[Physics] Physics Digest, Gravitational Waves

[Hans van Leunen]

To all
If field equations are treated in a more general manner, then some new insights appear. Quaternionic differential equations appear to offer a self consistent set. The quaternionic first order partial differential equation contains five terms. Two quaternionic homogeneous second order partial differential equations exist. One of them is the equivalent of the wave equation. A short overview is given in Mother of all Field Equations; http://vixra.org/abs/1709.0324 .
Hans
----Origineel Bericht----
Van : row1 at cornell.edu
Datum : 06/10/2017 17:35
Aan : physics at tuks.nl
Onderwerp : Re: [Physics] Physics Digest, Gravitational Waves
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {
	mso-style-unhide: no;
	mso-style-qformat: yes;
	mso-style-parent: ;
	margin: 0.0in;
	margin-bottom: 1.0E-4pt;
	mso-pagination: widow-orphan;
	font-size: 12.0pt;
	font-family: "Times New Roman" , serif;
	mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri;
}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {
	mso-style-noshow: yes;
	mso-style-priority: 99;
	color: rgb(5,99,193);
	text-decoration: underline;
	text-underline: single;
}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
	mso-style-noshow: yes;
	mso-style-priority: 99;
	color: rgb(149,79,114);
	text-decoration: underline;
	text-underline: single;
}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0 {
	mso-style-name: msonormal;
	mso-style-unhide: no;
	mso-margin-top-alt: auto;
	margin-right: 0.0in;
	mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto;
	margin-left: 0.0in;
	mso-pagination: widow-orphan;
	font-size: 12.0pt;
	font-family: "Times New Roman" , serif;
	mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri;
}
span.EmailStyle18 {
	mso-style-type: personal-reply;
	mso-style-noshow: yes;
	mso-style-unhide: no;
	mso-ansi-font-size: 11.0pt;
	mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;
	font-family: Calibri , sans-serif;
	mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri;
	mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri;
	mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;
	mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";
	color: rgb(31,73,125);
}
*.MsoChpDefault {
	mso-style-type: export-only;
	mso-default-props: yes;
	font-size: 10.0pt;
	mso-ansi-font-size: 10.0pt;
	mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;
}
div.WordSection1 {
	page: WordSection1;
}
 
Dear Carl Johnson,
   
 
I think that even if the wavelength of gravitational waves were 3 x 10^6 m and they traveled at 3 x 10^8 m/s, it would only take 0.01 s to pass through a detector. For other reasons I favor La Sage gravitation over general relativity. I am attaching a paper of mine that is in press.
   
 
Thank,
   
 
Randy
   
 
   
     
   
 
   
     
   
 
   
     
   
 
  
   
From: Physics [mailto:physics-bounces at tuks.nl] On Behalf Of cj at mb-soft.com
Sent: Friday, October 6, 2017 10:57 AM
To: physics at tuks.nl
Subject: Re: [Physics] Physics Digest, Gravitational Waves
     
  
 
 
  
    
  
 
  
Some of you guys in this group might have an ideal opportunity to become known.
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
Recently, the Nobel Prrize Committees showed how "political" their decisions are and where actual science is not that important to them.  They gave some Nobel Prizes in Physics regarding Gravitational Waves that have allegedly been detected.
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
Please look into the following.  The Newtonian Gravitational formula is essentially identical to the Coulomb's Law formula.  Gravitational mass instead of electrical charge and the value of the Constant arre the only differences.  Everyone knows the similarity of Electromagnetism and Gravitation, where gravitation is so relatively weak by a factor of trillions.
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
About fifteen years ago, I did the math regarding both of them.  You guys can do it as well, and I am sure you will be as surprised as I was at the math results.
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
It is easy to calculate that for electromagnetism, we can see an "entire wave" of microwaves in a fraction of a billionth of a second.  Simple Physics.
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
Fifteen years ago, I did that same simple math for gravitation, and I found that "one wave length" clearly takes many thousands of years to complete.  Yes, gravitational waves certainly DO exist, but they are SO large that in anyone's life, no one can witness even a tiny fraction of "one wavelength".  Specifically, if a gravitational wave was passing through our region right now, a single wave is currently in the Orion Belt stars and here at the same time.  Yes, that gravitational wave must carry incredible Energy in it, but to try to DETECT such a wave is clearly essentially impossible.
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
A wavelength of thousands of light years, and a frequency of a single wae per thousands of years.
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
Those Researchers never bothered to mention such frequency or wavelength.  The Nobel Committee never had a clue of this enormous difficulty regarding any experiment to try to detect any sinusoidal wave that is so huge and slow.  If anyone would (or will) ever notice this wavelength and frequency issue, they would see how impossible it is for us humans to detect such things (even though I certainly agree that they exist.)
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
If ANY ONE would do the Math and inform the Nobel Committee about this issue, they would see the "emptiness" of such a specific Nobel Prize.  Why don't one of you do that?
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
I certainly respect the work of many of my fellow Physicists.  But hadn't Nobel considered awarding a Prize to those two "physicists" who had claimed to produce "cold fusion" some time back.  It was only after actual Physicists examined those clasims that it became obvious that the claim was foolish.  Unfortunately, this is probably again the situation regarding detecting Gravitational Waves.
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
 
  
Carl Johnson
    
 
 
  
 
    
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20171006/9a7443c1/attachment.html>