Ready to say good bye to Newton's Gravitational Theory ?

Author:

Sheik Mohamed Yusuf.

Bengali. Diploma in Mechanical Engineering. U.A.E. resident for 32 years. Self
employed. Free lance Q.S. for fire fighting and fire alarm system. Habitual thinker.
Takes deep interest in astronomy and astrophysics. Got a serious breakthrough in the
field of fundamental forces of nature.

GRAVITATIONAL THEORY; CHALLENGED. (First article)

Posted on: 05-May-2010, Wednesday

INITIAL QUESTION: HIGH & LOW TIDE;

Ever since I came across the Newton’s gravitational theory in my secondary school by early 1960’s decade, I remained skeptical about the possible eternity of this theory. Being able to doubt at such a famous theory in my early teen age, I used to imagine that, some day I would shake this theory to give the correct one reaching the fitting academic level. But after passing secondary school normally, then wasting three years in college, finally taking a diploma in mechanical engineering, when I found myself in the category of academic middle class, I tried to give up thinking about the facts of those high class subjects, like theory of physics, astrophysics, astronomy, particle physics, fundamental forces of nature, and the like. But the subject never gave me up, rather continued flashing different crucial facts of nature into the mind, and finally the miracle happened in September, 1987, when a deep mystery unfolded itself to me, and clearly I witnessed death of Newton’s gravitational theory and saw true face of the fundamental force of nature.

Subsequently it indicated to faulty sides of many other theories of physics, although scientists are either comfortably settled with those or struggling to shape their ideas in some way or other. By the coincidence it was exactly after three hundred years of publication of ‘Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica’, (1687), the famous book of Sir Isaac Newton. Afterward a good few months passed in bewildered thinking about how to organize the explanation, overcoming many obvious theoretical obstacle and ultimately if necessary, to face the agitated western lions of those fields. Yet gathering some courage, I started studying some specific chapters of physics, and related articles that used to appear in the newspapers, expecting to reach the position of publication, in some years time. But the misfortune, my only life long companion, drove me twenty years down the road before desperately trying to make my way out at present in this way, taking the knowledge with me, to be actually a mankind’s due.

So the reason for doubting this famous theory in the first instant was the confusing reasoning of high tide and low tide factor given in the text book of class seven. Obviously any one would agree to believe that, moon’s attraction causes high tide on the moon facing side of the earth as described, but using the word ‘perhaps’ it was said that, water of low tide area creates pressure on other side of the earth causing high tide there by the same time. Whereas common sense tells that, low tide in some area must be the result of high tide in another area, and it can not be otherwise. In my that early age I could not digest such a reasoning of high tide and low tide factor, even though I had to write the same in my exam paper. And I believed that, such explanation can not be the common worldwide, rather different freak explanations are provided in different parts of the world about this well observed natural phenomenon. And my assessment was confirmed about a decade back here in the U.A.E. in an English geography text book for 6^th graders (printed in the U.S.A) which gave a more funny explanation with a sketch showing, the moon pulls up the water of its facing side leaving the sea bed and ground surface undisturbed, and by the same time, it pulls down the sea bed and ground surface of other side from behind the globe, leaving the water undisturbed to show high tide there, even though there is no reason for the water to show higher level in such a condition. Bravo, if the planet surface fluctuates by some meters daily in this way by the attraction of its satellite, then this planet or others with one or more satellites, could not have survived billions of years by now. Lacking the clearest explanation, therefore, high tide and low tide factor has been falsifying the Newton’s gravitational theory twice daily since its proclamation in 1687A.D.

SOLAR SYSTEM & THE UNIVERSE:

In our solar system, the position of orbiting planets in particular distance from the sun is said to be balanced between centripetal force of sun’s gravity and the centrifugal force of planet’s outward momentum. But, what Einstein described as gravitational instability, should effect the sun and planet relation as well, not only stars and other large bodies of the galaxies. Forced by two forces from two sides against each other, planets are supposed to be victim of gravitational instability either to dive into the sun or to fly away into oblivion as they increase and decrease the distance from sun greatly in their yearly elliptical dashing. But their successful journey of four and a half billion years so far, makes the gravitational theory, a failure idea.

