Le Verrier's and Einstein's Predictions for Precession of Perihelia

Nonfiction, Science & Nature, Science, Physics, Gravity
Cover of the book Le Verrier's and Einstein's Predictions for Precession of Perihelia by James Constant, James Constant
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: James Constant ISBN: 9781310611209
Publisher: James Constant Publication: January 5, 2015
Imprint: Smashwords Edition Language: English
Author: James Constant
ISBN: 9781310611209
Publisher: James Constant
Publication: January 5, 2015
Imprint: Smashwords Edition
Language: English

The discovery and attempts to find classical causes for the precession of the perihelion of the planet Mercury are well known.[ref_1] In the 19th century, the French astronomer Le Verrier found that the perihelion of Mercury advanced by 43 arc- seconds/100y, an amount which could not be accounted for in terms of the gravitational forces exerted on Mercury by the other known planets. Le Verrier assumed another planet, which he named Vulcan, existed between Mercury and the Sun. However, observations failed to establish that Vulcan existed. Another explanation put forth by astronomers was that Newton's law of gravitation was not correct but, if additional terms were added, these could account for the excess rate of turning of the orbit of Mercury. For example, it is known that if a repulsive force C/r3 is added to Newton's law it would provide a correct value for precession of the perihelion of planet Mercury.[ref_2] A different explanation is offered by Einstein's theory of gravitation which calls for an extra term A/r4 which, if added to Newton's law, gives the excess turning rate of 43 arc secondsonds/100y. Importantly, A was not adjusted to give this value. It emerged uniquely out of Einstein's theory. Thus, classical explanations, which could not be found since the 19th century were replaced by Einstein's theory in the 20th century. In what follows, I revisit the Newtonian, Kepler and Einstein ideas of perturbations as causes to find the excess turning rate of a planet. These include causes for effects solely by observed orbit parameters, for effects by other planets, for relativistic and barycentric effects, and for shortcomings by each theory.The largest error from observed values 43 arc seconds/100y is provided by Le Verrier’s method which most likely can be improved by adding non planetary perturbation terms to equation (3). The presumed smallest error from observed values is provided by Einstein’s method which claims exact prediction 0 when applied to a single planet, Mercury, but is contradicted because its application to all planets predicts error of 12.11 arc seconds/100y.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

The discovery and attempts to find classical causes for the precession of the perihelion of the planet Mercury are well known.[ref_1] In the 19th century, the French astronomer Le Verrier found that the perihelion of Mercury advanced by 43 arc- seconds/100y, an amount which could not be accounted for in terms of the gravitational forces exerted on Mercury by the other known planets. Le Verrier assumed another planet, which he named Vulcan, existed between Mercury and the Sun. However, observations failed to establish that Vulcan existed. Another explanation put forth by astronomers was that Newton's law of gravitation was not correct but, if additional terms were added, these could account for the excess rate of turning of the orbit of Mercury. For example, it is known that if a repulsive force C/r3 is added to Newton's law it would provide a correct value for precession of the perihelion of planet Mercury.[ref_2] A different explanation is offered by Einstein's theory of gravitation which calls for an extra term A/r4 which, if added to Newton's law, gives the excess turning rate of 43 arc secondsonds/100y. Importantly, A was not adjusted to give this value. It emerged uniquely out of Einstein's theory. Thus, classical explanations, which could not be found since the 19th century were replaced by Einstein's theory in the 20th century. In what follows, I revisit the Newtonian, Kepler and Einstein ideas of perturbations as causes to find the excess turning rate of a planet. These include causes for effects solely by observed orbit parameters, for effects by other planets, for relativistic and barycentric effects, and for shortcomings by each theory.The largest error from observed values 43 arc seconds/100y is provided by Le Verrier’s method which most likely can be improved by adding non planetary perturbation terms to equation (3). The presumed smallest error from observed values is provided by Einstein’s method which claims exact prediction 0 when applied to a single planet, Mercury, but is contradicted because its application to all planets predicts error of 12.11 arc seconds/100y.

More books from James Constant

Cover of the book The Domain of Law by James Constant
Cover of the book Cert Denied -The Denial of Certiorari Appeals Without Reasons by James Constant
Cover of the book Prospects for Constitutional Government by James Constant
Cover of the book America's Dilemma: Between Scylla and Charybdis by James Constant
Cover of the book Terri Shiavo: Her Life Due Process and Death by James Constant
Cover of the book Kepler Newton and Einstein by James Constant
Cover of the book Extended Zeta Functions Prove or Dis-prove Riemann's Hypothesis by James Constant
Cover of the book California Supreme Court Questions Presented by James Constant
Cover of the book Petition for Certiorari Denied Without Opinion: Patent Case 98-1151 by James Constant
Cover of the book Supreme Court Eminent Domain Case 09-381 Denied Without Opinion by James Constant
Cover of the book Thermodynamic Universe by James Constant
Cover of the book Large Scale Uncertainty Principle and the Gamma Ray and Optical Limits by James Constant
Cover of the book European Elites And Debt Crisis by James Constant
Cover of the book California Supreme Court Petition: S173448 – Denied Without Opinion by James Constant
Cover of the book Hilbert Godel Turing and the Computer Decision Problem by James Constant
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy