Engineer claims to have solved "the biggest problem in physics"

Bluegazer

Dagobah Resident

Full articule translated.

Argentine engineer claims to have solved "the biggest problem in physics," but can't get scientists to listen to him

José Figiacone derived a "structural" equation for gravitational fields that he says corrects Einstein's "mistakes" and explains the attraction of bodies and other forces of nature. But can an outsider really make a revolutionary contribution to science in the 21st century?

José Figiacone is an 81-year-old civil engineer with an extensive career as an executive at Techint, Aguas Argentinas and AySA, a company he headed between 2017 and 2019. But he is also an amateur physicist who for more than four decades immersed himself in books, reflections and calculations and set out to solve what he considers "the biggest problem in physics": an integral gravitational equation that dispenses with universal constants that are not deduced from it, that is valid from the stars to the interior of atoms, that fits with other theories and better explains the workings of the universe. And he says he found it.

If he were right, he could aspire to seek his place in the Olympus of physics. "Einstein already said it: the next great leap in physics will have to be made by an outsider," Figiacone assures. However, most scientists consider that, in the 21st century, it is virtually impossible for someone without a track record, credentials and specific professional dedication to make a substantial contribution in such a complex field, which also sheds light on aspects of the dynamics of science and the possibilities for the penetration of disruptive or revolutionary ideas.

"For 40 or 45 years I have been engaged in research in theoretical physics. Wherever I was, at work, in the doctor's waiting room or in a bar, I was with paper and sheets and pen concentrating on some idea or theory. My concern was much more physics than day-to-day work," Figiacone told Infobae.

The first thing that mobilized him, he says, was his "visceral refusal to accept time as a magnitude of universal existence and that depends on the speed of the observer", as proposed by Einstein in his 1905 theory of special or special relativity (a phenomenon that gives rise to the famous "paradox of the twins", according to which the one who travels through space at speeds close to the speed of light when he returns is younger than the one who stayed on Earth).

On the footsteps of Einstein

Figiacone says he was also challenged by a proposal made by Einstein and his colleague Leopold Infeld in a 1939
book, Physics, an Adventure of Thought: that physics should be able to be developed by any observer regardless of his or her position in the Universe. "Today the physics we know from the theoretical point of view is based on conventions or empirical constants established on Earth and therefore unknown to an observer outside of it," he says.

In particular, Figiacone addressed what he considers the central challenge of physics in this century: the problem of gravitation, whose resolution "is fundamental to be able to interrelate all the forces present in nature". One of the requirements of the elusive "theory of everything".

"Electromagnetic forces have been explained. Interatomic forces have been explained. The gravitational force has never been explained, and being able to do so is of vital importance," he postulates.

After getting rid of "wrong" physical principles of motion, embracing the concept of field, introducing kinetic energy as an indispensable factor for attraction between bodies and using the solar system as a model, Figiacone deduced an equation of gravitational fields "which shows that both the theory of relativity (special and general) and quantum theory are fully compatible with classical physics. And that the same results can be obtained as those obtained with the electromagnetic and atomic theories, in a simpler way and without resorting to conventions", he swears.

And he clarifies: "I do not fight against Einstein. On the contrary, I try to give continuity to his enormous successes and leave behind the useless".

Convincing from the outside

But it is one thing to postulate, and another to convince. In science, knowledge is built both by experiments, deductions or observations and by external peer validation. There is a formal system that requires communicating advances to colleagues through scientific journals, specialty congresses or preprints, which allows scrutiny and informed discussion of the results, with the most relevant data available for all to see. Carl Sagan used to say that "big claims require big evidence".

Figiacone briefly tried to follow that path, but did not find the acclaim or reception from the expert community that he had dreamed of. In 2005, he presented an outline or anticipatory study of gravitation at the meeting "Le Siécle d' Albert Einstein," held at the UNESCO Palace in Paris, France. And then he repeated the attempt with a more refined version at the 37th General Assembly of the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR), held in Montreal, Canada, in 2008. "A couple of physicists from Canada and India were interested and asked me for copies of the paper. But I realized that these congresses are mostly social gatherings, and that the scientific environment is very hard to accept new ideas," he says.

A CONICET physicist who participated in the second of these congresses does not remember Figiacone. "COSPAR assemblies consist of many sessions and have up to more than 3,000 registrants. So, it is very difficult for you to look at a poster or listen to a talk if it is not in your area of interest," he tells Infobae.

Discouraged by these experiences, and in the manner of Galileo in the 17th century or Darwin in the 19th century, Figiacone opted for a classic option to disseminate his reasoning or his theories: to publish a book. He did so a few weeks ago, with an elegant edition entitled Gravitation. Structural equation of gravitational fields. In 306 pages and 31 chapters, the engineer unfolds background, formulas and "validations" of the equation deduced by comparing it with other results obtained with different theories. "I have no doubt that it is correct," he emphasizes. In the bibliography of his work, he cites only 18 physics books published between 1939 and 2007.

Some scientists have encouraged and celebrated the contribution of amateurs like Figiacone. Freeman Dyson, an eminent theoretical physicist who passed away in March 2020 states in his book The Rebel Scientist (2006) that "in almost every profession, amateurs have more freedom to experiment and innovate." And that "it is to be hoped that the amateurs of the next century, using the new tools that modern technology will put in their hands, will succeed in invading and rejuvenating all of science."

Dyson recalled that the rise of the amateur scientist was in the 17th and 18th centuries, with the freedom to jump from one area of science to another and start new projects. But that, from the 19th century onward, the activity became increasingly professional. "It is difficult to imagine that, at the present time, an amateur physicist or chemist could make a major contribution to science and stand like Darwin in the front row with Edwin Hubble and Albert Einstein," he admitted, although he insisted that this could change in the future.

For Miguel De Asúa, a historian of science and professor of research methodology at the National University of San Martín (UNSAM), it is difficult to establish when science was structured in such a way that it "closed" as a community of specialists. "I would say that this was already well advanced in the first postwar period and crystallized in the second postwar period," he tells Infobae.

"In principle, it is still possible for anyone to write an article and send it for publication to be judged by peers. But this implies knowing the procedures for doing such a thing (being able to write a specialized article in the universal language of science) and being familiar with the specific literature, so as to enter into dialogue with those who know the subject in depth," adds the also CONICET researcher.

"Amateurs must recognize their own limits."

Other scientists, on the other hand, are much more skeptical and even hostile to outsiders. A. W. Peet, a New Zealand-born theoretical physicist who in the mid-1990s shared some years at Princeton with the Argentine Juan Maldacena ("I was more experienced, but he was clearly smarter!" he recalls) demanded in his blog that amateurs recognize their own limits: it is impossible to do research in string theory, cosmology or any other field of theoretical physics without formal scientific training and an advanced knowledge of mathematics.

"Please don't ask me to look at or criticize any new 'theory' about modern physics if you don't have a university degree in physics," cried Peet, who researches and teaches at the University of Toronto, Canada. And he used an analogy: "What is the probability that a person with no musical training could play a piano concerto without mistakes the first time he or she sits down at the instrument? Essentially zero! Not even Mozart could have done that. It takes learning music theory and manual techniques from an expert teacher, and years of daily practice."

The case of Figiacone described to him by Infobae reminds him of hundreds of amateur physicists he has met or heard about in a 30-year career as a researcher, he says. "If someone claims to have made a revolution in theoretical physics without having resorted to the basic accountability mechanisms of researchers, such as publications in peer-reviewed journals or presentations (at conferences) where they can listen carefully to criticism, why should they be given free publicity?" shoots Peet.

Estefanía Coluccio Leskow, who did a postdoc in particle physics in Italy and teaches physics and mathematics at the universities of Buenos Aires, San Andrés, Luján and New York City (CUNY), acknowledges that the scientific community is reluctant to accept disruptive theories, especially if they do not come from academia. "One is immediately suspicious... because the truth is that certain requirements must be met, such as publishing peer-reviewed articles. Those are the rules of the game," he tells Infobae.

Coluccio Leskow agrees with Peet that it is highly unlikely or impossible that someone could write a novel in Chinese and win the Nobel Prize for Literature knowing only the rudiments of the language. "Centuries ago, one could touch things and do experiments and draw conclusions. But there came a point when everything tangible was over and there are no more fruits of the tree within reach, you have to go out and look for the ones that are farther away and with new mathematics. I find it very difficult to imagine that an amateur could develop a whole theory and make a relevant contribution to modern physics without that mathematical mastery, although perhaps he could come up with some interesting ideas," he says.

Out of audacity, conviction or because he doesn't know what he's up against, Figiacone doesn't shy away from obstacles. He is sure that history will eventually recognize him. "I'm convinced that it's going to be perfectible, as everything is perfectible. Maybe in 10, 20 or 50 years they'll perfect what I've done, but I'm sure it won't contain mistakes," he emphasizes.

These days, Figiacone is wrapping and shipping copies of his book to a few people, including university professors, colleagues and journalists. He is also going to translate it and dreams of sending it to NASA, "where everything to do with gravitation is of interest". And he promises to publish a synthesis on a preprint server for scientists. He confidently awaits his place in posterity, but wants to help the process along. "You have to make a lot of spider webs to catch the fly in one of them," he compares.

Web: Nueva teoría de la gravitación

GRAVITATION

STRUCTURAL EQUATION OF THE GRAVITATIONAL FIELDS

Under the above title, a book by engineer José Figiacone is in print, in which he explains the solution to the problem of gravitation by obtaining a structural equation that expresses the gravitational fields.

We speak of gravitational fields and not of gravitational field because each star produces its own field, existing therefore in the Universe as many gravitational fields as the number of stars that integrate it. All the gravitational fields respond to the same equation that the author has denominated "Structural Equation of the Gravitational Fields".

As expressed by A. Einstein and L. Infeld in their book "The Evolution of Physics", since the appearance of the "field theory" all the equations of physics must have the form of structure laws and therefore not contain empirical constants determined experimentally only on Earth, because in that case the equations would lack universal validity. The structural equation of gravitational fields obtained is not based on the concept of matter but on the concepts of field and energy, and lacks empirical constants, so it has the form of a "structure law". According to the statement of the scientific method made by Galileo Galilei "in science nothing can be accepted as true if it has not been experimentally proved". In this case we have proceeded inversely, that is to say, once the equation was obtained, it was applied to obtain all the values related to gravitation already known and experimentally verified by physics, obtaining in all cases the same results, for which it is considered to have complied with the statement of the scientific method.
 

Bluegazer

Dagobah Resident
GRAVITATION

STRUCTURAL
EQUATION OF THE GRAVITATIONAL FIELDS

Under the above title, a book by engineer José Figiacone is in print, in which he explains the solution to the problem of gravitation by obtaining a structural equation that expresses the gravitational fields.

We speak of gravitational fields and not of gravitational field because each star produces its own field, existing therefore in the Universe as many gravitational fields as the number of stars that integrate it. All the gravitational fields respond to the same equation that the author has denominated "Structural Equation of the Gravitational Fields".

As expressed by A. Einstein and L. Infeld in their book "The Evolution of Physics", since the appearance of the "field theory" all the equations of physics must have the form of structure laws and therefore not contain empirical constants determined experimentally only on Earth, because in that case the equations would lack universal validity. The structural equation of gravitational fields obtained is not based on the concept of matter but on the concepts of field and energy, and lacks empirical constants, so it has the form of a "structure law". According to the statement of the scientific method made by Galileo Galilei "in science nothing can be accepted as true if it has not been experimentally proved". In this case we have proceeded inversely, that is to say, once the equation was obtained, it was applied to obtain all the values related to gravitation already known and experimentally verified by physics, obtaining in all cases the same results, for which it is considered to have complied with the statement of the scientific method.
(Ark) My question is that in my research, related to the paper I've been writing for a year now, there appears a mathematical structure, an antisymmetric matrix or something like that. I believe it's important, but I don't know whether it's related to action of electromagnetic field, or gravitational field, or some kind of informational field. I have no clue and I would like to have a hint what it is doing this thing that is there and I don't know what kind of job it is doing?

(L) So, you're asking if it's informational, gravitational, or electromagnetic?

(Ark) Or something else.

A: Electromagnetism structured by information emitted by gravity.

Q: (Ark) Alright. [laughs]

A: Go deeper to find the structuring forces.
 

Bluegazer

Dagobah Resident

Translation of the complete text:

Most important papers presented by the author in the period 1985-2015.

During the period 1985-2015 the author presented numerous papers in academic settings and international congresses, the most important of which are detailed below:

I.- Paper presented at the Unesco Palace in Paris on the occasion of:
"The Albert Einstein Century International Conference" which took place at the UNESCO Palace in Paris in the week between the 18th and 22nd of July 2005 on the occasion of the celebration of L'Siecle d'Albert Einstein".

The title of the abstract of the work presented was: Development of a Relativistic Physics: Unified Field Theory, the contents of which are as follows:

"As stated in the book (The Evolution of Physics , authored by A. Einstein - L Infeld) there are high probabilities of being able to develop a relativistic physics based on the Special Theory of Relativity if the issue of gravitation is solved first, I began my study by trying to obtain an equation of the gravitational field that would be compatible with the Special Theory of Relativity. Once such an equation was obtained (where Newton's constant does not appear) I was able to verify that the equation can also be applied to Bohr's atomic model and to the electric and magnetic fields, obtaining in all cases values identical to those obtained in the classical theories of physics, and totally compatible with the quantum theory. That is why in this work the equation obtained was called: "Equation of the gravitational field of universal validity". The equation is the mathematical expression of a unique field that is the generator of all interactions or forces between bodies. Hence the title: "Development of a Relativistic Physics: Unified Field Theory. The "Universally Valid Gravitational Field Equation" also provides for a new view of relativistic kinematics and the problem of time, as explained in the paper.

The main assumption of the work is that the gravitational attraction between bodies is not a direct consequence of an interaction between their masses, but derives from the kinetic energy that these masses have because they are in motion.
Hypothetical masses at absolute rest, i.e., with zero velocity with respect to all possible coordinate systems that can be adopted in the Universe, would not generate a gravitational field.

II.- Paper presented in Montreal during the 37th Cospar Scientific Assembly:
37th Cospar Scientific Assembly that took place in the city of Montreal Canada in the week of June 13-20, 2008.
The paper was presented with the title "Study of Gravitation Problem obtention of the General and Equation of Gravitation Fild" and its abstract is included below:

Study of Gravitation Problem, obtention of the General and Equation of Gravitation Field.

The first step of the study consisted in demonstrating that "G" is not a universal constant, but is variable, depending on the mass distribution of each gravitational field. Based on this premise, the equation that expresses the value of "G" according to each mass distribution of the different systems was obtained. Once the equation of "G" was obtained, it was possible to derive the general equation of the gravitational field, which, when applied to the solar system, yielded the expected results, including the small variations pointed out by Einstein in his general theory of relativity. Similarly, when applied to the General Theory of Relativity, the equation expressing G ¨ allows obtaining the equation expressing O (phi) and, based on that, the same General Equation of the Gravitational Field obtained in the scope of the Special Theory of Relativity can be obtained.

The following is a summary of the book in print: The purpose of this book is to present a new theory of gravitation. This theory is based on the concept of gravitational field or more correctly of gravitational fields, since there are as many gravitational fields as there are stars in the universe, since each star creates its own gravitational field.

The main objective of the study is to obtain an equation that characterizes the gravitational fields, starting from the premise that all of them must respond to the same and unique equation. The equation must also explain the interaction of the innumerable gravitational fields among themselves. The equation that characterizes the gravitational fields was found and once obtained it could be verified that it is also applicable to atoms and electromagnetic fields. It will be seen throughout the study that the equation is applicable to all known force fields, thus allowing to explain all interactions between bodies with that single equation. The main concept of the theory is that all actions between bodies are a function of the kinetic energy that these bodies possess by being in motion. Let us point out that there are no known bodies at rest in the universe with respect to all the infinite possible coordinate systems that can be adopted.
The book consists of this preface and nine parts with a total of 30 chapters.

PART I consists of five chapters that cover from the preliminary concepts to the choice of the gravitational model on which the theory is based, which is the solar system, which was the system used by Newton for the deduction of his "Universal Equation of Gravitation".

PART II is composed of three chapters in which an exhaustive analysis is made of the three dimensionless magnitudes associated to all the bodies of the solar system: dimensions, distances, movements and masses.

PART III It is composed of four chapters and is dedicated to the exhaustive analysis of what was called "time magnitude" showing that it does not have a dimensionless existence, nor is it necessary for the development of physics. It also analyzes what was called "time dilation".

PART IV It is composed of six chapters in which the theory itself is fully developed and the essential equations for its use are deduced, namely:
- The general equation of the Gravitational Fields.
- The equation of the so-called Universal Gravitational Constant "G".
- The mass of the galaxy is calculated
- It is demonstrated that the above equations are independent of the reference point adopted for their determination.
- The equations obtained are validated by applying them to obtain those values already known and/or previously determined by physics, demonstrating that they are identical.

PART V Consists of two chapters, the first one showing that the equation of gravitational fields found is compatible with the Theory of Restricted Relativity (GRT) and the second one showing the same with respect to the General Theory of Relativity (GRT).

PART VI Consists of three chapters, two devoted to the application of the general equation of gravitational fields to atoms and the other devoted to the application of the same equation to atomic nuclei.

PART VII Consists of three chapters where the application of the equation of gravitational fields to the electric field, the magnetic field and electromagnetic induction are respectively analyzed.

PART VIII Consists of four chapters where the equations of the so-called universal constants of physics "G" "K" and "h" are derived. PART IX The conclusions of the study are summarized.
 

Bluegazer

Dagobah Resident

About the Theory

The purpose of this text is to present a new theory of gravitation.
This theory is based on the concept of gravitational field or more correctly of gravitational fields, since there are as many gravitational fields as there are stars in the universe, since each star creates its own gravitational field.
The main objective of the study is to obtain an equation that characterizes the gravitational fields, starting from the premise that all of them must respond to the same and unique equation.

The equation must also explain the interaction of the innumerable gravitational fields among themselves.
The equation that characterizes the gravitational fields was found and once it was obtained it could be verified that it is also applicable to the gravitational fields....


PART I

INTRODUCTION, HISTORY OF GRAVITATION, PRELIMINARY CONCEPTS AND MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS


CHAPTER I

Introduction to the study
At the Congress "Le Siecle d' Albert Einstein" held at the Unesco Palace in Paris in 2005 on the occasion of the scientist's centenary, a congress in which I participated with the presentation of a study on gravitation anticipating the present one, the problem of Gravitation was defined as the most important to be solved in this century.

It was stated that the main lines of research on gravitation were being developed in the USA and Russia.

In the USA through the so-called String Theory, while in Russia, according to the presentation of the physicist Vitaly Melnicov, who presented a study entitled "Gravity as a key problem of the millennium", the research was aimed at analyzing whether the so-called "Universal Constant of Gravitation" (which has only been measured experimentally on Earth) is really universally valid.

It was also stated at the Congress that the resolution of the gravitation problem was of vital importance for the possible obtaining of the equation of a single field.
In view of the consideration that the challenge of physics today is the elaboration of a theory of gravitation, I decided to extend the outline I presented in Paris into a comprehensive study. This study is the one I present in this book.

The purpose of the study is to obtain an integral solution to the problem of gravitation, valid both in the field of classical physics and in that of relativistic physics and compatible with the Quantum Theory.

Einstein had already understood that the fundamental problem of physics was that of gravitation. The scientist says in the book "La Física Aventura del pensamiento", of which he is the author together with L. Infeld: "There is a well-founded hope of formulating a relativistic physics, but for this it is necessary to attack first the problem of gravitation". The authors add that the solution to this problem must be different from Newton's solution and that the laws to be formulated must be valid, like all natural laws, for all possible coordinate systems (CS), i.e. they must have universal validity.

The new gravitational laws, they add, must be, (as Maxwell's laws are for electromagnetism), structural laws containing the changes of the gravitational field. Einstein tried to find these new laws from the Theory of Restricted Relativity, but he did not succeed, let us quote his words: "But this Newton's law stubbornly resisted all the efforts made to simplify it and adapt it to the Theory of Restricted Relativity".

It was because of this and in order to achieve what the Theory of Restricted Relativity did not seem to allow, that he devoted himself to the elaboration of the General Theory of Relativity. He says that this theory tries to formulate the physical laws for all SC indistinctly and that gravitation is the fundamental problem to be solved.

In the General Theory of Relativity, Einstein abandons Euclidean geometry, as he says in "The Physics Adventure of Thought": "If in the formulation of the relativistic theory of gravitation we were not successful in combining Euclidean geometry with physics within a simple and consistent picture, we would be forced to abandon the idea of the Euclidean nature of our space and seek a representation more appropriate to reality, adopting more general assumptions regarding its geometrical character".

In the "General Theory of Relativity" he tried (without succeeding) to find a solution for the laws of the gravitational field, but at a great cost: the abandonment of Euclidean space. Einstein-Infeld express in the aforementioned book: "Suppose for the moment that we had succeeded in developing the program of Generalized Relativity, are we not in danger of being too far removed from reality by speculation? We know how accurately the Classical Theory explains astronomical observations.

Is there a possibility of bridging the New Theory and observation? All speculation has to be controlled by experience and the most beautiful of theories has to be rejected if it does not conform to the facts."

They point out that the "General Theory of Relativity" seems to find validity in explaining the anomalies of Mercury's orbit, and that further evidence is difficult to find as the results of the new equations only differ from classical mechanics for bodies moving at very high velocity, i.e. for velocity values not present in the ordinary world.

This in itself contains a certain contradiction, for if the laws sought are to have universal validity, they must also be applicable to bodies moving at a much lower velocity than that of light, otherwise they would not be universally valid.

Therefore, it seems very evident today that a theory of gravitation cannot be limited in its development to explain the phenomena for high velocities, but on the contrary it must have total validity for the bodies of our solar system and galaxy that move at non-relativistic velocities, even more so if we consider that Newton's equation was deduced from the motion of the moon around the Earth.

The aim of this book is to expose a theory that allows us to derive the structural equations of gravitational fields from Classical Physics and the Theory of Restricted Relativity, demonstrating that the adaptation of the Theory of Restricted Relativity to the problem of gravitation is entirely possible. Finally, also proving its compatibility with the General Theory of Relativity.

These equations were found, are structural, express the changes of gravitational fields and are formulated without abandoning Euclidean geometry.

We should speak of gravitational fields and not of gravitational field because each star in the universe creates its own field and therefore in the universe interact with each other as many gravitational fields as stars compose it. The innumerable fields generated by the innumerable stars all respond to the same equation. The new equations are validated as they can be applied to all gravitational fields with greater universality than Newton's equation, obtaining values totally compatible with those obtained with that equation, which has been repeatedly verified.

In the specific case of the anomalies of the orbit of mercury, they are perfectly explained by the equations found and do not depend on the reasons assumed in the General Theory of Relativity. The distance still has the same importance in the new equations of gravitational fields, but the forces do not depend only on it and the masses, but the kinetic energy of bodies in motion has a fundamental role, and therefore, the velocity, with all the implications that derive from it.

The universal constant of gravitation "G" has also disappeared in the New Theory that we present, since it does not intervene in the equations of the gravitational field found. It is also shown that the validity of "G" is not universal as its name expresses it, but depends on each gravitational system. If it is desired to calculate for each gravitational system the value of G, the Theory provides the equation that allows to do it as a function of the parameters of the system.

The equations obtained have the form of structure laws, a form required for all physical equations since the great discovery of the Field Theory, and are not built on the basis of the concept of matter but on the concepts of field and energy, which acquire an essential importance.

Einstein-Infeld says in the aforementioned book: "Would it not be feasible to discard the concept of matter and structure a physics based only on the concept of field? According to this conception, what impresses our senses as matter is really an enormous concentration of energy within a relatively very small volume, We could consider matter the regions where the field is extremely intense. In this way a new philosophical panorama would be created. Its mission and ultimate goal would be the explanation of all phenomena of nature by structural laws, valid always and everywhere."

In this respect we must say that the new equations of the gravitational fields that we will expose fulfill these conditions and we will demonstrate that they are valid always and everywhere, including in the interior of stars and atoms. In fact, they can also be applied to electromagnetic fields obtaining the same values obtained with the classical theory. The equations of the constants of physics can also be obtained with the theory.

The problem that the laws of the field do not break down in the regions of high energy concentration (matter) has been solved, in the theory that I present, that is to say that it is no longer necessary to divide field and matter.
 

Bluegazer

Dagobah Resident
@woneill1701 Good news. I have spoken by messenger on facebook, on the page of the author of the book.

He said: For now it is not for sale. But I am looking at how to deliver it for free in electronic form, it is being translated into English.
 

Attachments

  • Captura de pantalla 2021-02-28 192021.jpg
    Captura de pantalla 2021-02-28 192021.jpg
    44.5 KB · Views: 6

Bluegazer

Dagobah Resident
Ok, some mathematics from the author. I hope they can be read here correctly since I am translating it.


As was stated in the Congress held in 2005 at the Unesco Palace in Paris on the occasion of the celebration of Albert Einstein's centenary (where he presented a paper anticipating the present one), the greatest problem to be solved by physics in this century is the problem of gravitation.

As Einstein and L. Insfeld stated in their book "The Evolution of Physics", in order to solve the problem of gravitation it is necessary to discard the concept of matter and structure physics only through the concept of field. This is what is exposed in the book of my authorship entitled "New Theory of Gravitation: Structural Equation of Gravitational Fields".

In the universe there are a number of gravitational fields equal to the number of stars that compose it, since each star generates its own gravitational field. All gravitational fields interact with each other. The actions generated by all the fields as well as the interactions between them can be determined with a single equation that I have called "Structural Equation of the Gravitational Fields" By means of the "Structural Equation of the Gravitational Fields" whose results were verified with the obtaining of values totally coincident to those obtained with Newton's Equation (in spite of not appearing in it the so called Universal Constant of Gravitation G) can also be obtained:

a) An equation that expresses the constant G
b) The value of the mass of the Galaxy.
Equation of "G
All gravitational systems have the same structure: A central body around which one or more bodies and/or other gravitational systems rotate in equilibrium. Around the center of mass of the Galaxy revolve in equilibrium all the stars that compose it, as well as all the gravitational systems that eventually accompany them. As an example we will cite the gravitational system called "Solar System" that is integrated in turn by other satellite gravitational systems such as the Jovian, Saturnian, etc. Individual bodies, Mercury, Venus, etc., also rotate in the Solar System. For each of these systems it is found that the product of the distance of the orbiting bodies from the orbited one by the square of their orbital velocity is constant. For the Planetary System, the product of the average distance of each planet to the Sun by the square of the average velocity of the planet relative to the Sun is in all cases:
1.png


For Jupiter's satellites or moons, the same product applies in all cases:
2.png


In both systems if we divide the indicated values by the mass of the central body of the system, in one case the Sun and the other Jupiter, we obtain the value of G, That is to say that:

3.png


The above is also valid if we take the system formed by the Moon, the Earth and the Sun. The distance from the Moon to the Earth is:
4.png
and its velocity around the earth is:
5.png
and the earth mass is:
6.png


therefore:
7.png



8.png
is a unit of mass defined in the study that has no relation to the kilogram mass whose validity is exclusively for comparing masses of bodies located on the earth. Therefore, in any gravitational system, if we denominate
m.png
to the mass of the central body,
m2.png
to the masses of the orbiting bodies,
d.png
the distances between the orbiting and orbited bodies, and
v.png
to the velocities of the orbiting bodies, the value of
g.png
is given by:

9.png
(says; and it has in all cases the value of)

The difference between the value
10.png
and the value
11.png
obtained with the successive experiments made in the form devised by Cavendish are due to the influence on the value obtained experimentally of the effect due to the earth's rotation that can be obtained with the equation
12.png
(says; and it is equivalent to). The component due to the earth's rotation has no influence outside of the earth, therefore the value of
g.png
to be used in Newton's equation for the calculation of forces between bodies in the Galaxy is
13.png

For bodies located on the surface of the earth, value should instead be used
14.png
.