Now let us look at the universe to see the activities of gravitational force there. Gravitational force is known to be the weakest of four natural forces, but wide ranging enough to hold whole of the universe together. It means two stars pull each other from two extreme ends of the cosmos, which is thirty billion light years across. But when we see a distant star, we actually see its old photograph only which it left behind hundreds or thousands of yeas ago, and never we can see it in its present location, as ever moving stars must have reached by then somewhere else far and far away, even some of them may have exploded by then, but we see them existing and shining. So how does one star’s gravitational force pulls another distant one following its past and present location counting millions or billions of years? In the face of such question some scientists say that, gravitational force communicates in no time. But the questioning scientists never accepted this opinion.

So the gravitational theory, even though seriously used by Einstein (only to create more confusion about this) in his general theory of relativity, remained a hypothetical idea only, although scientists have been using this half cooked thesis to investigate every natural phenomenon, and suffering from confusion in every move. If timely they would have investigated high tide and low tide factor to the full satisfactory level, perhaps they could have discovered the true fundamental force of nature and avoid hanging up with false gravitational pull. Covering the whole universe with pulling net, they were again surprised with the stability of universe in spite of central pull, and with peculiar idea of its material shortage, which is said to be only 4% to 10% of the logical requirement. And to suppress the confusion, they are periodically inventing imaginary ghosts like, dark matter, dark energy, x-matter, quantum shimmer, vacuum energy, quintessence, zero force, zero point energy, etc, to substitute the imaginary short supply of detectable matter in the universe.

When they describe the center of the universe to be pulling everything that so called big bang created, they forget to mention that, it also pulls the space as well, as the space is said to have been created by big bang. In this point those scientists look to me like the baby on his mother’s arm, who believes that he has fallen there from sky. Would those astrophysical babies tell, how many miles or light years available between the last material object on the outer most boundaries of cosmos and the point of space and no space? And what is there beyond the space? In the face of such question, they usually say, ‘you will not understand that’ (to mean, nobody will understand). Well, in such an answer, it is better to use first person singular number pronoun with present tense, rather than using second person plural number pronoun with future tense.

THREE OTHER FORCES:

Finally comes the question of three other fundamental forces of nature, called, electromagnetic force, strong nuclear force and weak nuclear force. Atomic structure resembles our solar structure except their shape, being spherical and disc type respectively. For the stability of atomic structure, gravitational force did not get a chance to play its role there like in the solar system it does. An electromagnetic force and a strong nuclear force together have been placed there to keep the atom as it is seen now, and a weak nuclear force is detailed to cause the nuclear decaying. Well, when the question comes about the origin of all the four fundamental forces of nature, scientists honestly admit their inability to understand that. But in this stage of their knowledge again they are busy in unifying the forces, and dreaming about grand unified theory (GUT). And, as if the work of physicists, S.Glashow, S.Weinberge and A.Salam, has unified two nuclear forces with electromagnetic force, and only gravitational force remained intractable with other three. But for sure, they have unified their imaginations only.

(Footnote)

The first article is concluded here. Stage by stage, all the false theories will be demolished and the correct theories will be put forward. The research will range from the particle, smaller than quark, to the area larger than the possible final expansion of the cosmos. Subsequently, Einstein’s general theory of relativity will go, black hole theory will be altered and big bang theory will be silenced. Total number of articles perhaps, will be seven to ten.

{Copy right of this article is reserved by the author}

The website was installed on 26-November-2007.

This article was initially posted on 24-December-2007.

Afterwards time to time it was rectified and reposted.

Finally it is posted on 05-May-2010.

Contact: E-mail: sheikyusuf@ymail.com Or, E-mail: yusuf@yusuphysics.com

SMS to: 00971 50 5320613.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moderate this article.