Doppler Effect Of Gravitational Field

Status
Not open for further replies.
exchemist said:
Nope. You joined this forum on 17th March.

But on 21st February you posted this thread about the Doppler effect of gravity on another (nutcase) science site: http://www.scienceforums.com/topic/36585-doppler-effect-of-gravitational-field/?hl= doppler gravity
Click to expand...
I looked at the links you pointed out.
For the first time, I explicitly put forward that the Doppler effect of gravitational field starts from March 24, 2020.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/a-story-about-special-relativity-who-can-explain-it？.162954/page-10
http://www.scienceforums.com/topic/36585-doppler-effect-of-gravitational-field/?p=382952
But I also noticed that in Feb 22 2020 04:03 am, I have used the Title Doppler effect of gravity field. And I can basically make sure that the title is not modified later. Just now I made a try. I can't change the title.
In this forum, with the discussion of scholars, let me deduce this idea and verify it in mercury precession.
Well, you let me rearrange the history of this topic.

I hope that we will focus on the gravitational field later.
For hundreds of years, scientists have tried to modify the equation of gravitation, and now we have. I hope our discussion will make this theory more perfect and play a role in specific scientific research.
 
I put the recent discussions and thoughts into the paper, and made some supplements, which can help others understand. I will submit to nature again.
I will also post the latest version of the paper in the scientific forum. Hope to make this theory more perfect.
 
Physical Review Letters has rejected my manuscript, although Earth precession, Mars precession, and Jupiter precession calculated using this theory. . . The results obtained are closer to the observed value than the GR.

This is really disappointing. I cannot understand why they do not show interest in the discovery that Newton's gravity is corrected.

Neddy, continue our discussion? You have not responded to my answer for several days.
 
Last edited:
TonyYuan said:
Physical Review Letters has rejected my manuscript, although Earth precession, Mars precession, and Jupiter precession calculated using this theory. . . The results obtained are closer to the observed value than the GR.

This is really disappointing. I cannot understand why they do not show interest in the discovery that Newton's gravity is corrected.

Neddy, continue our discussion? You have not responded to my answer for several days.
Click to expand...
I expect it will be because you claim to have overturned relativity, yet you don't even understand what the Doppler effect is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: (Q)
exchemist said:
I expect it will be because you claim to have overturned relativity, yet you don't even understand what the Doppler effect is.
Click to expand...
Newton's universal gravitation is a law of interaction between objects. There is mutual attraction between any objects. The magnitude of this force is proportional to the mass of each object and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.If M and m represent the mass of two objects and R represents the distance between them, then the mutual attraction between the objects is F=(G*M*m) / R², G is called the universal gravitational constant.The gravitational equation has played an important role in calculating the orbit of celestial bodies and discovering new celestial bodies, but there are some deviations between the calculation results and actual observations. A well-known example is that the calculation of Mercury precession deviates from the actual observations by 43” per century.Scientists have been looking for ways to modify the gravitational equation, but it has never been successful. One important reason is that the speed of gravity is not considered to be limited.Now that scientists have measured that the speed of gravity is the same as the speed of light c, this paper studies how Newton's universal gravitational equation should be modified accordingly after the gravity is no longer the excess force that Newton thinks.

When two objects with their own velocities interact, we can easily think of the chase effect, and the relative velocity between them will affect the effect. Both acoustic and light waves have a similar effect, namely the Doppler effect of waves.We can collectively refer to the chasing effect and the wave Doppler effect as the generalDoppler effect, or as the relative velocity effect. Will there be a similar effect between the gravitational field and the object?LIGO discovered gravitational waves. This discovery has increased our scientific conjecture about the Doppler effect of gravitational fields. However, science has never been based on conjecture. Science must come from strict mathematical calculation and physical derivation.
 
Earth precession, Mars precession, and Jupiter precession calculated using this theory. . . The results obtained are closer to the observed value than the GR.

You can look at the results of GR calculations and observations, the difference is huge. Why can everyone turn a blind eye?
 
TonyYuan said:
Earth precession, Mars precession, and Jupiter precession calculated using this theory. . . The results obtained are closer to the observed value than the GR.

You can look at the results of GR calculations and observations, the difference is huge. Why can everyone turn a blind eye?
Click to expand...
Because you are clearly a crank who is talking out of his arse. If you claim a Doppler effect, there has to be a wave or other periodic phenomenon involved (e.g. a stream of particles emitted at regular intervals), whereby the frequency of the phenomenon detected at a receiver depends on the relative velocities of source and receiver.

If you don't have this, you don't have a Doppler effect. And none of your algebra makes any mention of a frequency or wavelength. So whatever your goofy idea is, it is NOT any sort of Doppler effect.

That will be enough to make the editor of any science journal throw your paper in the bin. And it is also why nobody on this forum who knows any science takes you seriously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: (Q)
exchemist said:
Because you are clearly a crank who is talking out of his arse. If you claim a Doppler effect, there has to be a wave or other periodic phenomenon involved (e.g. a stream of particles emitted at regular intervals), whereby the frequency of the phenomenon detected at a receiver depends on the relative velocities of source and receiver.

If you don't have this, you don't have a Doppler effect. And none of your algebra makes any mention of a frequency or wavelength. So whatever your goofy idea is, it is NOT any sort of Doppler effect.

That will be enough to make the editor of any science journal throw your paper in the bin. And it is also why nobody on this forum who knows any science takes you seriously.
Click to expand...
If scholars treat the Doppler effect as superficially as you do, then I have nothing to say.

The Doppler effect is essentially a chasing effect between objects, and there is a Doppler effect between any object or wave or field of finite velocity.

I think scholars who understand mathematics and physics a little should understand this truth.

Of course, if you think that the Doppler effect is the unique name of the wave, then our theory can be called other names, such as the relative velocity effect.
 
