There are no iron lumps near the magnet. Does this mean that the magnetic field does not exist?
The effect of the Doppler effect on planetary orbits
- Thread starter TonyYuan
- Start date
Spatial density is the concept of GR, why should you object? Space bending is a 2D image. In the perspective of a 3D image, it is the spatial density.
LIGO would not be happy to hear this.
What is the reason for the difference in acceleration? You should understand that the two locations A and B will not have different g1 and g2 for no reason. Have you thought about the reason?
The gravitational waves discovered by LIGO are very weak. He comes from a distant place, so how can you ignore the gravitational field of the earth in front of you?
If you can argue this point, you will get a Nobel Prize.
Is GR afraid of moving?
The Doppler effect itself is based on the theory of classical physics. Where do you say these meanings? What you want to explain is that there is no gravitational field. That is, it is only the space that bends, which causes the gravitational wave. . . These are just models, I also appreciate the GR model, but if the GR model is the only model that can be used, then I do not agree with you.
In the calm sea, there is no outside influence, how can there be fluctuations, how can you throw an ant into the waves. Since the waves have been stirred up, it must be a force that cannot be ignored. It is certainly not an ant.
Let's look at the neighbor of the earth, the moon, and the gravity of the moon is also affecting the earth. So how much do you think the acceleration g produced by the moon will be measured at the position of the earth? Almost 0.
Last edited:
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
No but it means there is no force. Which is what he said.
Tony, you really are not much good at this. You clearly don't understand what a field is. Even worse, you can't even read a post of mine in plain English without trying to reverse its meaning.
I suspect you are suffering from some form of mental condition.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Gibberish.
You are no longer suitable for discussion on this topic. Even a person who does not have at least a respectful attitude, I hope you leave this thread.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Gravitation waves are not emitted from stationary objects with constant mass.
Last edited:
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Like a lake with no wind, the field exists, but it is calm - no waves.
Gravitational fields do not, in and of themselves, have waves. Only changes to the gravitational field propagate as waves.
The planets experience no gravitational waves from the sun. They are effectively sitting on a calm lake.
It doesn't matter whether you agree with this, or even understand it, your idea is based on faulty assumptions.
My thoughts are consistent with yours. At least it is moving relative to the earth.
I totally agree with you.
Your thoughts do not conflict with the Doppler effect of gravitational field.
Regardless of whether it is a gravitational field or a curved space, no matter what it is in the end. What matters is that it has an effect on the physics in which it is located. And this action follows the movement of objects.
Then the fluctuation of the effect caused by this movement, no matter what it is called, it will also have a Doppler effect. The effect of relative movement.
Last edited:
Can you specify?
Is my explanation not clear enough?
==>Regardless of whether it is a gravitational field or a curved space, no matter what it is in the end. What matters is that it has an effect on the physics in which it is located. And this action follows the movement of objects.
Then the fluctuation of the effect caused by this movement, no matter what it is called, it will also have a Doppler effect. The effect of relative movement.
The model is not important.
What is important is that the planetary motion is affected by somethingX, and this effect will change as this thingX changes.
I think what I have said is clear enough, I do n’t know why you still do n’t understand. You can look at the GR calculation to find the planetary precession deviation. Except that Mercury is in line with the observation results, the precession deviation of the other planets is not a little bit worse than the observation results.
What is important is that the planetary motion is affected by somethingX, and this effect will change as this thingX changes.
I think what I have said is clear enough, I do n’t know why you still do n’t understand. You can look at the GR calculation to find the planetary precession deviation. Except that Mercury is in line with the observation results, the precession deviation of the other planets is not a little bit worse than the observation results.
Once my Polish colleague had a very hidden error in a program design. If you don't think very carefully, you can't find a logic error here. Although this procedure has been considered correct for more than 3 years. But I found this error and told them that the design was wrong, and made a detailed explanation. But they totally disagreed with my point of view. I explained to them many times, and finally they were very angry and very unwilling to listen to me for 10 minutes. Then they said sorry to me, they were wrong. After correcting this error, 100 prontos have been resolved, and the performance of 4G devices has been greatly improved.
History always needs to repeat itself.
History always needs to repeat itself.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
You have done nothing to earn respect from anybody. In fact your refusal to answer the question everyone has been asking you - a question that is obviously demanded by the title of the thread, shows a total lack of respect on your part.
Either you are both rude and an idiot, or you have a mental condition. By suggesting the latter I am being charitable.
But Origin is right.
.....[click]......