View Poll Results: What do you think about my work and article "Dilation as field"? (post #56 and links)

Voters
6. You may not vote on this poll
  • Your work looks like at least interesting, keep developing - I wish you good luck

    1 16.67%
  • I do not have a clear opinion on the subject

    1 16.67%
  • Leave it, it is worthless work without future

    4 66.67%
Results 1 to 30 of 71

Thread: Kepler's third law rules the Gravity

Threaded View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    346

    Lightbulb Kepler's third law rules the Gravity

    Hello all.

    I would like to show something that I hope, you may like.
    You will see, that Kepler was perfectly right, but in some unexpected way.

    I provide references as links in text.
    In whole post we assume that c=1 to simplify calculations.

    We take 3rd Keppler law for some rotation in R distance where T is period. We may transform it to form of:









    Let our constans for considered rotation will be equal to Schwarschild radius R_s, then:



    Let us derive time dilation factor gamma for such move:



    As you probably see, it is the same factor that is present in Schwarzschild metric, where for geodesics we have:



    Let us differentiate our gamma factor by R. Surprise! - we obtain gravitational acceleration...



    If you do not believe it is correct, look at the reference, formula (25), keeping in mind, that:



    Looks interesting?
    Take a look at this. Now, we derive rest of Schwarschild metric...

    At first we recall and transform simply Newtonian formula for accelerated move for our case:





    as it is easy to calculate if we differentiate above by "R" we obtain:



    thus:





    Now, we define observer resting in R distance to source of gravity (f.e. we on Earth).
    His proper time formula we may denote as:



    Thanks to above observer, Schwarzschild metric may be rewritten for "every particular observer" (without any bad looking "dt" in infinity). For geodesics Schwarzschild metric will be in form of:





    Let us rewrite above as:



    Now, we show, that difference between Schwarzschild and Minkowski is equal to t_g:



    If we denote spatial increment as dx



    Schwarzschild metric appears to be consequence of some Kepler rotation in Minkowski timespace...



    If you are interested why it works this way, I explain it in my article draft and partly in my previous posts.
    Last edited by pogono; 2011-Dec-11 at 06:47 PM. Reason: mistake corrected, thanks to grapes

Similar Threads

  1. rules?
    By stpbutcool1 in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 2004-Nov-24, 03:45 PM
  2. New rules
    By Fraser in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2003-Nov-17, 06:20 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •