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 Angular Momentum Puzzle by James Constant
Cover of the book California Petition for Rehearing S188596 by James Constant
Cover of the book The Individualist in Nature Society and State by James Constant
Cover of the book Extended Zeta Functions Prove or Dis-prove Riemann's Hypothesis by James Constant
Cover of the book America's Dilemma: Between Scylla and Charybdis by James Constant
Cover of the book Debt Democracy and Greek Nemesis by James Constant
Cover of the book Newton's Gravitation and Cosmic Expansion (V Appendices) by James Constant
Cover of the book The Gravitational Probe B Boondoggle by James Constant
Cover of the book Supreme Court Questions Presented 09-381– Denied Without Opinion by James Constant
Cover of the book Questions Presented Supreme Court Cases by James Constant
Cover of the book Finding Pythagorean Primes by James Constant
Cover of the book Cert Denied -The Denial of Certiorari Appeals Without Reasons by James Constant
Cover of the book Constant v American Micro-Devices (Supreme Court Patent Morass) by James Constant
Cover of the book Petition for Certiorari – Patent Case 94-782 - Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) - Patent Statute 35 USC 261 – Judgment lien Statute 12 USC 1963 by James Constant
Cover of the book Global Positioning System Clock Errors 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