The Basic Self Contradiction in Einstein’s Precession Calculation

This contradiction is demonstrated by problem 7-13 (attached second pdf scan) of the third edition of Marion and Thornton “Classical Dynamics”, in which the precessing ellipse is obtained from the correct force law, the new universal force law of gravitation. We now know that this law produces fractal conical sections and also hyperbolic spirals in galactic dynamics, as well as binary pular orbits and all other known orbits. It predicts many other kinds of orbits. Also attached is the Einstein calculation (attached first pdf scan). It starts from eq. (7.74) with an incorrect force law, so cannot give a precessing ellipse QED. The corrrect force law is actually given in problem 7-13. In previous work by Horst Eckardt and myself it was demonstrated by computer that eq. (7.74) gives a tremendously complicated orbit that is NOT a fractal conical section. This is in fact admitted by Marion and Thornton in problem 7-13. No wonder the students are confused, and everyone else too. I think that it is very important to make a thorough numerical study of eq. (7.74) to machine precision, and to show in many ways using numerical integration and the latest graphics techniques, that it does NOT produce a precessing ellipse or more generally a precessing conical section. That should convince even the most bone headed dogmatist that EGR is wildly wrong. Of course we have demonstrated this in many ways, but I think it is necessary to bang the message home repeatedly. This is what Schwarzschild tried to do on Dec. 22nd 1915 and was totally ignored for a century. This means that EGR is politics as usual at present.

amarionandthorntonapsidalanglesandprecession.pdf

amarionandthorntonproblem7-13.pdf


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 30 other followers

%d bloggers like this: