Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Friday, January 13, 2012 3:40 AM
|A lot of credit is due to professional genealogists, in particular my cousin Stuart Davies of the Royal Celtic line and my late cousin Leonid Morgan, also my Havard cousin by marriage Dewi Lewis, and last but not least Sir Arthur Turner-Thomas, V. C., K. G. (Wales), G. C., who is the historian to my distant cousin, H. R. H. The Countess of Wessex. Also the work of my Evans cousin Chris Davies and his colleagues. I put together their work in one long line of sixty generations back to the fourth century and earlier, linking up with the work of Clement Bartrum on the early genealogies of ancient Britain. The Turner-Thomas site is a fantastic mine of information, and is called “Celtic Royal Genealogies”. Using the mathematics of power series one quickly finds that we are all related, especially in a small country like Wales, but also in the whole of Britain and so on. You have two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents and so on, so over thirty generations you have 2 power thirty = 1,073,741,824 parents. Thirty generations goes back about a thousand years, at which time the entire population of Wales was perhaps order 10 power 4 people. That means a lot of inter marriage and all related. The same is true for any country or even a continent. This indeed took several years of work by several excellent professional genealogists who were kind enough to help me, so there is documentary evidence for each link in the line. I am sure that the autobiography will be very popular for this reason alone. Their work is very accurate.
In a message dated 13/01/2012 09:39:45 GMT Standard Time, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
I am totally amazed by the amount of information in the autobiography ! Really incredible, how did you collect this information, must have taken several years ?
Cambridge International Science Publishing
Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Sunday, January 08, 2012 12:51 AM
Subject: Velocity in Cylindrical Polar Coordinates
|The total linear velocity in cylindrical polar coordinates was used in the important papers UFT190 ff. It is:
v bold = d(r e sub r bold) / dt
where e sub r bold is the radial unit vector (unitless) and r the radial coordinate (metres). This is important because it was shown in Section 3 of UFT196 that the acceleration calculated from the ellipse in cylindrical polar coordinates does not contain a centrifugal part. This means that the Newton theory is deeply self inconsistent. All the calculations with velocity and acceleration are given there in cylindrical polar coordinates. They are by no means straightforward, which is why the problem with Newton was not discovered for three hundred years. Examination of basic concepts is a difficult task, so only a few scholars have done it down the centuries. AIAS is outstanding in that it addresses basic concepts without peer pressure to conform to dogma. The velocity squared is then
v squared = (dr/dt) squared + r squared (dtheta / dt) squared
which has the right S. I. units. This gives the kinetic energy m v squared / 2. The so called “centrifugal effective potential energy” is the second term, despite the fact that it is clearly the rotational kinetic energy. However, as shown in Section 3 of UFT196, it does not exist, the force calculated directly from the elliptical Newtonian orbit does not contain the centrifugal force. This is why I rejected Newton’s concept of force in favour of geometry (Keplerian and earlier philosophy). I would have failed my O levels at Pontardawe Grammar School if I had done that there. Now I can concentrate on the real truth.
In a message dated 07/01/2012 19:37:20 GMT Standard Time
PS: A similar problem occurs with the definition of velocity in polar cordinates. The radial component is in m/s but the angular component is in radiants/s. I guess that this is analoguous for the torsion and Riemann tensor elements.
Am 07.01.2012 15:35, schrieb EMyrone
I checked the comprehensive computer output by Horst Eckardt once more and I put the torsion elements into the right S.I. units in eqs. (1) and (2) of this note. There should be a 1 / c for T sup 1 sub 01 and a 1 / r for T sup 1 sub 12. This gives the right S. I. units of torsion – inverse metres. In the output they are in normalized or non SI units. Each torsion element is twice the relevant connection element. The output can be put in the right SI units by noting that the time derivative must contain a 1 / c wherever it occurs, and the angle derivative must contain a 1 / r wherever it occurs. I give the mathematical origin of the 1 / r in eq. (14), the definition of the divergence in cylindrical polar coordinates. The important result is that the torsion is non zero for the hyeprbolic spiral (the observed spiral of a whirlpool galaxy), but it is zero for the logarithmic spiral, which is not observed. So spacetime torsion produces a hyperbolic spiral as observed in astronomy, another major advantage of ECE theory. Eqs. (1) to (3) of this note are valid for all orbits of any kind and are in the right S. I. units.
Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Saturday, January 07, 2012 5:51 AM
Subject: Orbital Angular Velocity of the Earth
|I think that this should be very accurately known these days. A simple calculation is that the earth rotates 360 degress in a year (3.2 ten power seven seconds). This gives 2.0 ten power minus seven radians per second for the angular velocity. This can be refined slightly but is a good estimate. Googling around will give a lot of information.
In a message dated 07/01/2012 12:42:50 GMT Standard Time
I agree, an experimental precise measurement of omega is required. My intent for raising this question was that we need some method for guessing or defining omega (or rdot) for a graphical representation of torsion. The classical equation in Marion and Thornton is eq. 8.15 (probably 7.15 in your issue) but depends on the potential which has been abandoned in the new theory. I propose taking the angular momentum in non-relativistic approximation:
L = m r^2 omega
Together with the orbital equation then we should have all what we need.
Am 07.01.2012 12:51, schrieb EMyrone
I think that the astronomers still measure angular velocity through Kepler’s second law of 1609, equal areas in equal times. They must have supercomputers to do this with phenomenal accuracy in the solar system. Knowing this, dr / dt can be found from the chain rule:
dr / dt = (dr / dtheta)(dtheta / dt)
and in the solar system dr / dtheta is found from the observations of a precessing ellipse, the precession of the perihelion corrected by supercomputer for the gravitational effects of other objects, and other corrections. All the concepts that we have used are spectacularly correct, and congratulations on the computer algebra. These are all major advances in cosmology.
Feed: Dr. Myron Evans
Posted on: Saturday, January 07, 2012 4:53 AM
Subject: Astronomical Measurements of the Angular Velocity