To: EMyrone@aol.com

Sent: 03/05/2016 17:33:51 GMT Daylight Time

Subj: Re: Angle for Precise AgreementWales has been missed narrowly

Am 03.05.2016 um 18:26 schrieb EMyrone:

This looks very good, it is roughly the latitude of Edinburgh in the north.

To: Emyrone

Sent: 03/05/2016 16:40:59 GMT Daylight Time

Subj: recalculation for note 345(7)As notified in the previous email I recalculated the angle of

conformance for the experimental value, it is60.8 degrees.

Horst

]]>

]]>

]]>

To: Emyrone@aol.com

Sent: 03/05/2016 16:40:59 GMT Daylight Time

Subj: recalculation for note 345(7)As notified in the previous email I recalculated the angle of

conformance for the experimental value, it is60.8 degrees.

Horst

]]>

To: EMyrone@aol.com

Sent: 03/05/2016 16:34:04 GMT Daylight Time

Subj: Re: 345(7): Correct solutionI think I found the solution: The gravitomagnetic field is maximal for the polar angle theta=0 and minimal for theta=pi/2. In the plot of the attachment you see the angular factor F(theta) and its square F^2(theta). This is minimal for theta=pi/2. Therefore our previous simplified calculation without angular factor was for theta=pi/2. In note 345(7), eq. (19) the theoretical value has to be divided by 1.58. I will check if then a positive x comes out again.

Horst

Am 03.05.2016 um 12:14 schrieb EMyrone:

This note shows that the experimental result of 40.9 milliarcseconds per year claimed by Stanford / NASA is given exactly by ECE2 theory at two latitudes of the polar orbit of Gravity Probe B defined by Eq. (30). The result of Note 345(5) is obtained when the polar orbit crosses the equator. It is by no means clear how Stanford / NASA differentiated experimentally between the Lense Thirring effect and the geodetic effect. Also it is not clear how they came up with one value for the Lense Thirring effect when the effect depends on the latitude being crossed by the polar orbit of Gravity Probe B. The result 40.9 milliarseconds per year is accepted for the sake of argument. These ultra expensive experiments often come up with vague results. This one cost over $700 million paid for by taxation. ECE2 is the first correct theory of the Lense Thirring effect. In the next and final note for UFT345 this method will be applied to the geodetic effect. To me Gravity Probe B was motivated by dogma, and the dogmatisst were determined to come up with magical precision. This precision has been matched by ECE2, with correct geometry.

]]>

To: EMyrone@aol.com

Sent: 03/05/2016 15:06:14 GMT Daylight Time

Subj: Re: Checking Note 345(7)Concerning note 7 (Lense Thirring effect) it should be possible the average the theoretical value over the range of the polar angle for a given polar orbit (for example bold x = 0). Will try this.

Horst

Am 03.05.2016 um 15:43 schrieb EMyrone:

Many thanks for this check. At these latitudes ECE2 gives exact agreement with Gravity Probe B. The graph of the gravitomagnetic field will be very useful as usual. I will rework the geodetic effect tomorrow along the same lines as this note on the Lense Thirring effect, using the same representation of the polar orbit. In the geodetic effect the only source of angular momentum is the polar orbit of Gravity Probe B. For an observer on Gravity Probe B the earth rotates at the angular velocity of the spacecraft, which orbits once every ninety minutes. It should be possible to reproduce the experimentally observed geodetic precession precisely using a simplification of Note 345(6).

To: EMyrone

Sent: 03/05/2016 14:25:42 GMT Daylight Time

Subj: Correction: Re: 345(7): Exact Lense Thirring Precession from ECE2Correction: not azimuthal angle, but polar angle.

HorstAm 03.05.2016 um 15:17 schrieb Horst Eckardt:

You defined the angle theta as the complement to the azimut angle (normally measured from the North pole).

Your calculation is correct in 3 digits, the azimutal angles of coincidence of ECE2 Lense Thirring effect with the experimental value are:

53.7 degrees

67.3 degreesI am preparing a graphical representation of the gravitomagnetic field in dipole approximation for paper 344.

Horst

Am 03.05.2016 um 12:14 schrieb EMyrone:

This note shows that the experimental result of 40.9 milliarcseconds per year claimed by Stanford / NASA is given exactly by ECE2 theory at two latitudes of the polar orbit of Gravity Probe B defined by Eq. (30). The result of Note 345(5) is obtained when the polar orbit crosses the equator. It is by no means clear how Stanford / NASA differentiated experimentally between the Lense Thirring effect and the geodetic effect. Also it is not clear how they came up with one value for the Lense Thirring effect when the effect depends on the latitude being crossed by the polar orbit of Gravity Probe B. The result 40.9 milliarseconds per year is accepted for the sake of argument. These ultra expensive experiments often come up with vague results. This one cost over $700 million paid for by taxation. ECE2 is the first correct theory of the Lense Thirring effect. In the next and final note for UFT345 this method will be applied to the geodetic effect. To me Gravity Probe B was motivated by dogma, and the dogmatisst were determined to come up with magical precision. This precision has been matched by ECE2, with correct geometry.

]]>

To: EMyrone@aol.com

Sent: 03/05/2016 14:25:42 GMT Daylight Time

Subj: Correction: Re: 345(7): Exact Lense Thirring Precession from ECE2Correction: not azimuthal angle, but polar angle.

HorstAm 03.05.2016 um 15:17 schrieb Horst Eckardt:

You defined the angle theta as the complement to the azimut angle (normally measured from the North pole).

Your calculation is correct in 3 digits, the azimutal angles of coincidence of ECE2 Lense Thirring effect with the experimental value are:

53.7 degrees

67.3 degreesI am preparing a graphical representation of the gravitomagnetic field in dipole approximation for paper 344.

Horst

Am 03.05.2016 um 12:14 schrieb EMyrone:

This note shows that the experimental result of 40.9 milliarcseconds per year claimed by Stanford / NASA is given exactly by ECE2 theory at two latitudes of the polar orbit of Gravity Probe B defined by Eq. (30). The result of Note 345(5) is obtained when the polar orbit crosses the equator. It is by no means clear how Stanford / NASA differentiated experimentally between the Lense Thirring effect and the geodetic effect. Also it is not clear how they came up with one value for the Lense Thirring effect when the effect depends on the latitude being crossed by the polar orbit of Gravity Probe B. The result 40.9 milliarseconds per year is accepted for the sake of argument. These ultra expensive experiments often come up with vague results. This one cost over $700 million paid for by taxation. ECE2 is the first correct theory of the Lense Thirring effect. In the next and final note for UFT345 this method will be applied to the geodetic effect. To me Gravity Probe B was motivated by dogma, and the dogmatisst were determined to come up with magical precision. This precision has been matched by ECE2, with correct geometry.

]]>

]]>

BookofScientometricsVolumeTwo.pdf

]]>

]]>