DELPHI4Test2014 PaintBrushWin3.1 ¦ Jan2022 — UNIVERSUMS HISTORIA | 2011V4 ¦ 2022I18 | aproduction | Sen uppdat vers: 2023-10-27 YMD ¦ HumanRight is a knowledge domain

content · webbSÖK äMNESORD på denna sida Ctrl+F • SubjectINDEX • all files • helpStart DISPOSITION

HOW UNIVERSE HISTORY BEGAN .. From Windows 3.1 .. on the first computer editions .. MsWORKS 4.0 .. the best .. soon [after a rough decade] killed by New Microsoft [ 2008 MsWORKS banned ] ..

The Final Connection ¦

THE MODERN ACADEMY ISSUE 1800+:

• Trying to explain Natural Phenomena

— from a point of view where the whole of its Book of Knowledge was NOT observed.

6Jan2023 —— Firefox Reads Symbol ¦ closets before:

Do not use Firefox web reader — cannot read Symbol, all first UH-documents produced with MicrosoftWORD2000 convenient type pi with Ctrl+Shift+p for pi, etc. — for UH documents: Firefox vandalizes it.

— Mozilla Firefox web reader seems to have been created and intended solely for business reports — no conventional scientific unitive literature Symbol Font.

— Funny why Firefox reads Times New Roman too .. maybe the creators forgot to exclude that one too, in advising a Symbol Unicode for EVERY font. High IQ:

— No TRADITIONAL SCIENCE ARCHIVE readouts in Firefox. Very educated personnel. Broad-sighted an so. It is such a joy. Much science. Archives.

TheFinalConnection ¦ Dmax ¦ TheConstruct ¦ AllNatural ¦ DisClaim ¦ CheopsRectangleMATH ¦ LGD ¦ Deduction ¦ Hubble1929 ¦ ExperimentalConfirmations ¦ PlanckEquivalents ¦

Introduction ¦ MULTIPLEcPROOF ¦ MULTIPLEc ¦ MACcRef ¦ TheTEXPLAN ¦ TheSolarEclipses ¦ ThePlanckWay ¦ TheEinsteinError ¦ ProvingTheEclipses ¦ Gpotential ¦ Suns4 ¦

LightAndGravitation ¦ Results ¦ AminorTermConflict ¦ crREF ¦ Nature2022 ¦ DivergenceConvergence ¦ SolarCycle ¦ StarBASE ¦

ThePerihelionPrecessions ¦ ExplainingCoriolisPrecession ¦ ThePoint ¦ CausalNewton ¦ IncreasingTemperaturePressure ¦ SaturatedLightField ¦ TheExplanation ¦ rPdMATH ¦

TwienAffection ¦ CoriolisResolution ¦ AgainInConclusion ¦ ConcludingAllKeplerMath ¦ PrecessionEnergy ¦ ArguePoints ¦ POINT ¦ THEvDcRelation ¦ Newtons3inShort ¦ PotentialBarrier ¦

ExplainingTheDynamics ¦ FirstLIGHT ¦ UnderstadingActionReaction ¦ KeplerMomentumBasics ¦ GeDith ¦ APPLICATIONS 1-4¦ ThePrecessiveSTATEargument ¦

PerihelionPrecessionRotationalCenter ¦ CENTbyLightTime ¦

CaseClosed ¦ StefanBoltzmannDetails ¦ TheCircleArgument ¦ DynamicsExplanation ¦ ButLOOK ¦ Explanation ¦ SuperPositionPrinciple ¦ Basic ¦ TwoArguments ¦ Sections1234 ¦

TheEddingtonForm ¦ TheWikipediaEinsteinForm ¦ BasicEPSmath ¦ TheEddingtonArgument ¦ RelativisticMass ¦ Testified ¦ LocalGdominance ¦ ThermoElGraDis ¦ REGULARc ¦ Number5 ¦

TheComplete ¦ TheExperiment ¦ Experiment ¦ AllKeplerMath ¦ PhysicsFirst ¦ PhysicsFirstMATH ¦ STATE ¦ GripDeep ¦ THEcrFACTORS ¦ PressureMinMax ¦ TheGeneralREF ¦ ByQuality ¦

BasicMathRanks ¦ TheMath ¦ FormallyKeplerMath ¦ CalCardRef ¦ TheRESULT ¦ CalculatingKeplerAnomalistic ¦ DecisiveParam ¦ AnomalisticPeriod ¦ Compressed ¦ IAUtestDETAILS ¦

TheENDresult ¦ Examination ¦ RelatedMath ¦ TheGtest ¦ TheElectricConstant ¦ TestingOtherCandidates ¦ IterativeConstantTest ¦ RedShiftIssues ¦ TheGPSexample ¦

DeducedConnections ¦ VEERING ¦ PE — PlanckEquivalents¦ TWI ¦ SRTN ¦ TheMisconception ¦ TheAbsoluteMETRIC ¦

Appendix ¦ TheNeutronSquareBreakThrough ¦ TheStarAnvil ¦ TheIAUtest ¦ ConstantPRECISION ¦ SpaceElectricalResistance ¦ HowIsTemperatureGENERATED ¦ Rex ¦

CentralEnergyMachine ¦ HowTEMP ¦ ComptonEffect ¦ ModernDegenerationPressure ¦ PULSARS ¦

Reason ¦ UnitedNations ¦ OurHistory ¦ HISTORY ¦ S ¦ content ¦

How it all started .. on one of the first commercially available computers: Windows 3.1, Compaq Presario — with printer and a Floppy Disc, Diskettes ..1.4 MB .. it was fantastic ..

PaintBrush — Windows 3.1 — The Original:

UniverseHistory WOULD DEFINITELY NOT HAVE EVOLVED WITHOUT PaintBrush — the discovery of The Natural Chart of The Atomic Masses — as Matched by Experimental Measure: The Neutron Square

The outnumbering of modern academic ideas in nuclear and cosmological physics (1800+) — please share a disclaimer: search for, non yet found (Nov2022):

WHAT FINAL CONNECTION MADE IT?

EXPERIMENTALLY MEASURE ATOMIC MASSES — that made it, most definitely

———————————————

NeutronSquare — Neutronkvadraten ¦ The Elliptic Funtions — Ellipsfunktionerna

ONE ASKS HONESTLY in concern of Microsoft’s so called development (after Bill Gates era); Why is the company shutting down natural scientifically useful computer developing TOOLS and replacing them with cropped, watered down copies of clearly program mutilated character? Test answer: Because ITS inducement lies not in HELPING but MANIPULATING. Conquering.

• Zero interest for knowledge: not one word HumanRight. Not a sound. Not a hint. Not a spell. Where is world jurisdiction — other than paid Bitches to these?

indexREGISTER — DISPOSITION | Teckenförklaringar: MusKLICKVänster | Höger: | — RullaMushjulet FRÅN | MOTDig: |

Vidareutvecklat Från DELPHI 4 Test 2011

T2014PaintBrush — HUVUDDELEN AV VERKTYGEN MAN BEHÖVER FÖR AVANCERAD DATORANVÄNDNING I TEXT OCH BILD

Neutron Square’s general morphology. A complementary more in detail description is given from The Neutron Square Break Through.

PaintBrush — Windows 3.1 — The Original:

DELPHI4Test2011.htm:

TheFinalConnection: Reason ¦ Our History ¦

”endowed with reason and conscience”. Say.

rJ — Checking on the Cheops Rectangle Basic Math ¦ Comparing on the Flinders Petrie 1883 Cheops Pyramid precisoon measures

THE FINAL CONNECTION — THAT MADE IT

———————————————

TheEarthMASS ¦ CWON ¦ CAP ¦

The Kepler vr and Planck cr Momentum

— on the verge of explaining the planets’ perihelion precessions — on plain Kepler Math

The breakthrough came 1601-1612. Working with Tyge Brahe (1600) Johannes Kepler discovered Kepler’s Three Laws of planetary motion. The most central of them by mathematics as the Kepler (Area) Momentum

K = vr = 2A/T; = d²/T =(d/T)d = vd (=vr), also the Geometrical Displacement (bh/2=A):

• The central vector connecting Sun and Planet sweeps equal areas in equal times.

Adding the orbiting mass (m), the KeplerMomentum expresses the Angular momentum (mK=mvr), to us more universally known in the form of Planck constant (h) with v=c in h=mcr=6.626 t34 JS (The Neutron).

• With the deduced Light’s Gravitational Dependency from the Cheops Rectangle geometrical mathematics

— light divergence (c₀ = 2.99792458 T8 M/S) in space is preserved a natural constant independent of gravitational influences (the atomic nucleus’ deduction Part II: gravitation’s fundamental form)

— there is apparently also a fix and solid corresponding Planck (area) Momentum: h=m·c₀r: the Neutron (spin).

On these premises (and the following historical parts with Galilei, Newton, Bradley, Euler and Planck) — apparently never deduced or even hinted at by the modern academic inducements (1800+) as a unitive foundation of the natural physics of the universe — this UniverseHistory was unfolded (beginning during the 1970s): as pouring water from one bucket to another (more or less: »with the greatest ease»).

This author was — hence — never blocked by modern academic inventions — and hence neither invited to their corridors (6 points of available 5 — perhaps I’d better do it myself ..). And so, more freely, a set of analyzing and result comparing cross referring expeditions in mathematics and physics was launched. It had to be fought for — not so much in concern of the results as the TIME and SOLITUDE needed to get the work done.

Dmax: TEXPL

RELATED PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS

The Atomic Nucleus’ Gravitational mass lies not in its volume — as resembling the mass of a drop of water — but in its unlimited toroidal hollow fractal structure:

— »shells» where the fractal principle defines an endlessly increasing density on an endlessly decreasing shell mass (PASTOM: hollow toroidal): m=n·m/n: n→∞: no smallest part

— the nucleus hollow toroid fractal surface (Planck structure constant ¦ [E=hf=(h/nFractal)nFractal·f=hFractal · fFractal]) is, or can so be understood to be immensely Hard.

See details in deduction from h=mcr The Planck Ring,

WHAT BASIC ELEMENTARY PHENOMENA DID HIDE ALL THIS FROM MODERN ACADEMY?

— The Star Physics. Beginning from The Atomic Nucleus — on the foundation of The Energy Law.

EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATIONS (as quoted from SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN August 1987 and others) on the TNED deduced N3m20 Neutron-Proton atomic nucleus:

———————————————

Collisions between Spinning Protons ¦ CONFIRMATIONS ¦ Spin directed colliding protons — TNED Dynamics cross reference on experimental results ¦ h = mcr — the atomic nucleus:

CWON: — mJ = 5.975 T24 KG Earth mass references

The modern academic QUARK theory and nomenclature has no connection to the TNED deduced atomic nucleus. These are two completely different ideas. The atomic nucleus in TNED has no innate particles. The mathematical resemblance is simple: 1 = 1 = 1 000 000 / 1 000 000 = N/N = ANY/ANY = ∞ / ∞ . Simple elementary math.

The atomic nucleus — gravitation — is already standing on a fundamental zero base:

• the atomic nucleus — gravitation — cannot be compressed. The Planck Structural Constant. Physics7th.

CWON through CAP:

IN ALL FURTHER TESTS we preferentially use this apparently very precised given Earth mass figure 5.975 T24 KG ±<3GRAM for tests wherever there is an offer for any the slightest chance of opportunity to question the result. The rJ feature has further connectivity in the following text.

• Every single material celestial body in the universe — shows exactly the same building up physical principle, Related Physics says:

———————————————

TheEarthMASS ¦ CWON ¦ CAP ¦ The Galactic Building ¦ The Solar Systems in The Milky Way ¦ The Meteorite Proofs ¦ TheNEUTRONsquare

CAP: Concentric Atomic Production — CWON: Complete Whole Number-solution

• FROM the tiniest grain to the largest galaxy (The Distribution of Elements) — based on the deduced Planck constant h=mcr Neutron Toroid atomic nucleus (N3m20), certified by The Energy Law (GripDEEP ¦ GcQ): Energy — mass — cannot be created. Mass can only be transferred E=hf=mc² to different levels of usable energy. AS a given property of physics, it certifies that the atomic nucleus (TNED) already is standing on a »zero»: the fundamental property of gravitation: the atomic nucleus — gravitation as such — cannot be compressed. Gravitation as such apparently certifies the fundamental incompressibility of gravitation’s fundamental element: the atomic nucleus: physics’ seventh principle (PASTOM: principle structure of mass: never mentioned in modern academy).

— INSTEAD OF RELATING AND DEDUCING that — please do disclaim anyone who can — NATURE (physics) Modern academy consensus 1800+ INVENTED (BasicMATH) an idea of a cosmic limited mass (because it seemed embarrassing to the 1800+ IQ aces to assume that »God» — life; gravitation and electricity — was the inventor of intelligence .. the only known instance at the time ..) — although even modern academic personnel realizes that any creation of energy — mass — is a fundamental physical impossibility: LIGHT is massless. LIGHT develops no centrifugation. Not even on my best day. There is no trace of an inertial force in a celestial LIGHT’S gravitationally governed orbit or trajectory (The Eclipse experiments from 1919). But the Kepler-Newton kinetics have it: moving masses.

THE CWON COMPLEX IN UNIVERSE HISTORY. Up to the general deduction of the celestial primary body building physics, there were no proofs in UniverseHistory of a direct mathematically provable ORDER IN THE isotopic distribution of Earth crust elements. TNED SUGGESTS IT TO BE SO from the deduced primary celestial body building (TEXPL) Dmax property. However, in investigating the 1900s available geological data on the Earth’s crust compositions (The Prime Data) — AtmosBiosLitos — the figures (CWON) appeared. And so a final quantitative Earth mass connecting proof did, and has now, arrived on the table (2020+).

• Especially light’s gravitational dependency LGD exhibits a center in the whole TNED deduced cosmic building.

— And it gives (real steel) further perspective on the different already established scientific domains.

The Contracted Construct:

• As 1800+ neither The Zero Integral responded very successfully inside the Modern Math High Quarter Corridors

— modern academic famous teaching system’s inability to recognize the difference between DIFFERENCE 0-1 and DIFFERENTIAL: the point (xyz), the Form For Zero: nothing —

further Inventions 1800+ in Logic had to be consented for The modern Merit Student to Earn its Job Favor in participating the general destruction[‡] of the Earth Global environment 1800+

• 30% forest area removed by 2000 from 1800 — after only 200 years of ardent inventory strives (ForestWORL2012).

• And still counting, Nov2022 (GlobalWatchersData).

— It seems obvious that Modern Academic Thinking does not understand the Role of The Chlorophyll Agency:

— »THAT our brains were developed on credit from Chlorophyll Agencies on SunLight, is nonsense».

— »That is why we keep chopping the population down».

— »We will do fine without».

• Collecting sunlight for LIFE STRENGTH AND SUPPORT HEALTH PROVISION for all species — ended 1812

(adopted IPCC preference value here in UniverseHistory). Ever since, it has apparently been the subject of looting and sacking — for business and industrial profit. 30%. 200y. From undisturbed 3Gy Brain Constructor Development. Say again. Come again: Stop The Madness. End it. Finish it. Execute it. Vaporize Its Atom.

• Enlightened Humans don’t kill alive Leaf&Needle. No mother god loving way.

AS IT APPEARS — then — BY THE CONSTRUCTORS OF THE GREAT CHEOPS PYRAMID AT GIZA, Egypt:

• Summing all the impressions collected on that subject and object in UniverseHistory (CheopsATLAS):

• IT WAS BUILT — apparently as a testifying monument of universal mathematics and physics as the most present prominent alternative explanation if nothing can disclaim that candidate (besides too, even worse, in a geologically dim history we cannot prove today, and even more worse: by a technology definitely not present in our time). It was for us to find — verify — as a »The Corresponding fundamental universal proof of Naturally Deductive Physics». But in our time, on credit of the established 1800+ society ideas of intelligence and nature, the bare possibility of any other source of intelligence than modern academy’s own 1800+, the alternatives are constantly denied. Perhaps it safest to burn the bible too.

(Because, as it seems: IT apparently HAS a very original strongly suggested connection. Compare TheClaim).

All natural constants:

MODERN ACADEMY: Say something preferentially intelligent.

Is there anything at all inside the 1800+ Modern Academy Consensus IQ Elite that IT did NOT turn its back on, starting to INVENT ITS universe, instead of DEDUCING it[‡1][‡2]?

Give us one example. That would be encouraging.

Come again. Show the math. Dazzle us.

SWEDEN 2018 — once a placid place .. and growing ..

Sweden is exaggerating its further global governmental care for Universal Animal Rights .. MustBuyBook.

— VEGETATION — Leaf&Needle — was apparently intended — nervous system construct — for maintenance of basic biological NATURAL HEALTH CARE.

— NOT for any kind or sort of industrial scale energy consumption or business profiting: NOT for Trafficking Humanity, but Developing it. Say again:

— What replaces the chemical reduction? 3Gy of undisturbed natural evolution, no cuts, up to 1800. 200 years later: more than 30% reduced forest area.

— »We’ll do fine with 70% for the developed 100 — we can always compensate with modern academic medical Juice». Have a nice Mad day.

Is that your best shot? Killing. Looting and Sacking. Technology for Destruction. Say again.

UN. United Nations. In a Universe. Say.

See further details on the provable Petrie-CHEOPS issue in

THE CONTRACTED CONSTRUCT.

• To be noted: the proof relies on a 100% on the Golden Section Paragon geometrical mathematics;

• There is no THEORY here — only the 1883 Flinders Petrie measuring reports under the looking glass of corresponding explaining geometric — illustrated — mathematics. Meaning:

• It holds, all of it — or not at all. So: Take your time.

As certified by quantities: any argument is welcome that can disclaim the proofs:

Searched for, none yet found.

DisClaim:

DO DISCLAIM — on the collected results in UniverseHistory

BECAUSE WE ARE still FAR FROM HAVING COMPLETE DETAILED PROOFS on the final count down Connection to the Cheops Building ..

Or — the building a such, and the Flinders Petrie 1883 measures, and their CheopsATLAS proven equivalents are compelling evidence as such. But still 2022 without proof of the connecting Constructor and its place and location in human history

The proofs we have: BioEk1-10, CAP, CWON, Advanced primitive bio-chemical matrices including direct meteorite proofs showing the same basic universal principle,

Atomic masses matching experimentally measured — deduction of Periodic System on Kepler resonances — and what follows on The K-cell Heat Physics, with further:

• The Neutron Square — proving and explaining modern academy’s invented primitive idea of nuclear physics

• The 100% Photosynthesis machine — solid cyclic bio mass with zero oxygen production, on which the whole Earth biological complex has eveolved

CheopsRectangleMATH: Deduction

Suns4

LIGHT’S GRAVITATIONAL DEPENDENCY IN RELATED PHYSICS

Geometric-mathematical proof: c0 cannot be destroyed — but 1800+ modern academy invented ideas [BasicMATHranks]

blocking any related mathematical/physical deduction:

Static and Expansive/Contractive Light’s Gravitational Dependency [the different possible states, all by math, of an expanding/contracting — or standstill — universal mass: our K-cell physics in UH] — apparently a completely unknown concept AS SUCH in Modern Quarters: Light’s top velocity divergence c0 cannot be destroyed.

Apparently meaning:

• Never created. Indestructible.

• The general 1800+ invented modern academy idea of a CREATION — some »ultimate Beginning» — is a delusion. If claimed, it becomes an exercised oppression, forcing the individual into depressive existential ideas on the origin of its own nature. Quite the opposite of HumanRight recognition. Physics First Principle.

The Graphical Function — through y = √ 1 – x² : allowing | 1 — x² | :

• The term »Cheops Rectangle», was so coined here in UH because the source of the central (Galilean used expression) bd=h² led back to its first mentioning through the ancient Greek references in geometry: The Cheops Pyramid. As however seen in the 5 basic math equations — square roots, the harmonic triangles, the complex algebraic foundation and its deduction, light’s gravitational dependency — none of these are mentioned or related as (so) connected, as known here, in the modern academic teaching system.

— Discovering these basics (1980+), searching for corresponding parts in available library literature, was like discovering an enormous Treasure, completely unknown to present thinking: never mentioned.

Light’s Gravitational Dependency: DisClaim ¦ CeopsRectangleMATH ¦ Deduction

See also more compressed in Physics General Explanation

LIGHT’S GRAVITATIONAL DEPENDENCY ¦ deduction

Figure 1

DOTTED — modern academy: this overall Concept is apparently unknown in modern quarters. See also Potential Barrier.

RELATED PHYSICS — TNED, CheopsRectangleMath, GripDEEP:

Light Divergence — linear propagation of light in free space — follows a local gravitational potential

w² = Gm₂/r. m₂ is the central gravitating mass, r the distance from its gravity center, G the universal gravitation constant: During the instrumental epoch 1960-1999, and still, in many references given as 6.67 t11 JM/[KG]².

• The CHEOPS RECTANGLE MATH directly shows — with c0 constant preserved independent of gravitation,

c/c0 = (1 w²/cc0) — why neither Einstein nor Schwarzchild could reach the deducing conditions:

• Modern Academy 1800+ invented/adopted ideas of physics — apparently with zero solidity in our practical physical universe apparently ON A SPARKLING MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATION — which consolidated — SO by drift, not plan — a banning of any reasonable explanation to the nature of gravitation and light.

Not even close.

Deduction: LGD ¦ CHEOPS

Light’s gravitational dependency

RELATED PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS — consequences pertaining to The deduction of the electric charge Q (RELATED Physics 7 Principles)

basic force equivalent:

F_c0=ma=m(c₀/dT)=constant ; minimum m on a maximum c = c₀ = F_c0dT/m = a·dT = c₀ ; divergence counts in any space point P and has no traveling property: no mass:

a = c₀/dT; related physics has no divergence differential (»dc₀»): c₀ is a natural constant, independent of mass. Then a force rank of the form can be understood to hold as a form for Light’s (Divergence’s) Gravitational (Convergence) Dependency, F_c0 = F_c + F_G : gravitation opposes — or governs: or defines — the local divergence.

• Then a corresponding energy rank (E=Fd) equivalent appears from the substitution (Δs) with a metric interval F_c0Δs = F_cΔs + F_GΔs as the

basic energy equivalent:

Ev = Ec + EG = mv² = mc² + mw² ; v² = c² + w² = cc₀ ¦ w² = Gm₂/r ;

F = ma = Gm₂m/r², Fr = mar = Gm₂m/r, Fr/m = ar = Gm₂/r = [M/S²]M = [M/S]² = w².

CHEOPS RECTANGLE: bd = h² : w=h ¦ b/h = h/d ; bd=h²:

w/c = (c₀–c)/w ¦ w² = cc₀–c² ¦ v/c₀ = c/v ¦ v² = cc₀ ;

w² + c² = v² ¦ c² = v² – w² = cc₀ – w² ;

c² = cc₀ – w² ¦ c² = cc₀ (1 – w²/cc₀) ¦ c = c₀ (1 – w²/cc₀) ;

——————————————————————————————

c/c₀ = (1 – w²/cc₀) ; compare Einstein and Schwarzchild : from THEIR MATH came THE ONSET : »find a more reasonable explanation», please.

——————————————————————————————

c² – cc₀ = – w² ;

c² – cc₀ + (c₀/2)² = (c₀/2)² – w² ;

(c – c₀/2)² = (c₀/2)² – w² ;

c – c₀/2 = √ (c₀/2)² – w² ;

c = c₀/2 + √ (c₀/2)² – w² ;

c = c₀/2 + c₀/2√ 1 – 4w²/c₀² ; light’s gravitational dependency — FULLY RELATED PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS. No relativity theory.

c/c₀ = (1/2)(1 + √ 1 – 4w²/c₀²) ; from c0 to c0/2 ; w² = cc0 — c² ¦ the [ half ] circle, radius c0/2

c/c₀ = (1/2)(1 – √ 4w²/c₀² – 1) ; from c0/2 to 0 ..; w² = c² — cc0 + c0²/2 ¦ the uniform hyperbola

c/c₀ = (1/2)(1 ± √|1 – 4w²/c₀²|) ; the Φ = FI arangement for automatic ±-selection: w/[c0/2] = a : Φ = INT[1–(|a—1|–[a—1])/2] giving

c/c₀ = (1/2)(1 + ϕ√|1 – 4w²/c₀²|) ; ϕ = (–2Φ+1) ¦ Φ=0 (+) from c₀ to c₀/2, then Φ=1 (–) from c₀/2 to 0.

We incorporate this formality typically into a spread sheat’s CalCard-structure for convenient access — if needed. c0 = 2.99792458 T8 M/S.

SolenT2022.ods T2 A55 — use, develop and extend as wished. Light’s propagation velocity here at Earth distance 1AU from Sun.

• These resulting comparing expressions exposes — apparently in every mathematical and physical detail — the corresponding related primitive Modern Academic Inventions (Einstein, Schwarzchild — both limited primitive ideas of a so called »closed universe»).

• And These resulting comparing expressions also apparently concludes: An — apparently provable in detail — perfect match to the quantities measured (1883) by the Flinders Petrie working group on The Cheops Pyramid (and others nearby) — on The Dmax property by Present Earth Mass (apparently also connecting CWON through CAP).

Beat that one: the rJCIRCLE and the Flinders Petrie 1882 Cheops Pyramid measures — and the highly possible (dim, obscured, forgotten, impossible to prove) origin of Script: »TheConstructivePLAN». Please do disclaim the one who can. We will surrender immediately. Absolutely.

The rJ — RadiusEarth (Sw. Jorden) — is our Earth mass 5.975 T24 KG perfect sphere taken on the deduced Planck constant Neutron atomic nucleus on its circumscribed regular block maximum density 1.82 T17 KG/M³, the Dmax.

Investing (2020) the match further, led to the complete Flinders Petrie 1883 asserted measures as accounted for in CheopsATLAS.

— The geometrical PLAN is — or can apparently be understood to be as shown and deduced in detail — all from The Golden Section Paragon and its spiral form with its central points and crossings: all geometrical math.

See The7.

As strong as this provability is: it DID come there (what are you talking about ..), AT its site (I don’t understand a shit of what this person is talking about ..). The only way to disclaim That One (excuse me: the fact that IT is standing there, as IS), is to show (one single is enough) one example on the Petrie measures and this investigation of them, that does NOT communicate WITHIN the given Petrie tolerances. Show that, and we can all go home: disclaim the plan and start fucking the pyramid too as apparently everything else has already been fucked:

— The Cheops Pyramid in Giza Egypt. Show that. And we will surrender immediately.

These however — as they have become here, yet — testamentary proofs have no known foundation of questioning, as found. Not by mathematics. Not by physics. But we would welcome such, if found. Please share.

But — again — the corresponding historical/geographical/geological decisive proofs lie (still) in the dark. That has now become the real steel of the challenge. With more to come.

Hubble1929:

Edwin Hubble 1929+ —— an expanding universe

FROM THE MOMENT WHEN THE RED SHIFT PHENOMENA[‡] OF AN EXPANDING UNIVERSE APPEARED (1929, after several measures when Edwin Hubble finally established our present idea of an expanding universe, preceded by other astronomical contributors; Friedman 1922, Lemaître 1927 and others) THE GENERAL MODERN ACADEMIC TASK WAS TO EXPLAIN THE ORIGIN OF THIS EXPANSION.

Given The Seven Principles of Physics in Universe History [APARC, FUNTOP, POM, NEONS, GRIP, DEEP and PASTOM], only Newton’s Three known in modern quarters, the rest gave itself up with not much resistance: like pouring water from one bucket to another. No big deal. However: It took its sweet time. Big Bucket.

See also below in EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATIONS.

Explaining the origin of universal expansion

FOR UNIVERSE HISTORY (TNEDbegin some earliest 1976 [or 1972]) AS BASED ON A GENUINE DEDUCTION OF THE ATOMIC NUCLEUS — gravitation and electricity: Planck constant h=mcr in explaining the origin of expansion — was a comparatively EASY quest compared to Modern Academic measures — where the population had to INVENT all kinds of stuff as it went along (BasicMATHranks ¦ ExperimentalCONFIRMATIONS).

In Modern Academy (1900+) — no naturally deduced atomic nucleus — the idea (soon) appeared of ”unlimited density”. The idea of ”a singularity” (»a first pointless nothing with unlimited density» ¦ Penrose 1965, ref., Stephen Hawking COSMOS, Sw., KOSMOS 1994s61m ¦ Penrose-Hawking 1970, s62) soon became popular — all costumed by a growing famous Relativity Idea. But: Light does not interact with mechanics. In UniverseHistory it is The Light-liberty clause in related physics: light paths does not develop centrifugation on applied gravitation (SolarEclipsesExpeditions1919+). See The Vic-Error. That was the Einstein population’s first mistake — although the whole scientific community 1881+ was proven that the speed of light on Earth is not affected by the Earth’s movement at all (M&M: Experiments from 1881) — also clarified from 1725 by James Bradley on the discovery of Aberration (first Light’s Gravitational Dependency observation — still not very much explainable in terms of modern academic nomenclature). A »light’s gravitational dependency» (LGD) was never observed in modern quarters. Not at all.

———————————————

James Bradley’s discovery 1725 of the Aberration phenomena ¦ TheSolarEclipses

So:

The modern academic idea soon turned out into »an exploding expanding singularity» — from an unlimited state of unlimited density. Very deep penetrating and explaining math — ending on the sensational construction of atoms too (The Pythagorean Theorem was also created, too, as a bonus, along with Planck constant, very high IQ math stuff). Matter appeared on the scale of intergalactic nebulae. General gas masses were spread out all over in our universe.

The idea soon had to appear, that it had to be by SPONTANEOUS CONTRACTION that these gas masses started to pinpoint specific mass centra — as the expansion continued. And from there, fast Hollywood forward, an early general Kant Nebular hypothesis appeared (together with general star history evolution);

• Earth and the other planets must have originated from planetesimal »downfall» from such a nebula debris (The Craters of the Moon and others — and the associated origin of impulses of planetary rotations). And further, by specific theories of our Sun, that »our 2,8 T22 KG water on and in Earth Crust had to have come from the outside».

That so, because it had become a consensus in modern academic merited intelligence that »SUN was too hot at the start to allow such water on Earth».

Very deep Early Insolation Insights (BBC was there filming it all too — but you must accept they demand cookies consent before you will have access to the content — modern general social global media establishment educative LogIn procedures: in order for The Pet to look into the shop’s windows on its merchandise, IT must LogIn).

The conditions were better year 1311.

The — apparent — only valuable TECHNOLOGY having developed 1800+ is the one of INSTRUMENTATION: non destructive technological enterprise. We find it today wherever humans and nature work together[‡] — with zero environmental hazard: no killing of alive vegetation.

WHERE — united nations — is JURISDICTION on planet Earth — other than Trafficking Payed Business Enterprise Bitches? Not one word HumanRight. Not a sound. Not a hint. Not a spell.

”.. every individual and every organ of society .. constantly in mind ..”, ”..of the greatest importance ..”, ”.. foundation of freedom, justice and peace ..”. Foundation. Where? Say again.

• CLAIMS outside a 24/7 HumanRight regocnition ”Whereas the recognition ..” has only power to destroy.

• There is no exception.

EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATIONS: revised and enhanced more detailed description Nov2022

FROM THE ORIGINAL partly less detailed STUB Nov2007 EXPERIMENTELLA BEKRÄFTERLSER

EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATIONS

———————————————

MULTIPLEc ¦ TheSolarEclipses ¦ ThePerihelionPrecessions ¦ TheGPSexample ¦

———————————————

The GcQ Theorem ¦ The Euler Equivalents ¦ GripDeep ¦ STATE ¦ RECKONING LAWS FOR THE quantity independent ENDLESS ¦ FirstPRINCIPLE — related physics and mathematics as deduced

Dmax

Many people (especially inside modern academic quarters 1800+), have — apparently — no idea at all of how primitive the modern academic adoption of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity really is — AS will be related by detail in this rebellious UH (UniverseHistory) production — for the relaxed mathematical joy of already established PhD:s, I’m afraid. Namely any provable close relationship between present academic idea and its provable connection to nature (physics — with zero destructive enterprise):

Not even close[‡].

— IF the reader can give solid scientific opposing arguments — mathematics and physics, no messing — we will surrender immediately. No problem.

The reason is — of course — »experimental proofs». So high in »IQ dignity», that modern academic pioneers simply did not care to look for more rational — reasonable: deducible — explanations.

• light paths does not develop centrifugation — which excludes the Kepler-Newton classic celestial orbits:

• Kepler-Newton classic celestial orbits — KeplerMomentumBasics — only apply to KINETICS: objects with mass.

• And light — its actual path — has not that property. As measured and deduced. See TheSolarEclipses.

That part was apparently reserved for any »UniverseHistory», or similar, wherever it may be found: Related mathematics and physics — by comparing results, unless we did miss something important;

The Planck Equivalents explain the most of the complex inside the most prominent modern academic features. But apparently where however the present high educative standard of global priority favors a more Hi Tech oriented modern academic thinking, I’m afraid[‡].

The GPS Example in explicit is also a prominent reminder.

PlanckEquivalents: AnswersCHART

1–(u/c)² = 1/[(UQ/m0c²) + 1] ; m0c²(1/[1–(u/c)²] – 1) = UQ = (E) ;

m₀c² = mcc_u = constant = E — no mass is created, no mass is destroyed but modern academy constantly fucks with it:

The voltage U produces a separation between a MoveQ (+Δm, measured [school physics] with a thread-ray-tube) and a RestQ (—Δm, never experimentally measured in the history of physics, as known). The sum i zero. Physics contains no net mass increase caused by motion. No way. Not in any physics branch.

———————————————

Deducing the electric charge — not represented in modern corridors ¦ PotentialBarrier ¦ TheNeutronSquareBreakThrough ¦ CheopsRectangleMATH ¦ PhysicsFirstMATH ¦ GcQ

Electric particle accelerator technology is limited by the electric field’s limited sensing feedback-change through the limited speed of light c0.

Mechanic particle accelerating physics has no such c-limiting [m/R] physical properties. But modern academy seems to ignore the fact:

— »At the present, we are too occupied with our c-Dolls-House-Theater issues to be able to show interest in anything else». CLOSED, the sign says. 1800+.

NO EXPERIMENTAL controlling method

Because there is no physical known method to distinguish the impulse (linear momentum) m₀v from m_Rv_R, also the interpretation of the instrumentally measured impulse and energy quantity from impulse-energy measurements can neither be resolved on a mathematical basis.

E(32J) = m₀(3.6c₀)² = E(32J) = (3.6)²m₀(c₀)² ............. the MULTIPLE c syndrome

cosmic radiation experimentation and observation issues (3.6c₀, see c02p6)

There is no (yet known) way in present known science to control velocities exceeding

c₀ = 2.99792458 T8 M/S: the equivalence aspect cannot be resolved. Question still open.

— A MECHANIC E(32J) = m · (3.6c)² contains exactly the same energy components as an ELECTRIC E(32J) = 3.6²·m · c².

— While the Electric alternative has a well 1900s developed technology in science, the 3.6c has no measuring technology at all.

— (Present) Earth science technology is (physically, and mathematically) blind to the mechanic component.

