[Physics] Shadow Gravity and Spiral Galaxies
Ruud Loeffen
rmmloeffen at gmail.com
Sat May 2 06:11:34 CEST 2020
Hello Arend and others.
I saw that the images for the equations in my response are missing. If you
want to read my response again with included equations, please follow this
link:
https://bit.ly/2SsDMZu
Best regards.
Ruud Loeffen.
Op vr 1 mei 2020 om 11:44 schreef Ruud Loeffen <rmmloeffen at gmail.com>:
> Hello Arend.
>
> The file "Shadow Gravity" inspires me to present some thoughts that I have
> inserted below.
>
> Best regards.
> Ruud Loeffen
>
> Op do 30 apr. 2020 om 13:10 schreef Arend Lammertink <lamare at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Paul sent me some interesting (draft) stuff about shadow gravity and
>> spiral galaxies in august/september last year:
>>
>> -:-
>> I am including below the progress I've made in the recent past. First
>> I've found an expression the given us the gravitational constant.
>>
>> G = ([4π]c/q)(2a^2c/A)^2 = 6.665E-11 m^3/kg-sec^2
>> Where a = Sqrt(3)8pi^2
>> A = Avogadro Number = 6.02214129E+23
>> q = Elemental Charge = 1.60403E-19 kg/sec
>> c = Light Speed = 2.9979E+08 m/sec
>> G = h'c(8π/mₑN')² = 6.673274E-11 Verses CODATA Concise form 6.67384E-11
>> h' = h-bar (1.05457E-34)
>> c = Light Speed (2.99792E+08)
>> mₑ= Electron Mass (9.10938E-31)
>> N'= Avrogadro Prime (5.97864E+23) = 6.02214E+23((1.66054 / 1.67262)
>>
>> Not sure how it all fits in yet but the Coulomb constant can also be
>> expressed in terms of h'c so yes, gravity is a second order effect of
>> EM. I also realized that Shadow Gravity must weaken as it passes
>> through multiple bodies. I am in the early stages of writing this up
>> an am attaching the very first draft writeup and would be interested
>> in your take & comments.
>>
> Do you remember the equation that Jesus Sanches presented a year ago, or
> so,:
> [image: image.png]
> I think that it is possible to construct many different equations that
> result in the Gravitational Constant with the correct units ( m^3 / kg.s^2
> ) using a combination of the hundreds of constants that are in use at the
> moment. I don't know if your equation or the one of Jesus makes any sense.
> The question is: do you have an explication for that equation: What Does It
> Mean?
> I got a more simple expression of the Gravitational Constant as the one
> you present here.
> Some weeks ago I presented "The Splitted Gravitational Constant" in a
> short video *Splitting the Gravitational Constant
> <http://bit.ly/2SPWfzH> *http://bit.ly/2SPWfzH
> G = (0.5 c^2/4π) * "kappa"
> For "kappa" I take the Einsteinian Coupling Constant from his paper "The
> principle of relativity, A collection of original papers “On the special
> and general theory of relativity” 1915 " with the form: K = 8* π G / c^2
> I rearranged this equation to:
> [image: image.png]
> This leads to the calculation of the acceleration at the surface of a
> planet.
> [image: image.png]
> For the earth:
>
> [image: image.png]
> In my book *CON-FUSING GRAVITATION. Applying the Lorentz Transformation
> of Mass-Energy <http://bit.ly/2CFGDIh> *http://bit.ly/2CFGDIh
> I explained the possible meaning of the equation as an INFLUX of the
> energy-field (0.5 m.c^2) towards the center of mass in chapter: The
> falling stone. Splitting the Gravitational Constant.
> At this point there might be a connection with more complicated formats
> for the Gravitational Constant as the one Arend presents here or Jesus
> Sanches. MAYBE, THERE ARE OTHER FORMATS RELATED TO AN INFLUX OF ENERGY TO
> THE CENTER. So, I am searching for other contributions that support my
> interpretation.
> The "kappa" function expresses a tiny expansion of the earth as seen in
> earthquakes, volcano's. drifting continents.
> I know my equation of the Splitted Gravitational Constant is very simple,
> but it is in accordance with Einsteins equation, the results of the
> calculations are clear and correct without any doubt and there is a
> possible explanation, that fits with many arising theories about the INFLUX
> of an ETHER.
> So, I hope you will view my video: http://bit.ly/2SPWfzH
>
> Please like it, if you like it.
> Best regards. Ruud Loeffen.
>
> Op do 30 apr. 2020 om 13:10 schreef Arend Lammertink <lamare at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Paul sent me some interesting (draft) stuff about shadow gravity and
>> spiral galaxies in august/september last year:
>>
>> -:-
>> I am including below the progress I've made in the recent past. First
>> I've found an expression the given us the gravitational constant.
>>
>> G = ([4π]c/q)(2a^2c/A)^2 = 6.665E-11 m^3/kg-sec^2
>> Where a = Sqrt(3)8pi^2
>> A = Avogadro Number = 6.02214129E+23
>> q = Elemental Charge = 1.60403E-19 kg/sec
>> c = Light Speed = 2.9979E+08 m/sec
>> G = h'c(8π/mₑN')² = 6.673274E-11 Verses CODATA Concise form 6.67384E-11
>> h' = h-bar (1.05457E-34)
>> c = Light Speed (2.99792E+08)
>> mₑ= Electron Mass (9.10938E-31)
>> N'= Avrogadro Prime (5.97864E+23) = 6.02214E+23((1.66054 / 1.67262)
>>
>> Not sure how it all fits in yet but the Coulomb constant can also be
>> expressed in terms of h'c so yes, gravity is a second order effect of
>> EM. I also realized that Shadow Gravity must weaken as it passes
>> through multiple bodies. I am in the early stages of writing this up
>> an am attaching the very first draft writeup and would be interested
>> in your take & comments.
>> -:-
>>
>> -:-
>> I am including an analysis of the cumulative shadowing effects of a
>> flat spiral galaxy and what the Shadow (LeSagian) Gravity orbital
>> dynamics process produces as a result. I will also include a graphic
>> plot of actual observations.
>> -:-
>>
>> Appears to be helpful in your discussion.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Arend.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 3:17 PM Tom Hollings <carmam at tiscali.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Got it that time Mike, thanks. The slow rotation rate makes it
>> difficult to estimate the speed in any case, but point taken.
>> > Tom.
>> >
>> >
>> > > On 29 April 2020 at 12:54 mikelawr at freenetname.co.uk wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Tom
>> > >
>> > > I said the rotational rates would not be dfferent. What will be
>> > > different is the actual velocities of the arms because you need to
>> > > separate out the viscosity red shift of the centre and arms, which
>> will
>> > > be the same because they are the same distance from us, from the local
>> > > reference frame where the centre and arms will be different.
>> > > Unfortunately we don't know what the value of any viscosity red shift
>> is
>> > > yet. Because the galaxy as a whole may be closer to us, then the
>> > > distance from centre to arms will be different to that which we
>> > > currently think it is. So with a different radius, but same rotational
>> > > frequency, then the estimaed velocity of the arms will be lower.
>> > > Cheers
>> > > Mike
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Physics mailing list
>> > Physics at tuks.nl
>> > http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
>> _______________________________________________
>> Physics mailing list
>> Physics at tuks.nl
>> http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
>>
>
>
> --
> *Ruud Loeffen*
> http://www.human-DNA.org
>
--
*Ruud Loeffen*
http://www.human-DNA.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20200502/3ecb2f6a/attachment.html>
More information about the Physics
mailing list