The central hypothesis to obtain the Structural Equation of Gravitational Fields is: "all gravitational actions between bodies are due to the kinetic energy they possess by being in motion".
 
today's knowledge, also "inspires" that the unknowed "Dark Matter" have a massive presence in the Universe.

for example, taking into account only the friction between two solids at low speeds, the air resistance is negligible, so the friction between two solids was discovered and formulated before be discovered the resistance of the Air, which is still a friction, but which uses different equations and coefficients, because of the dynamics of gases.

as gravitation is closely linked to the mass of objects, perhaps the difficulty in obtaining equations for gravitation between celestial bodies more accurately, may be related to that another Dark Matter that is still unknown to the science.

-----

below, what I just commented in another thread, and think worth to repeat here to discuss:

times ago I was noticed that our scienctific model was purposefully splitted into Gravity, Magnetism and Electricity to disguise people to not make the link, because the right model would be these three areas are one single science.
 
today's knowledge, also "inspires" that the unknowed "Dark Matter" have a massive presence in the Universe.

for example, taking into account only the friction between two solids at low speeds, the air resistance is negligible, so the friction between two solids was discovered and formulated before be discovered the resistance of the Air, which is still a friction, but which uses different equations and coefficients, because of the dynamics of gases.

as gravitation is closely linked to the mass of objects, perhaps the difficulty in obtaining equations for gravitation between celestial bodies more accurately, may be related to that another Dark Matter that is still unknown to the science.

-----

below, what I just commented in another thread, and think worth to repeat here to discuss:

times ago I was noticed that our scienctific model was purposefully splitted into Gravity, Magnetism and Electricity to disguise people to not make the link, because the right model would be these three areas are one single science.
There is enough dust and plasma in the universe to account for all the “anomalies” in the cosmological model.

Orthodox Physics refuses to acknowledge any other force than gravity in shaping the universe. Hence they invented the magical pixie dust called “dark matter”.

The EU folks have gone a little too far in attributing everything to electricity, but they have clearly demonstrated that electricity and magnetism are fundamental forces shaping the universe!
 

United Gnosis

Jedi Council Member
indeed. Gravitational reductionism is an aberration of modern science, i guess evolving from the Enlightenment's and Descartes' material reductionism, crude and mechanistic. The standard model of orthodox physics includes electromagnetism, but assumes it to 0. I quit university physics shortly after my cosmology professor (and his grad students) insisted that planetary bodies' charge naturally cancelled itself and could therefore be assumed away. It took all of 5 minutes to dismiss then spent the rest of the year explaining everything from neutron stars to nebula flows mechanistically. It's pretty sad, but it does seem more and more people are connecting the dots to a mostly standard, yet plasma-aware physics.
 

altomaltes

Padawan Learner
This post had lead me to the concept of gravity of Dewey Larson, yet known in this forum.
Dr. Larson has a more complete and inclusive schema. His flawless "periodic table" is astounding.

He digs the mistery of physicality, and states that there is only two generaring principles, space and time ( like ligth and love ) what dance together ( motion, because motion=space/time ) and generate all matter and its relations depending of the dance step, operating reciprocally, this is, taking sometimes the role of the partner. The show is called scalar motion, since it happens confined to the dance floor, or quanta.
For him, gravity is kinetic also, like the protagonist of the post, and so are all other phenomena, but he insists specially in this one.

When I rushed to wikipedia, I dicovered that he is banned. You can find the most bizarre theories in the wikipedia, like the plain earth, but not this one. This only means two things 1) He is in the correct track. 2) Someone ( or something ) yes posseses this tecnology, but does not want to share it. If you want to win poker as important as your cheating, is preventing the other players from do the same thing . Governements works this way.

Wikipedia is really biased on issues like false jews, ( with mitochondrial DNA other than Sara, the free spouse of Abraham) and some issues like aforementioned theory.

This guy also links counciesness and time/space. According CD's this is the key for the antigravity tech, another reason for dig it.
 

Bluegazer

Dagobah Resident
These are some updates on the author's facebook page.

May 15th 2021

AN INCREDIBLE ABSURDITY PRESENT IN MODERN PHYSICS BOOKS: THE TWIN PARADOX.

In the images of this publication you can see how the book "Contemporary Physics" (3rd Edition) by Drs. Edwin Jones and Richard Childers of the University of South Carolina expresses this paradox (p. 798) (see attached images).
In the analysis, the word "year" is considered exclusively as the denomination of a unit of time, multiple of the second; and the "second" derives from conventions adopted on Earth to presumably measure the "magnitude tempo", a magnitude never defined by physics nor dimensionally perceptible, so the word "year" taken in that way is only a conventional unit of "time".

However, the word "year" has a second concrete and real physical meaning, independent of the concept "time".

A year is also the designation for the duration of one revolution of the Earth around the Sun.

If instead of using the word "year" in its conventional meaning of unit of time we use it with its astronomical meaning, which is independent of any convention, and which indicates a complete rotation of the Earth around the Sun, or what is the same, which indicates that the radius vector that joins the Earth with the Sun swept the angle 2π of the Earth's orbit, we will see that when the traveler returns to Earth and his brother tells him that 35 years have elapsed since his departure, he will be telling him from the concrete astronomical point of view that the Earth during the duration of his trip made 35 revolutions around the Sun, and that is an uncontroversial value and valid for both brothers.

Therefore, if the age of a man is expressed by the number of revolutions that the Earth made around the Sun since his birth, both twins will still have the same age, because for both the Earth completed the same number of revolutions around the Sun during the period in which one of the brothers was traveling.

The rotation of the Earth around the Sun can be perceived by any observer regardless of the position it occupies in the galaxy, while the rotation of the Earth, which is the property of the Earth on which the concept "time" and its presumed unit "second" are based, is only perceived by terrestrial observers and therefore conventions based on such motion cannot have universal validity; otherwise, physics could only be developed on Earth.

Physics is the science that tries to explain the functioning of the universe, therefore, it must be based on the observation of such functioning and use magnitudes dimensionally perceptible in any point of it and not in conventions based on properties of a unique star, not perceptible in all the points of the universe.
It is clear from the above that the theory of relativity is a geocentric theory, since its development is based on a concept (time) and its unit (the second) that derive from the properties of a motion that is unique in the universe, the speed with which the Earth rotates around its axis.

If we change the reference point to analyze the PARADOX OF THE TWINS, and instead of taking the Earth we take the Sun, the present paradox does not exist.

By: Jose Figiacone

June 1st 2021

QUANTUM THEORY AND RELATIVITY THEORY: THEIR DISCREPANCIES.

Physics is the science that seeks to explain how the Universe works. At the beginning of the 20th century, two new physical theories were born: the Quantum Theory, whose author was Max Planck; and the Theory of Relativity, whose author was Albert Einstein.

These theories are antagonistic, that is, one is correct and the other may not be.
Max Planck's Quantum Theory is based on the motion of electromagnetic waves in the Universe, a motion that is cyclic. The duration of all the cycles of a wave is the same, and this duration is different for each wave.

Physics expresses this by saying that all waves have their own frequency.

The Quantum Theory explains very satisfactorily the movements of electrons around the nuclei of atoms which are also cyclic of constant period.
It is not superfluous to clarify that the motions of all stars are cyclic of constant period, but while the cycles of the motions of electrons and stars are closed, the cycles of waves are open. However, in all three cases a cycle is characterized by the universal constant 2π.

The Quantum Theory is supported by countless experiments carried out by Max Planck and numerous other scientists on the behavior of waves, and thus satisfies the requirements of the scientific method, which demands that the conclusions of a theory be experimentally supported.

Furthermore, the conclusions of the Quantum Theory are supported by all the technological advances in the field of remote transmission of sounds and images, advances all supported by the Theory of Waves developed by Max Planck and basis of the Quantum Theory.

That is to say that the Quantum Theory is responsible for the current Sociocultural Revolution (that of communications).

The Theory of Relativity is based on rectilinear (and uniform) motion and on the fact that the magnitude "time" does not elapse equally for all observers, but depends on the speed with which each observer is moving. This hypothesis was necessary to reconcile the rectilinear and uniform motion on which the theory is based, with the concept of "time" born of a cyclic motion, the rotation of the Earth.

This reconciliation also led to the conception of what was called the "space-time continuum" within which all the bodies that make up the Universe would move, deforming it as they pass.

The Theory of Relativity has no experimental support to sustain it, its advocates claiming that the necessary experiments are impossible, since the effects predicted by the theory would only be perceived in bodies moving at speeds close to the speed of electromagnetic waves.

This is contrary to the scientific method, which postulates that nothing can be accepted as valid without having been experimentally demonstrated.

The Theory is also not supported by any technological advance made on the basis of its postulates.

It seems very clear then, at present, that if one of the theories, Quantum Theory, is experimentally supported and from its conclusions the current Sociocultural Revolution (that of communications) is derived, this theory can be considered totally valid; while its antagonist, that of Relativity, should be discarded.

By. José Figiacone.
 
Top Bottom