[General] Velocity of gravitation

Albrecht Giese phys at a-giese.de
Wed Feb 13 12:33:05 PST 2019 

Hi All,

we should be careful not to intermix two phenomena:

-  one question is whether a field (electrical or gravitational) 
propagates instantaneously or with a delay according to c (speed of light)
-  the other question is to which direction the field vector is pointing.

The latter question was addressed by Chip when he mentioned a "distorted 
shape" of the field.

The calculation in the paper of S. Carlip, for which I have given a 
link, says that the field vector has a speed-dependent component. And 
that means, even if the field updates arrive at the test charge after a 
delay, the field vector will point to the actual position of the source 
charge. This has the consequence (a bit surprising) that if one would 
stop the motion of the source charge at some position, the test charge 
would notice the field as coming from a position which the source should 
have at that moment, but in fact dos not have at that moment.

I find this explanation quite plausible. And as I wrote, if we assume a 
medium for the propagation of the field, then in a classical view there 
is generally no aberration. Take as an example a wave generated in 
water. This wave arrives at a moving observer from the same direction as 
at an observer at rest.

Albrecht

Am 13.02.2019 um 17:56 schrieb af.kracklauer at web.de:
> Chip:
> As a convinced proponent of the error in QM (as first discovered by 
> Edwin Jaynes) I cannot accept any explnation of instantanious 
> interaction in terms of "wave function collapse."  Bell's "Theorem" is 
> simply wrong, and all similar work contains the same error.  
> Entanglement is just correlation from a prior cause. No hokus-pokus!
> Further, I see no reason a wrench has to arrise by delayed 
> Coulomb-type intereaction. Again, it seems the error here is the 
> association of the wrong source-sink pairs.  The direction of such 
> interaction does not point to a position on a presumed past location 
> in that the source is not moving relative to the sink in a straight 
> line.  There are intertwined spirals, which are stable. [The 
> calculation of the involved force for the mutual circulation would 
> also have to include the gravitational BXv (magnetic like) term, which 
> I doubt has been done; correctly at least.  See O. D. Jefimenko.]
> Sorry, I just find much easier to beleive that mistakes were made than 
> that instantanioua interaction makes sense.
> ---Al
> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2019 um 14:21 Uhr
> *Von:* "Chip Akins" <chipakins at gmail.com>
> *An:* "'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'" 
> <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
> *Betreff:* Re: [General] Velocity of gravitation
>
> Hi Al
>
> Sorry Al, I should have used the term binary star instead of pulsar.
>
> We have experimental and physical evidence for /almost/ instantaneous 
> action, (the orbits of binary stars, wavefunction collapse, and the 
> measured “velocity” of the Coulomb field, entanglement).
>
> The question is not whether this (almost) instantaneous action exists, 
> but rather, what causes it?
>
> If gravity were a field which updates at the velocity c, then the idea 
> is that the motion of the stars would cause the direction of gravity 
> (the gravity vector) to point toward where the other star was in d/c 
> time earlier, and not at the instantaneous center of the other star. 
> But it seems that in all cases, the gravitational and electric field 
> vectors of stationary or moving objects point toward the center of the 
> object, regardless of distance or velocity.
>
> Therefore my conclusion is that the gravitational field is updated 
> /practically/ instantaneously.
>
> Chip
>
> *From:*General 
> [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] 
> *On Behalf Of *af.kracklauer at web.de
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 12, 2019 1:24 PM
> *To:* general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
> *Cc:* 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' 
> <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [General] Velocity of gravitation
>
> Hi Chip:
>
> When "studying" the orbital decay  of pulsars, it seems to me that an 
> increse in the decay implies a change (presumably over and above that 
> caused by escaping radiation) in the angular momentum or else 
> directionally altered attaction between the two or whatever. Where 
> whould the energy thereto come from or go to.  What are you assuming 
> so as to get the dissipative wrench action on the pair for delayed 
> ineteraction but not there for instantanious interaction?  How can 
> whateveritis be justififed?  Is the effect you propose seen in binary 
> stars too?
>
> I can imagine that each just sees a weaker pull together through and 
> towards the center of mass.
>
> BTW, as I see it, there are no such THINGS as fields (or 
> photons/gravitons/aether etc.).  These concepts are models that help 
> associate a force with human experience.  All that is actually known 
> is captured with just Coulomb's (Gauss's) Law.  All the rest is baggage.
>
> ----Al
>
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 12. Februar 2019 um 15:29 Uhr
> *Von:* "Chip Akins" <chipakins at gmail.com <mailto:chipakins at gmail.com>>
> *An:* "'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'" 
> <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org 
> <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>>
> *Betreff:* Re: [General] Velocity of gravitation
>
> Hi Al
>
> If we study the orbital decay of pulsars we can see two large massive 
> objects with gravitational fields, co-orbiting.
>
> In this circumstance the gravitational field is not a stationary field.
>
> However, in this circumstance it is clear that the instantaneous force 
> vector of gravity must point toward the instantaneous position of the 
> masses or the orbits would decay MUCH faster than observed. So gravity 
> cannot be a retarded force, the field itself must either have a 
> distorted shape due to motion, or it must be instantaneous.
>
> I have run the requisite math to determine if a quantifiable rule 
> could exist which causes field distortion which would create the 
> appropriate force vectors. And there is no solution for distortion 
> with motion which holds in all circumstances.
>
> Therefore my conclusion is that the gravitational field is updated 
> practically instantaneously.
>
> Chip Akins
>
> *From:*General 
> [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] 
> *On Behalf Of *af.kracklauer at web.de <mailto:af.kracklauer at web.de>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 12, 2019 8:03 AM
> *To:* general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org 
> <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
> *Cc:* 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' 
> <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org 
> <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>>; Wolfgang Baer 
> <wolf at nascentinc.com <mailto:wolf at nascentinc.com>>
> *Subject:* Re: [General] Velocity of gravitation
>
> Hi Albrecht:
>
> It helps some; but....
>
> For my part, it seems to me that for sufficiently symmetric conditions 
> (a planet's essentially circular orbit about the sun, say) that a 
> planet cannot distinguish between running into a gravitational field 
> at a point, x say, where the gravitational field is at the moment of 
> the planet's arrival at x that ommited 8 min earlier and 
> sun-directed,  or one emmited instantainiously 0 min earlier.  They 
> would appear to the planet to be the same.  Thus, I doubt the argument 
> that delayed gravitational interaction would execute an orbit 
> destroying torque, which in my mind matches up the wrong source and 
> sink events and doesn't make geometric sense.
>
> What I suspect is that gravitation is a residue of the electromagnetic 
> intereaction (via a delayed Coulomb's Law) ultimately caused by the 
> discrepancy in the weights of the positive and negative charge 
> carriers and thus their random motion and distribution about each 
> other.   This would nicely explain why the speed of gravity is (should 
> be) exactly the speed of light. While I can't prove it, I imagine that 
> if either speed were instantanious/infinite, that the universe would 
> lock up so that there would be no motion at all.  That is, delay makes 
> for dynamcis. [for what it's worth, maybe nothing!]
>
> ciao,  Al
>
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 11. Februar 2019 um 21:18 Uhr
> *Von:* "Albrecht Giese" <phys at a-giese.de <mailto:phys at a-giese.de>>
> *An:* "'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'" 
> <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org 
> <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>>, "Wolfgang Baer" 
> <wolf at nascentinc.com <mailto:wolf at nascentinc.com>>
> *Betreff:* [General] Velocity of gravitation
>
> Hi Wolf, hi All,
>
> some time ago we had a discussion here about gravity. In particular 
> about the question whether the propagation speed of the gravitational 
> field is *c* or infinite. The problem behind is the fact that a finite 
> propagation speed of gravity should cause rotating pairs of stars to 
> permanently increase their speed, because the other star appears at a 
> retarded position and so the force between the stars should have a 
> tangential component. Our discussion ended at that time with the 
> result that the Liénard-Wiechert potential would solve the problem.
>
> This was not very satisfying because the Liénard-Wiechert formalism is 
> only about the field at a retarded time, and this description by 
> itself does not solve this problem. I found that the solution is a 
> completely different phenomenon. It is the fact (and as such well 
> known in the physical literature) that fields like the electric field 
> and also the gravitational field (our case) never show aberration. 
> This is – according to literature – a well-known fact which is also 
> theoretically well understood. But most are not aware of it, like me.
>
> Experimentally it can in the case of the electrical field be proven in 
> the laboratory. And the motion of stars show it for the gravitational 
> case.
>
> Do you feel that this helps?
>
> Albrecht
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
> 	
>
> Virenfrei. www.avast.com 
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
> _______________________________________________ If you no longer wish 
> to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles 
> General Discussion List at af.kracklauer at web.de 
> <mailto:af.kracklauer at web.de> Click here to unsubscribe 
> <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
>
> _______________________________________________ If you no longer wish 
> to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles 
> General Discussion List at af.kracklauer at web.de 
> <mailto:af.kracklauer at web.de> Click here to unsubscribe 
> <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
>
> _______________________________________________ If you no longer wish 
> to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles 
> General Discussion List at af.kracklauer at web.de Click here to 
> unsubscribe 
> <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at phys at a-giese.de
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
> Click here to unsubscribe
> </a>


---
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20190213/a37e24ff/attachment.html>

More information about the General mailing list