Both theories give orbital precession and this note is a comparison of the two theories, and also a comparison with the astronomical data. In the solar system these data can be modelled with Eq. (9). Although Eq. (9) is not the precise orbit, it represents the observations empirically. In the solar system the data can be represented empirically by Eq. (9), which can be produced exactly by both theories. The kinetic energies of the two theories are compared. In UFT363 it is a non relativistic kinetic energy modified by a spin connection. In UFT372 it is the well known relativistic kinetic energy of ECE2 relativity, which takes the format of the well known relativistic kinetic energy of special relativity. A meaningful comparison can be made if the rest energy is subtracted from the relativistic total energy as in Eq. (32) to leave the relativistic kinetic energy. This is reduced to the non relativistic kinetic energy in the limit v << c, allowing the spin connection to be calculated as in Eq. (49) in terms of orbital observables. So the spin connection responsible for precession can be observed experimentally and plotted in terms of r, the distance between m orbiting M. These results are yet another way of showing that Einsteinian general relativity is incorrect and obsolete.

a373rdpapernotes1.pdf

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

This entry was posted on March 15, 2017 at 12:29 pm and is filed under asott2. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.