The variability of the “Universal Gravitational Constant&quo

[Rolf Guthmann]

The variability of the “Universal Gravitational Constant ”.

The universal gravitational constant (G), with an official value of 6.6726 x 10-11 and the strange units of m3.kg-1.s-2 (distance cubed divided by the product of mass by time squared), is the oldest constant in physics, but has proved to be the most difficult to determine. Most physical constants are precise to more than 8 decimal places, but values found for G differ shortly after the third decimal place and sometimes before. No precise value has yet been determined, and every time a new team of researchers sets out to establish it with new and modern equipment, different values are found.

We will now see how a range of experimental results or gravitational anomalies question the validity of Newton’s universal law of gravitation. This law states that the gravitational force between two bodies is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. To obtain the force of attraction between them, it is also necessary to multiply by G.

F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck’s 1981 study, “Geophysical evidence for non-Newtonian gravity” (Nature, v. 292, 1981, pp. 230-232.), shows that measurements performed under the sea, in deep mineshafts and in similar locations give results up to 1% higher than the official value, and that the deeper the location, the higher the value of G. According to Newton’s formulation, the force attracting the spheres was greater according to the increased depth. See also http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v33/i12/p3487_1. .............................

In 1798, Henry Cavendish published an experiment in Philosophical Transactions that has been challenging the world of physics for over 200 years. Using a sensitive torsion balance to determine the gravitational constant, he discovered that heating the spheres produced a considerable increase in the attraction between them (see Stephen Mooney, “From the cause of gravity to the revolution of science”, Apeiron, 1999, pp. 138-141). Since then, the experiment has been repeated countless times, in high vacuum chambers, using the most modern measuring equipment. Despite the powerful arsenal of contemporary physics, efforts to explain the phenomenon have been unconvincing……………………….
………………….

In the Quantum Theory of Gravity - “QTG” we will demonstrate how gravity can be found in atoms and the importance of time.

Quantum Theory of Gravity - “QTG”
The Powerful new law of the gravity !!

See more details in the following Sites:
http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/index.html
or
http://www.geocities.com/rolfguthmann/

[Jens]

In 1798, Henry Cavendish published an experiment in Philosophical Transactions that has been challenging the world of physics for over 200 years. Using a sensitive torsion balance to determine the gravitational constant, he discovered that heating the spheres produced a considerable increase in the attraction between them (see Stephen Mooney, “From the cause of gravity to the revolution of science”, Apeiron, 1999, pp. 138-141). Since then, the experiment has been repeated countless times, in high vacuum chambers, using the most modern measuring equipment. Despite the powerful arsenal of contemporary physics, efforts to explain the phenomenon have been unconvincing.

Do you have any better citations for this? I'd be interested in reading about that experiment, but I can't find it anywhere except strange sites. The wikipedia entry doesn't mention that experiment at all. And also, you say that it has been repeated countless times. Can you give me any good citations for that?

[papageno]

The variability of the “Universal Gravitational Constant ”.
I just hope that you are not an alter ego of Lunatik/nutant gene 71: he is the one obsessed with variable G.



The universal gravitational constant (G), with an official value of 6.6726 x 10-11 and the strange units of m3.kg-1.s-2 (distance cubed divided by the product of mass by time squared),...
There is nothing strange about it: the units come from Newton's law of gravitation.



... is the oldest constant in physics, but has proved to be the most difficult to determine.
It is hard to measure, because it gravitional interaction is weak compared to other interactions.
It is hard in lab experiments to compensate adequately for spurious effects.



Most physical constants are precise to more than 8 decimal places, but values found for G differ shortly after the third decimal place and sometimes before.
According to my copy of the CODATA (http://www.codata.org/), G (http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?bg|search_for=universal_in!) has an uccertainty of the order of 10^-4 (fourth decimal place).



No precise value has yet been determined, and every time a new team of researchers sets out to establish it with new and modern equipment, different values are found.
So?
Measurements are never perfect, and have errors.
The point is that the precision and the accuracy improve over time.



We will now see how a range of experimental results or gravitational anomalies question the validity of Newton’s universal law of gravitation. This law states that the gravitational force between two bodies is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. To obtain the force of attraction between them, it is also necessary to multiply by G.


F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck’s 1981 study, “Geophysical evidence for non-Newtonian gravity” (Nature, v. 292, 1981, pp. 230-232.), shows that measurements performed under the sea, in deep mineshafts and in similar locations give results up to 1% higher than the official value, and that the deeper the location, the higher the value of G. According to Newton’s formulation, the force attracting the spheres was greater according to the increased depth. See also http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v33/i12/p3487_1

The only residual doubt arises from the possibility of bias by an anomalous regional gravity gradient. Neither measurements of gravity gradient above ground level (in tall chimneys) nor surface surveys are yet adequate to remove this doubt, but the coincidence of conclusions derived from mine data obtained in different parts of the world makes such an anomaly appear an improbable explanation.
Search the board for the threads about variable G: I gave plenty of references with experimental contraints to these anomalies.



In 1798, Henry Cavendish published an experiment in Philosophical Transactions that has been challenging the world of physics for over 200 years. Using a sensitive torsion balance to determine the gravitational constant, he discovered that heating the spheres produced a considerable increase in the attraction between them (see Stephen Mooney, “From the cause of gravity to the revolution of science”, Apeiron, 1999, pp. 138-141). Since then, the experiment has been repeated countless times, in high vacuum chambers, using the most modern measuring equipment. Despite the powerful arsenal of contemporary physics, efforts to explain the phenomenon have been unconvincing.
References?
I found only this
The Effect of Temperature on Gravitative Attraction (http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v21/i6/p680_1?qid=800b303ebbf27602&qseq=2&show=10):
Phys. Rev.[/i] 21, 680–691 (1923) ]
[...]
...since the observational error is of the same order as the result, the conclusion is that the effect, if it exists, is less than 2 x 10-6 per degree, and may well be zero. The previous result is explained as probably due to a slight change in the relative positions of the large and small masses, reversible with the temperature change.


EDIT to add title of paper.