Riemann's Geometry and Newton's Gravitation

Nonfiction, Science & Nature, Science, Physics, Gravity
Cover of the book Riemann's Geometry and Newton's Gravitation 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: 9781311526472
Publisher: James Constant Publication: December 14, 2014
Imprint: Smashwords Edition Language: English
Author: James Constant
ISBN: 9781311526472
Publisher: James Constant
Publication: December 14, 2014
Imprint: Smashwords Edition
Language: English

Einstein’s General Relativity is hard to reconcile with the rest of physics, and even within its own structure has weaknesses. Its heavy mathematical structure seems utterly incompatible with Quantum Mechanics and is at best tenuous with Special Relativity and Newton's Theory of Gravitation. Different as Einstein's and Newton's theories are, within the solar system, Einstein’s theory is greatly simplified by imitating Newton’s theory and as the two theories merge their results are almost identical. Yet, for over 80 years, the measurements are less than satisfactory and competing theories have emerged to explain the observations.
Einstein’s field equations are difficult to solve in a closed form. For example, only one exact solution, the Schwarzschild solution, has been found for the recession of the precession of perihelia problem. Generally, the motion of a planet is along a geodesic in Riemann’s curved space-time. Einstein’s theory claims that such geodesic motions account for the precession of the perihelion of the planet Mercury and that they also describe the bending of light in a gravitational field. Einstein’s claims to have solved the Mercury precession and light bending problems are advertised as key evidence supporting the theory of General Relativity
While the paucity and inconclusiveness of experimental evidence is an obstacle to the confirmation of General Relativity, there are some other indicators. This page will examine some difficulties in reconciling General Relativity with Special Relativity and Newton’s Theory of Gravitation. Included are comparisons of predictions for the precession of perihelia and bending of light under Kepler’s laws and Einstein’s General Relativity. It is clear that Einstein's theory of gravitation cannot be reconciled with Newton's theory of gravitation Kepler’s laws, and the mass energy law.

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

Einstein’s General Relativity is hard to reconcile with the rest of physics, and even within its own structure has weaknesses. Its heavy mathematical structure seems utterly incompatible with Quantum Mechanics and is at best tenuous with Special Relativity and Newton's Theory of Gravitation. Different as Einstein's and Newton's theories are, within the solar system, Einstein’s theory is greatly simplified by imitating Newton’s theory and as the two theories merge their results are almost identical. Yet, for over 80 years, the measurements are less than satisfactory and competing theories have emerged to explain the observations.
Einstein’s field equations are difficult to solve in a closed form. For example, only one exact solution, the Schwarzschild solution, has been found for the recession of the precession of perihelia problem. Generally, the motion of a planet is along a geodesic in Riemann’s curved space-time. Einstein’s theory claims that such geodesic motions account for the precession of the perihelion of the planet Mercury and that they also describe the bending of light in a gravitational field. Einstein’s claims to have solved the Mercury precession and light bending problems are advertised as key evidence supporting the theory of General Relativity
While the paucity and inconclusiveness of experimental evidence is an obstacle to the confirmation of General Relativity, there are some other indicators. This page will examine some difficulties in reconciling General Relativity with Special Relativity and Newton’s Theory of Gravitation. Included are comparisons of predictions for the precession of perihelia and bending of light under Kepler’s laws and Einstein’s General Relativity. It is clear that Einstein's theory of gravitation cannot be reconciled with Newton's theory of gravitation Kepler’s laws, and the mass energy law.

More books from James Constant

Cover of the book Finding Pythagorean Primes by James Constant
Cover of the book Biographical Index by James Constant
Cover of the book Character of the State by James Constant
Cover of the book How Federal Courts Defraud Patent Owners by James Constant
Cover of the book Einstein's Fictional Gravitational Waves by James Constant
Cover of the book Supreme Court Petition For Rehearing No 10-1275 by James Constant
Cover of the book The Judicial Trinity as Law of The Land by James Constant
Cover of the book California Supreme Court Questions Presented by James Constant
Cover of the book Kepler Newton and Einstein by James Constant
Cover of the book Einstein's Geometry and Tests by James Constant
Cover of the book Petition for Certiorari: Denied Without Opinion Patent Case 93-1413 by James Constant
Cover of the book Newton's Gravitation and Cosmic Expansion (IV Theories) by James Constant
Cover of the book Stop Judicial Abuse by James Constant
Cover of the book Newton's Gravitation and Cosmic Expansion (III Observations) by James Constant
Cover of the book Einstein's Equivalence Postulate and Spacelike Waves 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