Blog Ekkehard Friebe

By Victor de Botton – January 2012

Introduction
The present dissertation makes use of mathematics to supply alternative unified quantitative solutions all compatible between them. The first step is a correction of an existing vector equation. The next step is a geometric time definition to create a comprehensive geometric system independent on any assumed time variable defined externally from geometry. A geometric centre-spherical gravity equation is further developed from existing mathematic equations and is implemented to solve problems evolving from experimentally seemingly incompatible to one another results and to supply explanations to each, making use of purely mathematic parameters: length and geometric time.

Issues dealt with: 
– Dynamic acceleration in a three dimensions independent corrected equation
– Geometric time, non conservative quantic and apparently conservative behaviours
– Paradoxes like “electric weight”, “neutrons non rectilinear falling”
– Centre-spherical acceleration and geometric gravity equation
– Mathematic independent and precise gravity profile around Earth
– Red shift, black radiation and holes, sunspots and C.M.B.
– Coupling, super fluid, superconducting, solid state, geometric temperature
– Maintenance, transient and supernovae with geometric gravity
– Northward migration of continents, the Pacific Ring of Fire, Gulf Stream, Ninõ, Ninã and similar, magnetic field on Earth, the hole in the ozone layer at the Southern pole
– etc.

Geometric developments and theorems using rotating and translating “points” and the relationships between them are here independently developed. The mathematic existence of such points is mathematically sustained and explained. Questions will be asked after the demonstrations about the nature of the points. After the mathematic demonstrations, actual entities can be identified. 

[…………………] 

Conclusions
Mathematics would best describe Nature’s behaviour. Geometric time definition is the only way to avoid uncontrollable superposition of events, so is the prime number progression constraint to frequency. Mathematic developments like equations (1) and (2) cannot be disregarded and replaced by assumptions like the mass law assumption/decision and the C light velocity political decision.

Mathematic gravity is not proportional to the inverse of the square of the radius, a never validated but always applied assumption together with mass, never actually measured.

Two political “laws” rule the passive “scientific community” for over two centuries: 
– The mass law Notice the juridical term, never demonstrated.
– The C=constant law Recent experiments (CERN 2011) could finally give a good reason to discard the law altogether, together with its very brilliant PR conclusions like linear relativity.

History The inverse square “law” was used mainly for its easiness to absorb any discrepancy, never demonstrated with the excuse that Earth’s mass was too large to make measurements reliable. The “electric mass” mathematic equation, as quoted in old books for electric charges, was verified and induced by similarity excuse.

“Masses” were granted and distributed all around starting from Sir Isaac Newton’s apple and an un-demonstrated equation, furthering to atoms, stars and galaxies with no great danger of contradictions, and especially for being conservative thus reversible, not too or at all committing. “Weighed masses” are in fact measured accelerations required to move the de Coriolis average acceleration of any collection of transformable points.

The C law was decided upon by heavy pressure from wave mechanics experts who needed “an ether”. Afterwards, they further needed “an ether wind” and as it seems, the M&M experiment/s could well have been encouraged/financed by them.

The long series of M&M experiments, each and everyone never absolutely negative, all containing a positive residuum to the change of velocity of light, could not be really invoked.

Mirrors in all experiments were taken as “geometric mirrors”, as at the time, optics were divided until the second half of the twentieth century into “geometric optics” and “physical optics”. Mirrors were never thought of as new sources although with a refractive index of –1 they should not have been neglected, for at the same time refractive indices of gases in the experiments were very much accounted for and required proliferation of mirrors to keep experiments in small volumes of gas for control.

Experimental difficulties indeed existed but they could not be used as excuses.

– The first M&M experiment included only one mirror at half ways (50%) and actually yielded a 50% positive result, unequivocally meaning that light can change its velocity but was overruled intentionally.

– All further experiments along the M&M pattern always produced positive results but smaller and smaller and never negative even after introducing 17 mirrors in the experiment. On purely statistical grounds, this should have awakened some doubts about its conclusions but politics… Anyway the “decision” to keep velocity of light constant erected a very heavy stumbling block on the way to real scientific and sound judgement development on a great deal of other matters depending on the decision.

– New evidence, as of Tuesday, March 30, 2011 from the globe of the European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN, the very centre of the original decision in Switzerland, could finally give a strong enough blow to the political decision.

The matter is to be dealt about again using the definition of geometric time.

– Elsewhere a democratic “ballot” (politics) had to “decide” whether Pluto is a planet or not with no one of the three thousand voters really knowing for sure or even trying to understand what they “see”. By the way, all is well with Pluto.

Mechanical engineering wise, the size of the “controller” needed to put together the quantity of controllable points in space according to equation (1), puts a heavy philosophical burden and a very profound respect to this very controlled Universe.

“Theories”, human assumptions, cannot compete with mathematic/philosophic reliability.

Equation (3) puts the control distance equal to 0 as the gravity acceleration from to 1000000 suns from one side of the Milky Way is almost instant, more precisely one scan time of the most frequent point in the system, transmitted to the opposite side over everyone’s head and 10 billion light-years far.

This seemingly unsolvable by immediate visual assess feature/paradox, is resolved by the intrinsically relative/reciprocal requirement: Universe has rotated and translated around and along the one transformable point, and as such has recorded full information of the point new relative position. This is the “beauty of geometry” so much admired by Sir Isaac Newton and should be admired by all as well and should replace the “you see you believe” concept.

Lesen Sie bitte hier weiter!