Subject: Orbital Theory
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 04:57:54 EDT
The standard modellers will argue, predictably, that the Christoffel symbol and Schwarzschild metric (as they call it) produce the relativistic corrections in orbital theory (e.g. precession of the perihelion). However this is counter argued by the fact that the Christoffel connection is now known to contradict the Hodge dual of the Bianchi identity, so the Christoffel connection is a logical self-contradiction at a basic geometrical level. Steve Crothers has also given a counter argument in that Ricci flat solutions are pure geometry, and they contradict the Einstein equivalence principle. So we should use the satellite data (which are of course precise and interesting) to test ECE, because we already know that EH is self-contradictory and obsolete. Thirdly as just mentioned, Schwarzschild’s alpha from a Ricci flat solution is a loose parameter, not a predicting entity. All the so called precision tests of general relativity are now known to contain these fatal internal contradictions and fitted paramater alpha of a vacuum solution. So they all have to be overhauled systematically. In paper 108 which Horst is working on at present, we will give the rigorously consistent ECE description of the orbits of binary pulsars, without using gravitational radiation. The precision tests of gr are usually said to be: bending of light by gravity, percession of the perihelion, the orbits of binary pulsars, and the Lense Thirring effect. It is now known that they must all be based on torsion and curvature.
The intolerance of the standard mdollers to new ideas is also tediously predictable. For example our very well read and accepted paper 93 was dismissed by an anonymous referees as, sic, “a loony paper”. There was a seplling mistake, it shoul dhav ebeem “loonie”, which is slang of “insane”. When the editor was challenged by an objection to this offensive charade he in turn became dismissive and intolerant, and finally abusive. This episode is recorded word for word on the _www.aias.us_ (http://www.aias.us) blog. What has happened is that these people (who seek to censor and dismiss without reading, let alone understanding) have been by-passed by intense study worldwide of the entire contents of the _www.aias.us_ (http://www.aias.us) site.
Civil List Scientist