[Physics] Physics Digest, Gravitational Waves

[Randy O. Wayne]

Dear Ruud,
Thank you. The editor asked me to expand my original paper by adding the section on history. I am grateful that he asked me.
I think that actual masses are invariant and constant. I do not think that the actual mass increases with velocity but the resistance caused by the photons a mass moves through increases as a result of the Doppler effect. (That is light itself prevents a body from moving faster than the speed of light). My papers on this subject can be found here: http://labs.plantbio.cornell.edu/wayne/
I think that the gravitons can also increase the apparent mass of any body that moves through it, also as a result of the Doppler effect. The asymmetry results in the precession of the perihelion during the orbit.
I hope the papers linked to my website answers your questions. If not, I am happy to expand.
Thanks,
randy


From: Ruud Loeffen [mailto:rmmloeffen at gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 8, 2017 10:07 PM
To: General Physics and Natural Philosophy discussion list <physics at tuks.nl>; Randy O. Wayne <row1 at cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: [Physics] Physics Digest, Gravitational Waves

Helllo Randy.

Thank you for your interesting and well written paper. I liked also the short history about "Le Sage's hypothesis and the atmosphere in which his
hypothesis was considered".

I have a question regarding your paper. You wrote: "weight and gravitational acceleration can be understood in terms of Euclidean space and Newtonian time-a commonsense alternative to the general theory of relativity" Do you mean  that relativity effects due to accelerated velocity (or orbital velocity) are not applicable and that the Lorentz Transformation of Mass Energy (as from Julian Schwinger) are not involved. Do you conclude that the measurements in the LHC (where Kinetic Velocity is converted to Mass) are fake?
You wrote: "Thomson [24], one of the founders of the second law of thermodynamics, realized that if "the gravific corpuscles leave...with less energy than they had before collision, their effect must be to continually elevate the temperature throughout the whole mass. The energy which must be attributed to the gravific corpuscles is so enormously great, that this elevation of temperature would be sufficient to melt and evaporate any solid, great or small, in a fraction of a second of time." Thomson [24] could solve this paradox by assuming that the gravific corpuscles were not mathematical points but were capable to carrying with them significant amounts of rotational and vibrational energy"
Do you think that it is possible that the gravitons insert a part of their energy to the surface area of the Mass (and inwards) and that this Mass is increasing? I think about the theory of Stavros Tassos, that the Mass of the earth is increasing and that we can measure this at the surface of the earth. See his paper: The Model of the Oceanic Crust with this direct link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3rzUqJwR5KpYktpZ241NzdYRDQ

Best regards.

Ruud Loeffen.
======================================

On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 11:50 PM, Randy O. Wayne <row1 at cornell.edu<mailto:row1 at cornell.edu>> wrote:
Dear Tufail Abbas,
Thanks for your kind words. I hope the equations come through in this pdf version.
Thanks,
randy


From: Physics [mailto:physics-bounces at tuks.nl<mailto:physics-bounces at tuks.nl>] On Behalf Of Tufail Abbas
Sent: Friday, October 6, 2017 12:39 PM
To: General Physics and Natural Philosophy discussion list <physics at tuks.nl<mailto:physics at tuks.nl>>

Subject: Re: [Physics] Physics Digest, Gravitational Waves

Dear Randy,

Your paper is really interesting!!

I can see that your paper has lot of hidden equations.

Could you please share the version of paper with those equations included.

Thanks,

Tufail Abbas

On 6 Oct 2017 7:37 pm, "Randy O. Wayne" <row1 at cornell.edu<mailto:row1 at cornell.edu>> wrote:
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<mailto:physics-bounces at tuks.nl>] On Behalf Of cj at mb-soft.com<mailto:cj at mb-soft.com>
Sent: Friday, October 6, 2017 10:57 AM
To: physics at tuks.nl<mailto: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


_______________________________________________
Physics mailing list
Physics at tuks.nl<mailto:Physics at tuks.nl>
http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics


_______________________________________________
Physics mailing list
Physics at tuks.nl<mailto:Physics at tuks.nl>
http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics



--
Ruud Loeffen
Paardestraat32
6131HC Sittard
http://www.human-DNA.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20171009/7f44407e/attachment.html>