Poicaré measurements, the planets around the sun

More
20 years 8 months ago #8831 by Jim
Reply from was created by Jim
What is meant by the phrase "point mass"? I do not see gravititional structures as points.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 8 months ago #9411 by n/a10
Replied by n/a10 on topic Reply from ed van der Meulen
Hi Jim.

I have tried on highschool to compute the elliptical orbit of the earth around the sun. And normally is to make it easier by concentrating all the mass in one point. You hope that the error isn't so large.

But Poincaré did it with real sizes.

Mathematicians do that often. All the mass in the center of gravity. Only then you can't see that effect.

We think a lot of people now. But when you read about those old chaps, I think we can stil learn much from them.

I think there's a lot of fantasy in the modern theories. No one uses the layers. Google for layers and you meet 5.5 million hits. We have accidents. They happen in the margins. We have nice surprises also coming from the margins. Where are the margins in our theories?

You can ask everything.

Ed

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 8 months ago #9337 by n/a10
Replied by n/a10 on topic Reply from ed van der Meulen
A great result is then this.

Jupiter is important of course, also for the earth, but now there are moments forces can be non-differentiable, so like cracked reed. Now our moon can correct the Jupiter influences. And it's only in this way to understand.

I don't expect the forces will be dis-continuous. But we can never be sure.

Poincaré in 1899, a great man. Who says history isn't important?

I bring here the by already milions accepted physical chaos view. When there is in the coming week so little interest for my postings, I soon will leave this site and will go to another site. I have no much patience anymore and then you can go on in your own way.

I have already given an interesting book and urls.

Ed

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 8 months ago #4168 by Jim
Replied by Jim on topic Reply from
The generally accepted orbit of the Earth seems to me to be in error because data indicates the orbit is not nearly as eccentric as it is supposed to be. Why is the distance to the sun the nearest when the Earth is coolest and most distant when the Earth is warmest? And why is the solar constant not higher when the Earth is nearer the sun? Another point about how the math is done when calculating orbits-the mass of a star is not centered but rather the mass is spread out within a sphere.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.271 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum