and the greater the number of Aetherons in that ‘space.” And the larger the Inertial Mass in that space. Inertial Mass (i.e. electrons, protons, atoms, planets, suns, galaxies) are modeled as the condensing of the Aetherons into radial, tangential, and orthogonal directions. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

85
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion The Aether is also a form of heat energy where the temperature of that heat is measured on thermodynamic scales, and is a measure of the average kinetic energy of motion; of an atmospheric environment and of the particles in translation, rotation, vibration motion, of individual particles that make up an isolated system Net Inertial Mass body interacting with that atmospheric environment. The following equation describes the “Isotropic Kinetic Energy” and temperature dependence of the aether interaction with matter; and stated via aphorism: the “Internal Isotropic Omni-directional Kinetic Energy” of a conserved system is directly proportional to the Absolute Temperature of that system; and is related to Boyle’s Law: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

86
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Law of Conservation of “Isotropic” Internal Omni-directional Kinetic Energy — Isotropy (Direction Independent) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

87
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Law of Conservation of “Anisotropic” External Translational Kinetic Energy — Anisotropy (Direction Dependent) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

88
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1738**

Fluid Pressure Theory of Planetary Motion Daniel Bernoulli – ( ) – (Swiss) Bernoulli, proposed that in a flowing ideal fluid, the sum of the forces of the static pressure, due to the random motion of the atoms plus the dynamic pressure, due to the motion of the fluid, is a Constant. Bernoulli, published that a moving fluid exchanges its kinetic energy for pressure, in the form of the principle of the conservation of energy, applied to fluids in motion. Bernoulli, proved by experiment and mathematics, that for a closed and conserved system, as the velocity of a fluid increases, its static pressure decreases and vice versa. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

89
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Bernoulli’s Total Pressure Law of Conservation Bernoulli’s Total Conservation of Kinetic Energy Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

90
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Keeping the Inertial Mass Density () constant for an isolated fluid system and taking the differential of both sides of the above equation. And, letting the Pressure change (dP) with Velocity changes (dv) yields: Pressure Gradient of Vortex Fluid Field Circulation Force of Vortex Fluid Field Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

91
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Kepler’s “Second Law” of Elliptical Planetary Motion A line joining a planet and the Sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

92
**Unified Gravitational Vortex Mechanics**

Part #3 - May 19, 2012 Part #2 - May 5, 2012 Part #1 - March 24, 2012 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

93
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Gravitational Vortex Motion Mechanics The Gravitational Vortex Motion Mechanics is described by three (3) independent directional dimensions of motion: Radial Direction Tangential Direction Orthogonal Direction The Gravitational Vortex Motion Mechanics is described by three (3) directional dimensions of space & time motion; as well as inertial mass in motion: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

94
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

95
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Newton Modifies Kepler’s Third Law of Harmonies: Net Inertial System Mass Body: Evolutionary Attraction Rate: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

96
**Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion**

Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010 Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Kepler/Newton/Schwarzschild Third Law of Gravitational Harmony – Gravitational Evolutionary Attraction Rate: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

97
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Kepler’s Third Law - Evolutionary Attraction Rate Inertial Mass Gravitational Evolutionary Attraction Rate – (Radial Vector) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

98
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Inertial Mass – Gradient Gravitational Field Acceleration The Inertial Mass Gradient Gravitational Field Acceleration (g(Gravity)) varies in each spherical volume potential of the gravity field, such that the larger the volume potential, the slower the acceleration towards the center of the gradient gravity field; and the smaller the volume potential, the faster the acceleration towards the center of the gradient gravity field Aphorism: The motion of the Gradient Gravitational Field (g(Gravity)) Acceleration is a measure of the acceleration of the attraction and interaction of “mass towards mass”, and varies directly proportional to the Net Inertial (m(Net)) Mass, and varies inversely with the square of the Semi-Major radius (1/r2) distance, relative to the center of the Gradient Gravitational Field. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

99
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Gravitational Acceleration Gravitational Acceleration – (Radial Vector) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

100
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Kepler’s “Second Law” of Elliptical Planetary Motion A line joining a planet and the Sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

101
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Gravitational Aerial Velocity (Specific Angular Momentum) Gravitational Aerial Velocity – (Orthogonal Vector) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

102
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Gravitational Tangential “Orbital” Velocity Gravitational Tangential “Orbital” Velocity – (Tangential Vector) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

103
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Gravitational Vorticity “Vortical” Velocity Gravitational Vorticity “Vortical” Velocity – (Tangential Vector) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

104
**Unified Gravitational Vortex Gravitational Force & Field Mechanics**

Part #3 - May 19, 2012 Part #2 - May 5, 2012 Part #1 - March 24, 2012 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

105
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Inertial Mass “Newtonian” Gravitational Force Aphorism: The strength of the “Newtonian” Gravitational Force (F(Gravity)) is a measure of the force of attraction and interaction of “mass towards mass”, and varies in direct proportion to the product of the Net Inertial Mass (m(Net)) multiplied by the orbiting “test” mass (m(test)), and varies inversely with the square of the Semi-Major radius (1/r2) distance, relative to the center of the Gradient Gravitational Field. Inertial Mass “Newtonian” Gravitational Force Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

106
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Newton Law of Gravitational Attraction Force: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

107
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Inertial Mass “Self” Gravitational Force Aphorism: The strength of the “Self” Gravitational Force (F(Self)) is a measure of the force of attraction and interaction of “mass towards mass”, and varies directly with the square of the Linear Mass Density (2); and likewise varies in direct proportion to the square of the Net Inertial Mass (m(Net)), and varies inversely with the square of the Semi-Major radius (1/r2) distance, relative to the center of the Gradient Gravitational Field. Inertial Mass “Self” Gravitational Force Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

108
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Self Gravitational Attraction Force Law: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

109
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Push Gravitational Attraction Force Law: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

110
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Net Inertial Linear Mass Density Aphorism: The dense intensity of Net Inertial Linear Mass Density () is a measure of the linear density of the gradient potentials of the gravity field, and varies in direct proportion to the ratio of the Net Inertial Mass (m(Net)), and inversely with increases or decreases in the linear Semi-Major radius (1/r) distance, relative to the center of the Gradient Gravitational Field. And likewise varies in direct proportion to the Gravitational Field Potential (v2(Gravity)); and further varies in direct proportion to the square root of the “Self” Gravitational Force (F(Self)) of each concentric spherical shell potential of the gradient gravity field. Net Inertial Linear Mass Density Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

111
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion “Black Hole” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density The “Maximum” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density (), measures a “maximum” linear density, when the Semi-Major Radius (r = rSchwarzschild) distance is equal to the Schwarzschild Radius (rSchwarzschild) Black Hole Event Horizon, and represents the “lowest potential” or the “smallest volume” of the gradient gravity field system mass body. The “Maximum” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density (), exists at the core center, of every Net Inertial Mass (m(Net)), and is the core of every gradient gravitational field; and represents the: smallest volume, greatest Gravitational Force, largest Inertia Potential, greatest Potential Energy, largest Gravitational Acceleration, fastest Orbiting Velocity, and the shortest Orbital Period, of the gradient gravity field. In this “Gradient Vortex Gravitational Field” model, the “Black Hole” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density (Black-Hole)” is a constant value, that is spatially located at the Black Hole Event Horizon” origin source, of the gravitational gradient field; and is the “vacuum energy” binding proportionality between “Matter/Mass” and the “Space” of the “Vacuum of Space-time”; and can be modeled as a “fabric continuum” or “vacuum energy” that permeates throughout the entire universe. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

112
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion “Black Hole” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density The “Black Hole” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density (Black-Hole)” is a direct measure of the vacuum of space-time continuum, where the Net Inertial Mass – (m(Net)) or “matter” of the gravitational field system body, is directly proportional to the “space” distance of the “source of the” gravity field; and where the minimum distance, and the lowest energy potential, is given by the Schwarzschild Radius (rSchwarzschild) Black Hole Event Horizon, of the gradient gravity field, described by the following relation, and equation. “Black Hole” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

113
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion “Black Hole” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density The “Black Hole” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density (Black-Hole) is a gravitational field parameter where the ratio of the Net Inertial Mass – (m(Net)) divided by the Schwarzschild Radius (rSchwarzschild) Black Hole Event Horizon, is a constant of nature. “Black Hole” Net Inertial Linear Mass Density Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

114
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Gradient Gravitational Field - Inertial Mass “Volume” Density In an “Inhomogeneous Gradient Gravitational Field”, the Net Inertial “Volume” Mass Density (Net), varies from location to location of each gravitational energy potential, relative to the center of the gradient gravity field. “Black Hole” Net Inertial Mass “Volume” Density The most dense Net Inertial “Volume” Mass Density (Net), value, of the gradient gravitational field, is the Black Hole Event Horizon, Net Inertial “Volume” Mass Density (Black-Hole). The Black Hole Event Horizon, Net Inertial “Volume” Mass Density (Black-Hole), value, varies in inverse proportion to the Net Inertial Mass (m(Net)), of the gradient gravitational field, given by the following equation. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

115
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion Gradient Gravitational Field - Inertial Mass “Linear” Density In an “Inhomogeneous Gradient Gravitational Field”, the Net Inertial “Linear” Mass Density (), varies from location to location of each gravitational energy potential, relative to the center of the gradient gravity field. “Black Hole” Net Inertial Mass “Linear” Density The Black Hole Event Horizon, Net Inertial “Linear” Mass Density (Black-Hole), is a constant, of the gradient gravitational field, given by the following equation. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

116
**Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory**

Part #3 - May 19, 2012 Part #2 - May 5, 2012 Part #1 - March 24, 2012 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

117
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitation Vortex Theory The Unified Vortex Gravitation Vortex Theory described an isolated gravitation vortex system mass body, as being comprised of the following properties of matter and energy: Inertial Mass Gravitation Aether Gravitation Vacuum Energy Gravitation Heat Radiation Gravitation Unified Gravitation Vortex “Net Difference” Conservation Unified Gravitation Vortex “Net Sum” Conservation Unified Gravitation Vortex “Zero Sum” Conservation Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

118
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitation Vortex Theory Unified Gravitation Vortex “Net Difference” Conservation Unified Gravitation Vortex – Inertial Mass “Volume ”Density difference Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

119
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitation Vortex Theory Unified Gravitation Vortex “Net Difference” Conservation Unified Gravitation Vortex – Uniform Angular Acceleration difference Einstein Field Equation (EFE) – Geodesic Arc-Length Equation Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

120
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Mathematics of Space-time Geometric Warping Einstein Vacuum Density (Cosmological Term) – Inverse Square Distance Relation Heat Radiation Scalar – Inverse Square Distance Relation Stefan Boltzmann Heat Radiation Constant Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

121
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Universal Constants Planck’s Electromagnetic Constant Stefan Boltzmann Heat Radiation Constant Universal Gravitational Mass Attraction Constant Speed of Light in Vacuum Constant Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

122
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1922**

Homogeneous and Isotropic Theory of the Universe Friedmann modified Einstein's equations to relate to the evolution of a scale factor (a) related to the pressure and energy of the matter in the universe. The Friedmann equations are derived by inserting the metric for a homogeneous and isotropic universe into Einstein's field equations for a fluid with a given density and pressure. There are two (2) independent Friedmann equations for modeling a homogeneous, isotropic and expanding universe. Where (k) is the normalized spatial curvature of the system equal to −1, 0, or +1: Friedmann – Uniform Motion in the Universe Equation: Friedmann – Non-Uniform Accelerated Motion in the Universe Equation: Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

123
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Homogeneous and Isotropic Theory of the Universe Friedmann Equations for modeling a Homogeneous, Isotropic Conserved System ─ Uniform Motion in the Universe Equation Friedmann Equations for modeling a Homogeneous, Isotropic Conserved System ─ Uniform Angular Acceleration (Hubble Parameter) Super Principia - Friedmann Equations for modeling a Homogeneous, Isotropic Conserved System ─ Uniform Angular Acceleration Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

124
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Homogeneous and Isotropic Theory of the Universe Super Principia - Friedmann Equations for modeling a Homogeneous, Isotropic Conserved System ─ Uniform Angular Acceleration (Hubble Parameter) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

125
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Homogeneous and Isotropic Theory of the Universe Friedmann – Non-Uniform “Accelerated” Motion in the Universe Equation: Super Principia - Friedmann Equations for modeling a Homogeneous, Isotropic Conserved System ─ Total Angular Acceleration Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

126
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1915**

Space-time Geometric Theory of Planetary Motion Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

127
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1915**

Mathematics of Space-time Geometric Warping Source of Curvature of Spherical Gravitational Field Potential ― Map/Patch/Manifold “Einstein Field Equation (EFE)” Geodesic Arc Length Distance Map/Patch/Manifold Angle Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

128
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitation Vortex Theory The Unified Vortex Gravitation Vortex Theory described an isolated gravitation vortex system mass body, as being comprised of the following “Gravitational Force” properties of matter and energy: Inertial Mass Gravitation Force Aether Gravitation Force Vacuum Force Radiation Gravitation Force Unified Gravitation Vortex “Net Difference” Force Conservation Unified Gravitation Vortex “Net Sum” Force Conservation Unified Gravitation Vortex “Zero Sum” Force Conservation Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

129
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitation Vortex Theory Inertial Mass Gravitation Force Aether Gravitation “Light” Force Vacuum “Dark” Force Heat Radiation Gravitation Force Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

130
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Einstein Field Equation (EFE) - Stress Energy The General Relativity Einstein Field Equation (EFE) determines the metric tensor of space-time for a given arrangement of stress-energy in the space-time. The Einstein field equations describe the fundamental force of gravitation as a curved space-time caused by matter and energy. The “Stress” Energy (T()), describes curved space-time which includes matter and energy includes both energy and momentum densities as well as stress pressure and shear pressure. Drawing further upon the analogy with Newtonian gravity, it is natural to assume that the field equation for gravity describes this “Stress” Energy (T()), as the source of gravity on the surface of a spherical gravitational field potential. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

131
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Unified Gravitation Vortex Theory Ideal Gas Equation for Space-time – Einstein Field Equation (EFE) Stress Energy Cosmic “Dark” Vacuum Force Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

132
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 1916**

Black Hole Theory of Planetary Motion The Schwarzschild solution, which makes use of Schwarzschild coordinates and the Schwarzschild metric, leads to the well-known Schwarzschild radius, which is the size of the event horizon of a non-rotating black hole. Schwarzschild's spherically symmetric solution contains a coordinate singularity, on a surface of the black hole event horizon. In Schwarzschild coordinates, when considering that space and time expands, there is a mathematical singularity that lies on the sphere of a particular radius, called the Schwarzschild radius. Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

133
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Black Hole Theory of Planetary Motion The Schwarzschild solution, is described by three Energies: Dark Energy Metric - Dark Energy & Force – Time Dependence Space-time Expansion Metric – Space Dependence (Gravity Time Dilation) Geodesic Arc Length Metric – Einstein Field Equation (EFE) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

134
**Proposed Gravitation Vortex Theory – ca. 2010**

Dark Energy Metric - Dark Energy & Force – Time Dependence Space-time Expansion Metric – Space Dependence (Gravity Time Dilation) Geodesic Arc Length Metric – Einstein Field Equation (EFE) Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

135
**Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory**

Presented to: Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) Citation - Cite this work as: Robert Louis Kemp; The Super Principia Mathematica – The Rage to Master Conceptual & Mathematical Physics – The General Theory of Relativity – “Unified Gravitational Vortex Theory” - Online Presentation to Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA) – ISBN , Volume 3; July 2010 Part #3 - May 19, 2012 Part #2 - May 5, 2012 Part #1 - March 24, 2012 Copyright © 2012 – All Rights Reserved

Similar presentations

OK

Professional Development Series June 18, 2005 The Physics of Tops presented by Luis A. Martínez-Pérez, Ph.D. Associate Professor Science Education Florida.

Professional Development Series June 18, 2005 The Physics of Tops presented by Luis A. Martínez-Pérez, Ph.D. Associate Professor Science Education Florida.

© 2019 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

To make this website work, we log user data and share it with processors. To use this website, you must agree to our Privacy Policy, including cookie policy.

Ads by Google