Universal Gravitation
Home Natural Motion Universal Gravitation Cold Fusion Pulsing Thrust ShuttleFactor Challenger Studies STEMnP Oil Spill Disaster

 

 

Home
Natural Motion
Universal Gravitation
Cold Fusion
Pulsing Thrust
ShuttleFactor
Challenger Studies
STEMnP
Oil Spill Disaster

 

To be added:

AntiGravity

Failure Mechanisms

Cosmic Life Line

Sci Study of UFOs

Solo Sapiens

Philosophy of Science

A Complete Theory of Universal Gravitation and the Cause of Gravity


Theory of Universal Gravitation and A Unified Interaction
December 1993 (PDF 189KB)

Newton combined force and mass in universal gravitation. Einstein bypassed the issue of force altogether: In general relativity, gravity is geometry. However, in both Newton's and Einstein's theories of gravitation, mass is the cause of gravity. When enormous gravitation is detected in the universe, scientists search for the massive bodies that cause the large gravitation. When those massive bodies are not discovered, mysteriously hidden masses, such as the black holes and dark unseen matter, are proposed. Matter is out there, but it is hidden.

Newton and Einstein's theories of gravitation do not explain some observed facts, and both theories contradict other facts.


In this Report, I show that the heat screened, or hidden, inside insulating surface layers, such as the Earth’s crust, is the cause of gravity. The mysterious free fall is explained by the same effect. The same mechanism works in the stars, planets, moons, and atoms. My theory gives accurate answers to anomalies, perturbations, observations and contradictions that remain unanswered, or unexplainable. Detailed Crucial Tests and Numerical Examples are included, along with the governing equations. I urge the reader to use a standard high school or college physics textbook side-by-side with this Report. That way, you will see how one Maxwell-like equation applies to all fields in physics.


I find that a sphere, such as the Earth, with insulating crust layer(s) acts like an insulated-electric-conductor, which obeys Gauss's law, where the internally screened-temperature, rather than the electric charge, is the interaction agent.


Maxwell’s electromagnetic equations held a great promise. If only the mechanical equations, i.e., Newton’s, could be written in Maxwell-like equations. Einstein spent considerable effort and time trying to express gravitational equations in Maxwell-like form, but he was not able to do the task. In this Report, you will see how to express the gravitational equations in Maxwell-like equations.


The analogy between universal gravitation and general relativity can be seen as follows. Rather than begin with Newton’s equation of force, which includes the product of the masses, general relativity begins with an equation of potentials, where the central mass M is replaced by the density. The equation of potentials, or Poisson’s equation, is directly related to Newton’s law. It was therefore inevitable that the general relativity tensor attributes gravitation to the mass, via the density of matter.


Formulas of Universal Gravitation and Unified Interaction (PDF 481KB)
December 1993 (PDF 481 KB)

I had tried the above formulations with the moons of Jupiter and the other planets, the planets with the Sun, the Space Shuttle and satellites in earth orbits, the Lunar Orbiters and the Apollo spacecraft around the Moon. The procedure is a powerful tool to chart the gravitation footprint, especially, for bodies that do not have their own satellites.

To estimate the gravitating-temperature T of any body, Kepler’s constant k must be derived from the period and the distance of some orbiting body in the desired central-body-system; but my constant a will be the same for all central-body-systems. Kepler’s constant varies from one system to another, but my constant remains constant for all systems, whether galaxies, stars, planets, molecules or atoms.

When you try my formulations with problems in classical, electromagnetic and quantum physics, you will discover amazing results. The relationship, between Kepler’s constant k and my constant a, described above is such a result. Also, Kepler's constant and my constant give the speed of light!

Validity of the General Theory of Relativity
Submitted to a Physical Review Letters, July 1992

We show that the thought experiments used to develop general relativity did not include, nor consider, the basic “bouncing” motion. We also show that in the Einstein elevator, perfectly elastic balls fall together the first time, but that, subsequently, the motion of the balls is never synchronous…

In particular, we show that in accelerated frames, the action is a force-pulse, whereas in a gravitational field, the action is a series of uninterrupted force-pulses.

A rope is then fixed to the ceiling with a body attached to the free end. The rope hangs “vertically” and stretches. The inside observer considers this to be a gravitational effect.

Bergman noted that the “principle of equivalence” is basal to general relativity; the “principle cannot be eliminated without destroying the theory as a whole.3 Einstein himself (and Infeld) emphasized that without the principle, “our… argument would fail completely.”4

No experiment whatsoever can distinguish a gravitational field from an accelerated reference frame.”5 We describe such an experiment.

Our reasoning is not limited to thought experiments. The mass of a Space Shuttle Orbiter is approximately 90,000 kg. If the thrusters provide 1-g acceleration in orbit, then a floating 1-kg elastic ball will appear to fall freely… and the astronauts will immediately know that they are in an accelerating frame, and not in a gravitational field.

Comments from Dr. Gary D. Gordon, Senior Scientist, COMSAT (3/15/1994)

"The subject of this paper is fascinating. I find different individuals are satisfied by different answers. The question "Why do objects fall?" can be answered in so many different ways. A child may be told "you didn't hold on to it."

I understand you are looking for objections that people might raise in reviewing your theory. I hope the above is helpful. I am also attaching a calculation of the analemma.

There may be many ways of calculating the analemma. The procedure uses well known equations, but is not simple."

AbuTaha's Response to Gary Gordon (3/29/1994)

"... I have repeated the Cavendish tests with care to generate a quantitative database. A first-order effect can be produced by varying the temperature of the masses in the Cavendish experiment...

ANALEMMA: As you wrote, there are many ways to calculate the analemma, and the procedure is not simple. The enclosed figure shows four analemmas, (1) my calculated analemma, (2) your calculated analemma, (3) Sundial measured analemma, and (4) An analemma I derived from the velocity vector in the Ephemeris.

Your calculated analemma and the Sundial analemma are in agreement. On the other hand, my calculated analemma and the Ephemeris' velocity analemma are in agreement - - - The difference between the two sets requires explanation - - - Is the use of 2e justified?

THE MOON: Many Arab astronomers tried to make precise predictions of the Moon's motion, if only because the annual Islamic events are based on lunar calendar. Many years ago, I made similar attempts, and I also failed. The Moon's motion is simply incomprehensible - - - I was able to develop meaningful correlations from temperature-gravitation; e.g., perigee occurs after minimum declination (see enclosed figure)

I mentioned the formidable mass-based equation of 250 pages that describes the Moon's orbit. I offer an equation of one line; i.e., the radius vector to the Moon as function of temperatures and distance; to predict the motion of the Moon.

ECCENTRIC ORBITS: Here is an excellent correlation derived from my concept. If a moon (or ring) is too close to the parent planet so that it does not view the poles, then the eccentricity of the moon's orbit is very small or zero. Whereas if a moon is far enough from the parent planet so as to view the poles, then the moon's orbit is rather eccentric. This is true of most the moons we know today (1994)

MARS: In my extensive gravitation work, I have simply asked questions that have not been asked before. For example, astronomy textbooks give, in text and figures, observational facts. Aphelion of Mars' orbit occurs long before the planet's summer solstice, and perihelion occurs long before the winter solstice. The aphelion and perihelion of Earth occur slightly after the solstices. The difference is distinct (enclosed sketch). Why?

GENERAL REMARKS: In my view, mass gravitation runs into its most difficult test with periodic and non-periodic changes in the intensity and direction of gravity in a given location. To explain some of these requires that the invisible mascons (mass concentrations or black holes) move underground like cars on California highways. The temperature changes, on the other hand, are perceptible, measurable, and can explain the time variation of gravity."

AbuTaha's Response to Gary Gordon (3/31/1994)

"I like to add to my response of yesterday that the accuracies in the Cavendish experiment are worse than you indicated.

Comments from Dr. Gary D. Gordon, Senior Scientist, COMSAT (4/06/1994)

"I was interested in your data on the accuracy of the Cavendish experiment. The results you quote show that the experiment is less accurate than what I had guessed.

I think you are close to understanding the differences between the various calculations of the analemma. I hope the enclosed calculations (pp. 2-5) will help."

AbuTaha's Response to Gary Gordon (4/10/1994)

"Your observations would be useful to some of our friends - authors of satellite textbooks - who hardly treat the subject in their books. My understanding of the analemma has not changed much. The analemma is said to have been discovered by the Arabs. It is a vital tool to determine the exact time of daily prayers in Islam; for cities at different longitude and latitude. I had used the analemma extensively some theirty years ago for this and other purposes; and I had gained a clear understanding of it then.

You said in the earlier comments (p. 3, Para. 1) that "the analemma is not explained, nor mentioned," in your Handbook of Communications Satellite. You may be rushing to incorporate the Earth's analemma into the satellites' analemmas, drifts, and orbit perturbations.

The analemma is incidental to my concept temperature-gravitation - - - and further elaboration on the analemma would seem unproductive..."

AbuTaha's Response to Dr. Victor Slabinski, Senior Scientist, COMSAT (3/09/1994)

"Many years ago, I examined Kepler's assertions about a double acceleration in each orbit of the planets and the Moon. Kepler called it "the colure (lure or attraction) of the solstices." The double acceleration was evident (also to Tycho Brahe) after the effects of obliquity, eccentricity, etc. were eliminated. To account for the irregularity, Kepler reported that it required two eccentricities for each orbit to explain the observed irregularity. Alternatively, two accelerations in each orbit explained the observation.

(Using his database) Kepler reported how changing the eccentricity would explain the "irregularity," but that that would double the "irrergularity" on the other side. My Figures 3 and 4 (will be added when found) show exactly what was meant by the need for two eccentricities, or two accelerations.

Conclusion: The Analemma analysis demonstrates that there is an acceleration component that occurs around the summer solstice (or in the apogee region) that is not accounted for by Keplerian, Newtonian, or other methods. My temperature-gravitation concept and formulations give qualitative and quantitative answers.

"...you can see that the south cap sits squarely on the south pole while the north cap is centered around 75o. The effect of the location of the icecaps can also be seen in the case of the analemma; (see previous Section), where the acceleration in the summer solstice begins soon after April (early viewing of the North icecap) while the winter solstice acceleration is delayed until after October, due to the late viewing of that cap.

In summary, Kepler was right, the primary effect is terrestrial (or planetary), the effect lies in the poles, and more importantly, the effect is governed by the "posture" or attitude of the poles."

Reply to Wilbur L. Pritchard, First Director of Comsat Labs, (2/01/1994)

"It was thoughtful of you to send pages of the "Explanatory Supplement" to the Astronomical Ephemeris. There is a fundamental and substantial discrepancy that is not obvious to the casual observer."

Back to Top


Home ]

Comments or Questions; send mail to: info@shuttlefactor.com
Copyright © 2010 Ali F. AbuTaha