NASA планирует завершить миссию телескопа NEOWISE (Near Earth Object Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer - «Инфракрасный широкоугольный обзор для поиска околоземных объектов») из-за роста солнечной активности.
Ten Wrong Theories In The Planet Formation and Motion (8)
8th Wrong Theory / Planet Velocity Definition
THE PHYSICS BOOK tells
Planet velocity is defined based on the gravity force- means- the velocity depends on this planet mass
NOT FACT
Planet velocity is defined based on its orbit as Kepler stated (planet orbit defines its velocity)
The Proof Logic
Let's write the whole idea in following
Newton told us, the planet orbital distance and velocity depends on the gravity force - means- depends on this planet mass- BUT
As we have discussed the planets order contradicts the gravitation equation and disproves this concept- now- when we have asked the physicist (why does the planets order contradict the gravitation equation?) the physicist told us (because of the planets initial conditions)
(My 5 equations proves NO initial condition has effect on planets data)
AND -
I have proved Planet orbit depends on its neighbor orbit.
NOW - LET'S ASK
If the planets order contradicts the gravitation equation because of the initial condition
How can the planets velocities be defined based on their orbits?
Shortly- while the planets orbital distances are (in Wrong Order because of the initial conditions ), the planets velocities are (in Correct Order) where both depends on The Planets Masses
That proves The Concept Is Wrong
Neither The Planets Orbital Distances Nor Their Velocities Depend On Their Masses (NEWTON IS WRONG)
How Is Planet Velocity Defined?
Let's try to answer this question
DATA
My equation tells (v1v2=322)- the planets velocities prove it let's see in following..
The previous data tells the planets velocities are defined by two features
(1st Feature)
The planets velocities are complementary one another -means - each planet velocity is complementary with another planet - means- The planets velocities are defined in pairs and not in single planets.
(Notice, the inner planets orbital inclinations are defined by the rule (v1/v2), for example, Mercury orbital inclination 7 deg = Mercury velocity 47.4/ Uranus velocity 6.8- that proves the effect of the rule (v1v2=322) on the planet motion)
(2nd Feature)
Why the constant is 322?
1160000 seconds = 322 hours - means- there's a light velocity = 1.16 million km /s and this light moves for one second passes 1160000 km but we see this distance as a period (1160000 seconds =322 hours)- and - the planets velocities are defined based on this velocity 1.16 million km /s (I proved this light beam velocity is found)
Thanks
Physics Nobel Prize For Imaginary Ideas! (Revised)
Greetings
Ten Wrong Theories In The Planet Formation and Motion (8)
8th Wrong Theory / Planet Velocity Definition
THE PHYSICS BOOK tells
Planet velocity is defined based on the gravity force- means- the velocity depends on this planet mass
NOT FACT
Planet velocity is defined based on its orbit as Kepler stated (planet orbit defines its velocity)
The Proof Logic
Let's write the whole idea in following
Newton told us, the planet orbital distance and velocity depends on the gravity force - means- depends on this planet mass- BUT
As we have discussed the planets order contradicts the gravitation equation and disproves this concept- now- when we have asked the physicist (why does the planets order contradict the gravitation equation?) the physicist told us (because of the planets initial conditions)
(My 5 equations proves NO initial condition has effect on planets data)
AND -
I have proved Planet orbit depends on its neighbor orbit.
NOW - LET'S ASK
If the planets order contradicts the gravitation equation because of the initial condition
How can the planets velocities be defined based on their orbits?
Shortly- while the planets orbital distances are (in Wrong Order because of the initial conditions ), the planets velocities are (in Correct Order) where both depends on The Planets Masses
That proves The Concept Is Wrong
Neither The Planets Orbital Distances Nor Their Velocities Depend On Their Masses (NEWTON IS WRONG)
How Is Planet Velocity Defined?
Let's try to answer this question
DATA
My equation tells (v1v2=322)- the planets velocities prove it let's see in following..
322 = 47.4 km/s (Mercury velocities) x 6.8 km/s (Uranus velocities)
322 = 35 km/s (Venus velocity) x 4.7 km/s (Pluto velocity) x 2
322 = 29.8 km/s (the Earth velocity) x 5.4 km/s (Neptune velocities) x 2
322 = 24.1 km/s (Mars velocity) x 13.1 km/s (Jupiter velocity)
322 = (17.9 km/s)^2 (Ceres velocity) (Max error 2%)
DATA ANALYSIS
The previous data tells the planets velocities are defined by two features
(1st Feature)
The planets velocities are complementary one another -means - each planet velocity is complementary with another planet - means- The planets velocities are defined in pairs and not in single planets.
(Notice, the inner planets orbital inclinations are defined by the rule (v1/v2), for example, Mercury orbital inclination 7 deg = Mercury velocity 47.4/ Uranus velocity 6.8- that proves the effect of the rule (v1v2=322) on the planet motion)
(2nd Feature)
Why the constant is 322?
1160000 seconds = 322 hours - means- there's a light velocity = 1.16 million km /s and this light moves for one second passes 1160000 km but we see this distance as a period (1160000 seconds =322 hours)- and - the planets velocities are defined based on this velocity 1.16 million km /s (I proved this light beam velocity is found)
Thanks
Physics Nobel Prize For Imaginary Ideas! (Revised)
https://app.box.com/s/zpix094djp2k5wwg65dya03wuzag2bbc
or
https://app.box.com/s/c8et2absm5j7axbzjjl137cthgbp7u4p
Gerges Francis Tawdrous
Peoples' Friendship university of Russia - Moscow
ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1041-7147
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/gergis.tawadrous
Tumblr https://www.tumblr.com/blog/itsgerges
Livejournal https://gerges2022.livejournal.com/profile
box https://app.box.com/s/47fwd0gshir636xt0i3wpso8lvvl8vnv
Academia https://rudn.academia.edu/GergesTawadrous
Reply
Leave a comment