Перейти в начало сайта Перейти в начало сайта
Электронная библиотека «Наука и техника»
n-t.ru: Наука и техника
Home Page / Current publications / Scientific hypotheses
Home Page / Current publications / Scientific hypotheses

Научные статьи

Физика звёзд

Физика микромира



Наука и жизнь

Природа и люди

Техника – молодёжи

Нобелевские лауреаты

Премия по физике

Премия по химии

Премия по литературе

Премия по медицине

Премия по экономике

Премия мира


Безумные идеи

Как люди научились летать

Квантовый мир

Пионеры атомного века

У истоков дизайна

Ученые – популяризаторы науки

Издания НиТ

Батарейки и аккумуляторы

Охранные системы

Источники энергии

Свет и тепло

Научно-популярные статьи

Наука сегодня

Научные гипотезы

Теория относительности

История науки

Научные развлечения

Техника сегодня

История техники

Измерения в технике

Источники энергии

Наука и религия

Мир, в котором мы живём

Лит. творчество ученых

Человек и общество



Statics and dynamics of interactions

Nikolay Noskov
Translated from Russian by Jury Sarychev

As the lenses of ether near space bodies (by the Fresnel and Stokes) exist, in them there is a gradient of pressure (by Miller). According to experiments of Fiseau and Foucault, velocity of light should be greater in space, than at a surface of the Earth, as indicate modern calculations by results of observations of Remer for satellites of Jupiter, (c = 3,05·108 m/s). At approach to the Earth and to the Sun it should decrease, and at removal – to be increase, as precise measuring have shown. Last fact contradicts relativistic views and calculations on deviation of light near massive bodies and simultaneously displays that density of ether at approach to them grows. All these and other scientific facts testify that the waiving of ether and classic invariant of space, time and mass was a tragically error. The hypothesis of the Fresnel about a partial dragging of ether by bodies should appear again in a center of attention.

However, returning to an old kind classic mechanics of the Galilei – Newton – Euler – Laplace – Lagrange, it is necessary to stare at it: whether is all harmonic and correct in it? Respect and delight by it should not substitute of the critical analysis.

And now, more then 300 years later we discover that the classic mechanics consists from separate, incoherent among themselves parts. So, the law of universal gravitation is disconnected with dynamics. Dynamics actually is dynamics of inertia, and law of inertia is not selected as separate interaction. After all new formalisms of dynamics created on the basis of a principle of the least action (Mopertjui, Euler, and Lagrange) energy conservation law (Lagrange, Hamilton, Jacobi, Ostrogradskii), as well as a non-strength mechanics of a Hertz appear by versions of dynamics of inertia. The gravitation has remained virginally primitive till appearance of Gerber's works. In this works the gravitation was generalized on speed of interaction, i.e. graviodynamics was created. The researchers did not realize the fact of its occurrence. That has led physics in crisis at the end of XIX century and to appearance of theories – fallacies: STR and GTR.

By analogy with a Coulomb's law, which one is an electrostatics, the law of universal gravitation is graviostatics, though it is deduced for interaction of planets moving around of central bodies (Sun – planet, Earth – moon). However value of distance which is included in it, practically is constant, that means, that the relative velocity of interacting bodies (first derivative from distance on time) on a line connecting them practically is equal to zero.

Electrostatics of the Coulomb was lucky little bit more, than graviostatics of a Newton, as the electrodynamics laws were detected experimentally by Oersted, Arago, Ampere and Faraday. But... It was necessary to appear the theories of an electrodynamics in transactions of the Gauss, Weber, and Clausius... Lorentz, as the scientific world, not having understood, that the electrostatics has received generalization on speed of interaction, which they have accepted for velocity of light, has turned away from it. And first of them Lorentz has made it, strangely enough. The Lorentz has refused an electrodynamics for the reason that its laws (except for Maxwell equations, which one are dynamics of fields, not bodies) were not subjected to a general relativity, but which one Lorentz very wish to enter. Lorentz, and behind him Poincare, Einstein and behind them all relativists negligently stepped over the child, which one they throw out...

The dynamics of an electromagnetic interaction was disclaimed. The destiny of Gerber's graviodynamics completely depended on the unique fact: abnormal displacement of perihelions of planets. Moreover, Gerber's law of graviodynamics the law delayed potential) is not subjected general relativity not only, but also the relativity of the Galilei (and, therefore, does not have notorious equality of heavy and inert mass).

What was a sense of introduction of a general relativity? Understanding now, that dynamics of a classic mechanics is dynamics of inertia, and the inertia is the special kind of interaction, which one does not depend from gravitational, electromagnetic or nuclear interactions, we see, what exactly the inertia expresses a relativity of the Galilei and is its essence. Propagation and generalization of Galilean principle (laws of inertia) on other interactions, especially, not knowing, as the laws of inertia are deformed at high velocities is something in themselves, that there are no basis.

At rise of a general principle and also special and general relativity theories the set of logic errors is committed which one separately and together have resulted in incorrect conclusions and generalizations. By consideration, for example, of the gravitation we cannot tear off interacting bodies from each other, placing one of them in the invented reference system, to which one we can give arbitrary (theoretical) motion. And placing in this system even both gravitating bodies, how is it possible to tear off them from environment, with the help by which one they interact?! Considering motion of the freely dropping elevator Einstein has committed these roughest logic errors, not suspecting, that he does not know graviodynamics, that is properties and laws of forces of interaction at relative movement of interacting bodies. In outcome GTR is absurd mixture of inertia and gravitation.

Thus relativists peculiarly "have refuted" Gerber's graviodynamics. So, N.T. Roseveare in the book "Mercury's perihelion from Le Verrier to Einstein" (World, M., 1985) has written: "the Second reason, on which one the law of Gerber should be rejected (first reason he has called correct Gerber's forecast of displacement of perihelions of planets, but to which one, on a view of Roseveare, it is to add a relativistic effect (?! – N.N.)), is a deflection of light in gravitational field of the Sun. The calculations of these deviations make 2,62" – under the theory of Gerber and 1,75" – on a relativity theory. The expedition in Sobral (1919) has obtained value 1,98"±0,16"; the results of measuring of Freindlich (1929) was equal to 2,24"±0,16"; the results obtained in USSR (1949) has appeared 2,73"±0,31". More late measurements have not confirmed so considerable deviation, and the disproof of a relativity theory did not take place. But the mentioned experiments on deviation of light near the Sun were done by adherents of the relativity theory not by the opponents, therefore rhetorical conclusion of Roseveare about the disproof looks very strange.

But now it is necessary in general to subject to doubt idea of deviation of light near to massive bodies from positions of relativists. The point is that for a calculation of deviation they profit by relativistic mass of photons (it is considered, that photons are particles with a zero rest mass). And then their attraction is calculated under the laws of Gerber or theory of relativity as if this interaction happens with indefinitely high velocity of interaction. But if to consider, that the velocity of interaction is equal to velocity of light, deviation of light as a result of attraction should not be, as the interaction potential will delay completely. But except of this sensible reasoning the experimental fact of slowing-down of photons has appeared at approximation to the Earth and Sun and acceleration of them at removal, about which one is written above, and which one displays absurdity of the statement of relativists.

The properties and laws of graviodynamics are connected to the mechanism of interaction at relative movement of interacting bodies. The research of a phenomenon of delay of a potential on a moving body has result me in a conclusion that the delay of a potential happens non-uniformly. It results in longitudinal vibrations of a moving body. Energy of such motion of bodies has the law distinguished from smooth motion in a mechanics of a Newton. It has served as the basis for appearance so-called "of a defect of mass" and "of an equivalent of mass and energy".

Based on profound fallacies and logic errors, the general relativity has generated illusion of the modern researchers that it is possible and even as if necessary to make "great" and "super-great" amalgamation of interactions. The purpose and main point of it naturally has not common sense. But poet, the logic which one is faultless, prevented "In the same team it is not possible to harness both the horse and the quivering doe".

It is necessary to tell some words about the logic, so far as the researchers made the logic errors earlier and go on to make them now.

On an example of activity of a brain of the person the nature has shown, that logic is top of intellect. Logic is top of development of the nature having integrated in itself all kinds of mathematics and experience accumulated by mankind. Above logic anything is not present.

Why do we so appreciate transactions of the philosophers, writers, and poets? Everyone, who read "Memoirs about Sherlock Holmes" of Conan Doyle, was striked by force of logical thinking of Holmes. The activity of the researcher in science is similar to activity of a detective. But look round, and you will find out, that logic is unloved stepdaughter of science. It is not studied at schools and institutes. Logic frequently fined itself by subject of speculation in science not only, but also in policy, as well as in journalism and in religion.

At scientists, educated on relativistic positions, a substitution of logic by the expressions of authorities, cliches and false conclusions occurred. Especially a lot of such conclusions were made concerning classic invariant and ether. Founders of a relativism and leaders of scrambling against the logically faultless theory of a Newton were Berkly (1685...1753), Toland (1838...1916), and then During, Mach, Gartman and Avenarius. They were zealously supported by relativists. Minkowski and Einstein were at the head of them. Logic errors, inexactitude of logical thinking, violation of the laws of scientific logic, substitution of notions, fiction and ungrounded suppositions are their tools of scrambling against the theory of a Newton.

From the moment of occurrence STR and GTR (1905...1915) besides "the bending of a space-time" relativists were in time to do so much logic errors, that only their list would take more places than this entire article.

So, for example, for explanation of a nuclear interaction the hypothetical exchanged particles (Yukava), {as if well describing (but not explaining) interaction} were entered. Further (oh, my God!) these particles have appeared real-life, and now their existence is not called in question at all.

But... What the logic speaks in this occasion? And it speaks that such particles should, at first, have reason and, secondly, energy conservation laws are not kept.

Finally, researchers of the delayed potential having a such mechanism of interaction (made by Porkhovnik and Surdin (1956) result in law, which one does not correlate with observed and experimental data. Besides, above-mentioned law does not submit to general principle of relativity. The last fact shows that the relativistic theory has not consent inside itself.

In the same manner it is possible to speak about "an equivalent of mass and energy", "wave – particle", "a defect of mass" etc. etc.. It led to conclusion that the logic is not in honour at physicists. Common sense, against which relativists have declared war, is result of the logical laws.


Date of the publication:

July 11, 2000

Electronic version:

© NiT. Current publications, 1997

В начало сайта | Книги | Статьи | Журналы | Нобелевские лауреаты | Издания НиТ | Подписка
NiT's Electronic library: Books | Articles | Biographies | Abstracts | NiT's Publications | Journal
NiT's Projects and Companions: Competitions | Joint projects | Editorial Department
© МОО «Наука и техника», 1997...2017
About NiTContactAdvertisingLegal information
Яндекс цитирования