Physics
Scientific paper
Apr 2003
adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2003aps..apr.q1020y&link_type=abstract
American Physical Society, April Meeting, 2003, April 5-8, 2003 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, MEETING ID: APR03, abstract #Q1.020
Physics
Scientific paper
In Part I of this work, we derived a general equation of motion, based only on the special theory of relativity and energy conservation. This equation, turned out to be that of Newton, in the case the motion is driven by a weak gravitational field, with a velocity small as compared to the velocity of light. Thus in Part I we found -(GM_0/(r_0)^2)(1-(v_0)^2/(c_0)^2)=v_0dv_0/dr0 (written by the author, in the local frame of reference) here r0 is the distance of the object to the center of celestial object of mass M_0, v0 its velocity, as referred to the local observer; G is the universal constant of gravitation, and c0 the velocity of light in empty space. The above equation is written for the local observer; we should as well be able to write it, as seen by the distant observer. Thus, as we have discussed, the rest mass of an object in a gravitational field (in fact in any field the object in hand enters into interaction), is decreased as much as its binding energy in the field; a mass deficiency conversely, via quantum mechanics, yields (on the contrary to what the general theory of relativity predicts), the stretching of its size, as well as the weakening of its internal energy [1]. Henceforth we are not in the need of the Â"principle of equivalenceÂ" assumed by the general theory of relativity, in order to predict the occurrences dealt with this theory [2]. Our approach then, as viewed by the distant observer, yields -(GM_0/r^2)e^-α_0(1-2e^2α_0(v^2/(c_0)^2))=vdv/dr; α_0r=GM_0/(r(c_0)^2); here r is the distance of the object to the center of celestial object of mass M_0, and v its velocity, as referred to the distant observer. The frame drawn by the above equation allows us to derive the essential findings of the general theory of relativity, i.e. the bending of light through its passage nearby a celestial body, and the precession of the perihelion of the planets. Thus light is deflected exactly twice of what is classically predicted, whereas we predict for Mercury, a precession of the perihelion about 1.3Einstein predicted; the difference in question is experimentally indiscernible in the case of Mercury, but it should become more important, in a stronger field. Following our approach we further undertake the behavior of an object thrown with a very high speed from a celestial body; this amazingly evokes the inflationary behavior of the universe, at the very beginning. [1] T. Yarman, Invariances Based on Mass And Charge Variation, Manufactured by Wave Mechanics, Making up The Rules of Universal Matter Architecture, Chimica Acta Turcica, Vol 27, 1999. [2] T. Yarman, A Novel Approach to The End Results of the General Theory of Relativity and to Bound Muon Decay Rate Retardation, DAMOP 2001 Meeting, APS, May 16 -19, 2001, London, Ontario, Canada.
No associations
LandOfFree
The General Equation of Motion via the Special Theory of Relativity and Qauntum Mechanics Part II: Check against the Basic Predictions of the General Theory of Relativity does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with The General Equation of Motion via the Special Theory of Relativity and Qauntum Mechanics Part II: Check against the Basic Predictions of the General Theory of Relativity, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and The General Equation of Motion via the Special Theory of Relativity and Qauntum Mechanics Part II: Check against the Basic Predictions of the General Theory of Relativity will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-920122