Yes it was first explained in UFT119 using field equations and the gravitomagnetic field. That method should be equivalent to the kinematic method using the Euler equations. The link between the two methods is the spin connection. I would say that the two methods are complementary, and forging a link between them would be very interesting. The first thing to do is to show that the usual expressions for velocity and acceleration in spherical polars (or any valid coordinates system) are examples of the covariant derivative of Cartan geometry. As you know this has already been done in plane polars in recent papers. In UFT368 the calculations look to be on the classical level, but they are also generally covariant because the derivative in the moving frame is a generally covariant derivative.
Sent: 31/01/2017 10:21:40 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Discussion of Note 369(3)
Wasn’t the equinox explained by other mechanisms, for example gravitomagnetic field? There seems to be some ambiguity.
Am 30.01.2017 um 18:05 schrieb EMyrone:
Many thanks, many things can be done now with the new Maxima code for solving simultaneous differential equations. Provided that the problem is defined precisely, the code can solve the equations no matter how complicated. The trajectories of the freely rotating symmetric top are theta(t), phi(t) and chi(t), and solutions can also be obtained for the freely rotating asymmetric top. Then, gravitational interaction between m and M is coded in, taking care to use the same frame of reference self consistently. This results in very complicated algebra, but complication is no problem. The Milankovich cycles should come out of this code. This could not have been done in the time of Euler and Lagrange because of the complexity. They could use intelligent approximations of course.
Sent: 30/01/2017 14:29:27 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: New Results for 369(1)
Excellent, congratulations both. As you say, yet another first rigorous analysis.
Sent from my Samsung device