There are calculation errors in Newton's gravitation. I believe no one will object to this.

Now we have proposed a new gravitational equation, and it shows a high degree of accuracy in the calculation of planetary orbits. So why do we deny it?

If there are astronomers in the forum, and understand the precession of the earth, the precession of Mars, the precession of Jupiter, then in the calculation and observation of these data, I would like to compare with GR, whose data is closer to the observed value.

If my theory is closer to the observed value, then please respect my work. If GR is closer to the observed value, then I will say sorry to GR.
 
Taking out everyone's true skills, let's use the data to talk about whether GR is closer to real observations or whether my theory is closer to real observations.

Below is my data:
Planet ----- Perihelion ------- Aphelion ------- Ellipse axis (precession under the Doppler effect)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mercury------ 58.404" | ------- 32.938" | ------- 43.053"
Venus ------ 38.004"| ------- 38.466" | ------- 38.236"
Earth------- 33.073" |------- 32.392" | ------- 32.726"
Mars------- 27.609" | ------- 24.686" | ------- 26.075"
Jupiter------- 14.524" | ------- 13.042" | ------- 13.747"
Saturn------- 10.831" | ------- 9.519" | ------- 10.138"
Uranus------- 7.446" | ------- 6.992" | ------- 7.209"
Neptune------- 6.064"| ------- 5.929" | ------- 5.996"
 
Last edited:
TonyYuan said:
If scholars treat the Doppler effect as superficially as you do, then I have nothing to say.

The Doppler effect is essentially a chasing effect between objects, and there is a Doppler effect between any object or wave or field of finite velocity.

I think scholars who understand mathematics and physics a little should understand this truth.

Of course, if you think that the Doppler effect is the unique name of the wave, then our theory can be called other names, such as the relative velocity effect.
Click to expand...
Bullshit.

You have had your papers rejected by everyone.

I have told you why.

If you can't join the dots, nobody can make you do so, but you will be dooming yourself to being treated, with some justice, as an idiot.
 
Newton told us that the speed of the gravitational field is infinite. The gravity equation is:
F = G*M*m/R^2.
No matter what the speed of the object is, it cannot escape the influence of the gravitational field.

Now we know that the speed of the gravitational field is limited, which is equal to the speed of light c. The gravity equation is:
F = (G*M*m/R^2) * [(c-v) / c ].
When the speed of the object in the direction of the gravitational field reaches c, it can escape the influence of the gravitational field.

This is the simple chasing effect between the gravitational field and the object.
This new gravitational equation can accurately calculate the planet's orbit, which is a modification of Newton's gravitational equation.

The essence of space-time described by GR is to describe the chasing effect between gravitational field and objects.
 
Neddy Bate said:
Interesting, thank you.



Okay, so now I am at step 3.
Click to expand...
Neddy, In our previous discussion, you used data to verify the correctness of my mathematical derivation. But now there is an astronomy professor who is responsible for reviewing manuscripts in a journal. He said it was completely wrong. What do you think?
 
If you are a researcher in gravitational mechanics, please join us in the discussion. What we have done today is a modification of Newton's gravitational equation. Its significance is great, it can be comparable to GR.

In the discussion, I hope you can analyze from the perspective of classic physics, and temporarily forget SR.

The reviewers hired by the journal are disappointing, and some of them do not understand even the most basic physical knowledge. I hope this theory can be established in this scientific forum.


***********************************************************************************
Newton told us that the speed of the gravitational field is infinite. The gravity equation is:
F = G*M*m/R^2.
No matter what the speed of the object is, it cannot escape the influence of the gravitational field.

Now we know that the speed of the gravitational field is limited, which is equal to the speed of light c. The gravity equation is:
F = (G*M*m/R^2) * [(c-v) / c ].
When the speed of the object in the direction of the gravitational field reaches c, it can escape the influence of the gravitational field.

This is the simple chasing effect between the gravitational field and the object.
This new gravitational equation can accurately calculate the planet's orbit, which is a modification of Newton's gravitational equation.

The essence of space-time described by GR is to describe the chasing effect between gravitational field and objects.
***********************************************************************************

http://www.sciforums.com/attachments/doppler-effect-of-gravitational-field4-0-pdf.3419/
 
Thank you for submitting your manuscript to Heliyon and for giving us the opportunity to consider your work. I regret to inform you that your manuscript does not reach the required quality standard of this journal and we must therefore reject it. The effects of retarded gravitation and of retarded gravitational waves has long been understood. The author seeks to explain something that has already been well known for over 70 years. That all of the author's references are from wikipedia should convince the author of this. The quality of this submission is on par with a high school science report. Thus, it is not appropriate for any research journal.

Really?
 
TonyYuan said:
The quality of this submission is on par with a high school science report. Thus, it is not appropriate for any research journal.

Really?
Click to expand...

Yes. Really. Remember, you heard it here first.
 
(Q) said:
Yes. Really. Remember, you heard it here first.
Click to expand...
It seems that few people here think my theory is correct. It is more of various denials.

(Q) , You once said to me: "You have no regrets at working hard to be a crank? Too bad you didn't funnel all that work into learning something about physics."

F = (G*M*m / R^2) * (c - v) / c, I would love to know in what literature this formula has appeared. Apart from me, who has used it to calculate Mercury precession.
 
Last edited:
This paper is indeed suitable for high school students to read. Just like Newton's three laws of gravity and Newtonian mechanics.

The theory is not complicated, but it modifies Newton's law of gravitation. It can be equivalent to GR.

Newton's law of universal gravitation will regain its status in the field of science.
 
At this stage, I think the discussion of this "theory" is at an end. Now we're just seeing repetitive self-promotion.

Therefore, this thread is closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top