Introduction:

introduction —— TNED ¦ FOCUS MATERIEN 1975 ¦ Multiple c in modern academy

THE MULTIPLE c SYNDROME measured cosmic radiation

RELATED PHYSICS QUESTIONS and explains the nature of THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY

Enhanced Article from the original Swedish original (MULTIPLE c)

INCOMING COSMIC PARTICLES (mostly protons, as claimed) hit the Earth’s atmosphere, sometimes releasing quite hefty energy surges (”capable of lifting the Cambridge Astronomy 1978 book one meter over the table”, the 16 Joule example, BA1978.s274.sp2mn). As the particle fragments have been identified during the 1900s research, measuring methods have resulted in expeditions using the data for further comparing results. One of these uses the my-meson half life decays from high altitude cosmic impacts. Knowing the average µ-meson half life (t0 = 2µS = 2 t6 S), the altitude (h) where the (N) impact appears, and some Earth ground based instrumentation to count (A), the A particles reaching Earth’s surface exhibit comparing mathematics — and claims.

Summing the halving t0 = 2µS periods of the µ-mesons as they decay from the cosmic particle impact, a final number A of the initial N are registered by a ground station. The exercise in the different established textbooks[‡] was aimed to demonstrate the validity of Einstein’s theory of relativity — on the electromagnetic compromised precisely so narrow-minded idea that ”nothing travels faster than c”. In related physics it apparently blocks a more rich cosmological explanation:

• a v>c experimental controlling instrumentation does not exist in present scientific quarters. Further in MULTIPLEcPROOF.

PlanckvRcREF:

SolenT2022.ods T4 A25

———————————————

Calculated quantities according to the Quoted text book example — further explained in MULTIPLEc.

SolenT2022.ods T4 A13

— On the exact same mathematical end expression, however derived from completely different ideas of basic physics —

The Introduction tabled values show quantities from a textbook source. It reports cosmic radiation experiments and observations aimed at »proving Einstein’s theory of relativity». However, as we see — the explaining Planck equivalents, not mentioned in modern quarters — do show the mathematically manipulative course allowing an alternative explanation with multiple c — on exactly the same instrumentally measured and observed impulse and energy quantity. In modern corridors, one favors the idea of »time dilation», the specific parts above/below in the equations, to compensate for »(we cannot accept) travel faster than c». However, the standard classical Newton-Planck mechanical way exposes wider alternatives — that apparently has still more qualities not known in modern quarters. Further explained and illustrated below in MULTIPLEc. Exact same quantities on exact same expressions.

The proving, explaining, and connecting ranks:

vR = v√1–(vR/c)² = h/T0 ........... v√1–(vR/c)² = h/T0 ¦ Related physics Planck equivalents explanation — deduced as related.

tR = T0√1–(vR/c)² = h/v ........... v√1–(vR/c)² = h/T0 ¦ Modern academy — no correspondence.

• Modern academy would have had a more profitable status today if it had listened to Max Planck at the time[‡]. It didn’t.

• The two comparing ranks above apparently make the Planck equivalent solution sovereign: IT cannot be related from present academic thinking. No way.

The Planck equivalents explain the phenomena from a multiple c standpoint, also in detail to the origin of the most high energy (16 Joule) observed impacts. See MULTIPLEcPROOF and further below from MULTIPLEc.

Equating a particle accelerator energy equivalent to an ideal classic mechanical spouse (PlanckEquivalent) on a multiple c basis has a limit. An exact u=c0 can never be acquired. It would demand a corresponding m →∞ = ∞ · m0 as the accelerated particle’s velocity approaches the c-limit endlessly. The particle accelerating system transfers increasing mass to the (velocity u) accelerated particle as the accelerating energy increases (E/c²=UQ/c²=[m – m0]).

An energy equative transformation between the two different domains — mechanic and electric — can be accomplished provided the two different domains expose identical impulses (linear momentum p = mv = m1v1 = m2v2):

:

See deduction in The u-form. [UQ = c²(m–m0) .. Q with m0 is accelerated to u with m by U ..]

m0/mR = √ 1–(vR/c0)² ¦ m0/m = √ 1–(v/c0)² ¦ (Deduction, original):

The Planck Equivalent certifies the transfer is based on a summed conserved zero-changed mass — no relativity aspects:

• no mass is created, no mass is destroyed in an accelerating closed electric system — PlanckEQUIVALENTS.

IF THE TEXTBOOK’S u=v_R 0.995c IS GENUINE:

The PlanckEquivalent explaining origin (it better):

Original Debris

The textbook quote gives no specification or mentions an origin of the stated 0.995c, nor of any observed energy quantity connecting the cosmic radiation impact example.

— The PlanckEquivalet on equal impulses (linear momentum) determines a corresponding mechanical — no electric acceleration devises — on the order of 10c (9.962460869c) with the given 0.995c.

These two are however independent of the PlanckEquivalentResulting connections. The particle mass makes nothing to the u/v = m₀/m relation. With a single neutron (mechanic) for a single proton (electric, Q=e) the least possible corresponding particle accelerator energy is involved — some UQ = 8.8 GeV. The Cambridge Astronomy book mentions (BA1978s.274sp2m) that the main part of the observed impacting particles ”have energies around 10⁸ — 10⁹ eV”. That wold be reasonable for a neutron (mechanic, PlanckEquivalent v>c) in a resembling particle accelerator energy test on a proton.

But how about the 10c PlanckEquivalent?

This is the TNED calculating K-cell chart with its possible solutions (from part of the article in Earth Mass and The Andromeda test document, see from SandTRAVEL):

DEBRIS ORIGIN

SolenT2022.ods T4 N60

See MULTIPLEc on the full theoretical illustrated explanation: how the ejecta (our experimental mechanical neutron or neutron bead) works in TNED theory.

Using the approximated curve equations:

Lowest Possible Available Mechanic Ejection velocity — traveling from RimGRB:s to Earth:

v/c₀ = Distance/[NOW — pastORIGINALdebris(NonDecayedFastNeutrons)]Gy·T9·365.25·86400

with

Distance = Past^2/3·2.39567 T25 M

In the TNED/K-cell default the rc₀-line intersects (ideally) on/with the K-cell expanding universe’s RIM on a Last Building Galactic Point. After that point no further divergence (GRBs) will be possible: K-cell Dmax neutron mass entering positive divergence (c>0), and thereby a beginning neutron decay (K-cell Heat physics). That is, the y = 0.3944x straight slope. After that point the complete birth of the new period universe is finished.

HOWEVER: Neutron decay will be dependent on HOW FAST its J-bodies will enter the positive (rc₀) space: there are ejecta AWAY from K-cell center (neutron decays delays), and also ejecta TOWARDS it (neutron decay speeds up). The rc₀-limit just states the ideal c>0 starting point.

The only possible way for a type 10c neutron safely dormant and not decaying until entering v<c to arrive to Earth NOW (K-cell age 20.82 Gy, TNED says) would be IF its host GRBs have sufficient delay — margin — to satisfy an active ejecta region in a past originalDebris on the order of

19Gy. That is, backwards in the past from our NOW some 1,8Gy, on a traveling distance of 1.7 T26 M. The time window here would lie between 16.3Gy and around 19Gy with a v/c₀ possible spread between 3.5 and (maybe) 15 (19.6Gy) — corresponding to (u=vR)/c₀ values

0.960c₀(UQproton=2.4 T9 eV) to 0.998c₀(UQproton=1.4 T10 eV).

SolenT2022.ods T4 M49

Possibly. But that is also only in concern of only ONE single neutron.

Enhancing the scene with regular neutron beads — thousands and more on a preserved Dmax, until impact — the particle accelerator resemblance completely looses meaning:

The16Jcalc: QUOTING the source

Introduction

• The 16 Joule example TNED solution with a v>c pacing neutron bead consisting of some 1-2 T10 neutrons — a corresponding one single Atomic (nuclear) particle with mass number A=1.6T10 — is a definite impossibility for any particle accelerator. The TNED maximum mass number for the heaviest possible atomic nucleus is 317. Lawrence Berkeley atomic masses charts show a present maximum mass number at 293 (118Ui293). The 16 J observed cosmic radiation energy impact on Earth’s top atmosphere is on that premise a complete impossible Earth laboratory particle accelerator comparing exercise.

A MECHANICAL SOLUTION however on the Planck Equivalent impulse (linear momentum) credit has better provisions for taking the ship into harbor.

SolenT2022.ods T4 M45

UQ = 16.02 J: v=10c₀ with a Ø6.0 t12 M wide neutron bead, above. Below:

UQ = 16.02 J: v=3.6c₀ with a Ø8.8 t12 M wide neutron bead — less than average interatomic distance in a solid (2.5 t10 M).

Definitely no particle accelerator can do that — not because of the energy as such, but because of the limit of atomic nuclei mass. Atoms in our universe have a max mass number A = 300 compared to the above: billions. No way — not to mention the Problem of ionizing That one for particle acceleration. Not even Ever. No such physics exist.

The (LHC) Large Hadron Collider (Wikipedia, Particle accelerator, 23Dec2022) is said to be the present most powerful particle accelerator. It has a total capacity of 13 TeV = 13 T12 eV.

That is still a run of some 8 ten powers to go to match a 16 Joule = 1 T20 eV testing expedition.

• The reverse way is shut: Going IN THEORY from Earth laboratory particle accelerators to a (related TNED) cosmic-mechanical generated particle energy has no (here known) modern or other academic meaningful resemblance. Saying, TNED says:

• There is no deducing aspect, no relating aspect, no explaining aspect, no reasoning aspect at all: »we can reach them». But they cannot reach us:

• Light does not connect kinetics[‡].

• The details are so related and explained, in to the last atom. But modern academy apparently has not the idea of the concept. See also Moden Academic Multiple c.

There is plenty to pick from ..

THE J-BODY SURFACE EJECTION VELOCITIES

c03p6 ¦ vEJECT ¦ Introduction ¦ OriginalDebris

———————————————

NASA GRB map ¦ Hubble space telescope Galactic Deep image

Related physics

The K-cell contractive phase collects the same gravitational energy that later will cause recoil ejection after the initial K-cell detonation occasion in each new K-cell expansion phase. The TNED deduced expression is the same as the Escape Velocity form

v² = 2Gm₂/r

With m₂ as the primary K-cell expanding Dmax J-body and Dmax = m₂/(V=4πr³/3):

v = m₂^1/3 · √(2G[4πDmax/3]^1/3)

There (K-cell mass ca 4.15 T53 KG — Milky Way mass ca 2 T41 KG or ca T11 Sun masses) are some estimated ”hundreds of billions galaxies in the universe”.

• With a comparing scale from 10 Sun masses up to our Milky Way galaxy estimated 2 T41 KG — T 11 Sun masses — the ejected v/c₀ ratio goes from 1 to 2 150.

• Our expedition on investigating MULTIPLEc on Earth atmosphere impacts (The 16 Joule example) needs at most some 15 (The 16 J).

• There is, hence, plenty to pick from.

• It should though be mentioned here that the observed masses in our visual universe — after their primary ejections, TNED says — is only a fraction 1/355 of the total K-cell mass distribution. See

DARK MATTER ¦ (The ThermoNuclear radiation pressure’s role for Dark Matter)

¦ Quotes on Dark Matter (up to 400 times more has been observed)

— in TNED explained as debris of huge amounts of SAND impossible to detect over huge interstellar distances — pushed outside high above the galactic halos from their (Suns4) thermo nuclear radiation pressure (Tgamma — apparently unknown in modern corridors: see also The Perihelion Precessions — AllKeplerMath — explaining why and how).

• In modern academy, no theory exist by which to explain such debris.

In a raw calculation — our Sun mass roughly 2 T30 KG — its real steel primary ejecta mother mass would have had perhaps some at least 100 times greater mass in the luggage.

:

• Compare here (GALAXY FORMING — Recoil Picture) the resembling recoil water drop experiments and the photos that revealed (in strong light directed towards the camera lens) the high velocity tiny not immediately observed microscopic <1mM perfect spherical drops (as a spray) high above the more ordinary observed. Similar conditions should hold in the K-cell mathematical physics.

EXEMPLIFYING ON A ONE SINGLE NEUTRON/PROTON IMPACT

m₀v = m_Ru : v > c ¦ u < c : vMECHANIC uELECTRIC ¦ u = v_R ¦ v_R/c = 1/√ (c/v)² + 1 PlankEquivalentReference

v>c : Ekin/UQ = (v/c)²/2[ –1 + 1/√1–(u/c)²] = (v/c)²/2[–1 + 1/√1– 1/(1 + [c/v]²)] :

SolenT2022.ods T4 A37

PLANCK EQUIVALENT IMPULSE (linear momentum p = mv = m1v1 = m2v2) TRANSFER APPLICATION — not represented in modern quarters.

Comparing theoretical proton particle accelerator impact example — on the mechanic m0v=mRu Planck equivalent transfer impact; Incoming neutron/proton with v>c theoretically PlanckEquivalent substituted by a u<c Earth laboratory proton particle accelerator. As the input accelerating voltage (U) increases, the energy fraction (Ekin=m0v²/2)/EQ also increases (on the branch of a hyperbola).

So: In any theoretical Quest on matching a corresponding Earth particle accelerator (u<c) observed energy (UQ) from a corresponding v>c cosmic occasion, it would not suffice to assume an equal electric E=UQ quantity for the mechanic/kinetic Ekin quantity. The Ekin quantity lies in any way higher — provided the same impacting impulses (linear momentum) holds. However (again) this type of mathematical physics has no (here known) modern academic representation: »The Modern c Coccon Association»: ”nothing travels faster than c” (»LogIn»). See also MultipleMACc.

MULTIPLEcPROOF:

The MULTIPLE c PROOF — SAME MATH RANKS

Introduction — Quoting on the 16 Joule cosmic ray impact observation

SolenT2022.ods T4 M45 ¦ Dmax —— Solving the 16 Joule cosmic impact energy release observation — Problem.

” Vi vet mycket lite om de kosmiska partiklar som bär energimängder större än 10¹⁹ eV, eftersom jorden får ta

emot så få sådana per dygn. Just dessa partiklar är emellertid mycket intressanta, eftersom de bär på energier

av en storleksordning som överträffar allt som kan åstadkommas av partikelacceleratorerna i våra jordiska

laboratorier. Energin 10²⁰ eV är lika med 16 joule — tillräckligt för att lyfta denna bok en meter från bordet.”,

BA1978s274mn, Cambridge Astronomy.

Freely translated [see also LHC]:

WE know very little about the cosmic particles carrying energies greater than 10¹⁹ eV, because Earth receives so few of these per day. Especially these particles are however very interesting because they carry energies of a magnitude exceeding any achievable by the particle accelerators in our Earthly laboratories. The energy 10²⁰ eV equals 16 Joule — sufficient to lift this book one meter from the table.

———————————————

NEVER SEPARATED NEUTRONS EXPLANATION ¦

Cosmic radiation and Multiple c — the Swedish original stub ¦ explanation:

Menu:

• MACcREF uses multiple c cosmological concepts:

• MAC cannot disprove a multiple c existence.

— TESTING a multiple c from cosmic ray observations

• suggests MAC has a primitive idea of physics:

• The result apparently includes MAC ideas a primitive.

• See MULTIPLEc.

Calculated quantities according to the Quoted text book example — ONLY a single or few neutron/proton comparison is OK:

SolenT2022.ods T4 A13 ¦ Dmax

While modern academy has no theory and no experimental instrumental matching idea of a cosmological multiple c event — and so neither their possible physical phenomenal rejections — all such multiple c happenings can only be transferred to a corresponding present Earth science particle accelerator energy resemblance ¦ Introduction. Unaware — however — of such a mathematical transformation — The Impulse p=mv Planck Equivalents vR = v√1–(vR/c)², = h/T0 — modern academic idea uses a ”time dilation” method to compensate for the Not Possible measurable HigherThan c pace = Shorter TimeTravel;

tR = T0√1–(vR/c)², = h/v, is interpreted as »longer half life t0» in modern corridors. (So:) — The conditions were definitely better year 1311.

• The actual proof that multiple c does exist — then, from this cosmic ray exposure — relies on the exact same mathematics, on the exact same experimental observations, as the already familiar. However with a simple The multiple c related physics explanation apparently outside present academic quarters:

:

The proving, explaining, and connecting ranks — MULTIPLEcPROOF:

But in modern academy the explaining Planck Equivalents are unknown:

vR = v√1–(vR/c)² = h/T0 ........... v√1–(vR/c)² = h/T0 ¦ Related physics Planck equivalents explanation — deduced as related.

tR = T0√1–(vR/c)² = h/v ........... v√1–(vR/c)² = h/T0 ¦ Modern academy — no correspondence.

• Modern academy would have had a more profitable status today if it had listened to Max Planck at the time[‡]. It didn’t.

• The two comparing ranks above apparently make the Planck equivalent solution sovereign: IT cannot be related from present academic thinking. No way.

The Planck equivalents explain the phenomena from a multiple c standpoint, also in detail to the origin of the most high energy (16 Joule) observed impacts. See MULTIPLEcPROOF and further below from MULTIPLEc.

The experimental observations (Introduction) uses different methods to estimate and measure the released energies from incoming cosmic radiation (mostly identified as »high speed» protons [90%] and other [lighter] atomic nuclei [helium nuclei in majority]). The ranks above expose the different expressions explaining a corresponding relativistic (AnswersCHART) manipulative mathematics in comparison with the related and deduced Planck equivalents.

• No scientifically known instrumental method exists to reject the quest of possible multiple c.

• The electric charge’s mass-resistance proportionality excludes its part in mechanics and kinetics. Which also excludes any (present) experimental method to reject the existence of multiple c (present high speed experimentation is, what we know, limited to electric and magnetic properties: no kinetics):

• The TNED deduced K-cell physical mathematics has (far more) reasonable options in explaining the high energy cosmic ray particle impacts on a multiple c basis (The already familiar exemplified 16 Joule (T20eV) impact measure [BA1978s274]) — apparently way above the capacity of any established experimental particle accelerators.

See further below i MULTIPLEc.

ANSWERS CHART:

The Planck equivalents (as deduced in The original Swedish edition ;

u electrically accelerated velocity by c in a given fix gravitational potential: c varies with different such, see LGD):

f₀/f = √ 1–(u/c)² .................. PlanckEnergy’s FREQUENCY EQUIVALENT in ^Qm changes with growing u

m₀/m = √ 1–(u/c)² .................. PlanckEnergy’s MASS EQUIVALENT in ^Qm changes with growing u

λ/λ₀ = √ 1–(u/c)² .................. PlanckEnergy’s WAVELENGTH EQUIVALENT in ^Qm changes with growing u

Compare (The v+ic error) the modern academically adopted (1905+)

— on Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (1905+), Lorentz-Fitzgerald transformations — »same c everywhere»:

T/T₀ = √ 1–(v/c)² .................. time reduces with growing velocity v

m₀/m = √ 1–(v/c)² .................. mass grows with growing velocity v

d/d₀ = √ 1–(v/c)² .................. length reduces with growing velocity v

The v-form reflects Einstein’s vic-error: light propagation does not connect kinetics. Modern academy apparently does not understand that concept (»The c Cocoon Association» Friday Meetings: ”Nothing travels faster than c .. Nothing ..”, now during some 100 years [5200 Fridays]: DRIFT: Nothing is wrong with the intelligence, just the ability to realize its innate nature), although so fantastically clarified by the early Michelson and Morley interferometer experiments (1881+). Why? Apparently due to invented ideas — blocking a deduction. Not because of any kind of minor intelligence. Far from.

Basically the same exact mathematical ranks — but modern academy 1800+ apparently lost sight of DYNAMICS in gravitation and electricity (I’m afraid ¦ SolarEclipsesExpeditionResults1919+):

• Mechanics is NOT light propagation. But MAC invented a HYDRA (The v+ic error) in between. And so it began:

• WHILE the atomic nucleus is intrinsically free from inner particle constituents — gravitation’s fundamental mass form ¦ PotentialBarrier — modern academy has built a SUCH particle idea. And IT has apparently become »The foundation of the whole cosmic existential phenomena» — blocking the real steel explanations: These include — fully explain, or should if not — the modern part as a primitive — or not at all.

CUTTING LIFE PROVISIONS DOES NOT EXIST IN A SCIENTIFICALLY ENLIGHTENED SOCIETY.

In the light of related physics and its comparing results (The Neutron Square), it is obvious that the 1800+ modern academic idea prevents an explaining rational foundation (apparently also Illustrated). As such, and provided it (TheExplanation, whatever natural) is so free from flaws or misconceptions as it appears to be (Nature), the present academic way is apparently also provably LESS than primitive. It is directly destructive as it prevents the individual from a true, deeply and well relatable — harmonic : healthy — mathematical and physical realization. It is directly destructive as it does not lift a finger to break the destructive spell: education (TheLIST) on provably primitive ideas (gaining [looting and sacking] instead of sharing). Have your say.

The most convenient for present academic status would be: this is all crap.

Please share the insight: Even the worst of all stupid contributes to wisdom — appropriately apprehended.

MULTIPLEc: PlanckEquivalents ¦ Introduction ¦ MULTIPLEcPROOF

THE SPEED OF LIGHT

Proofs of multiple c

The Cosmic Radiation

CONNECTING ALL THE LOSE ENDS

Proving

An impossible expedition — in a particle accelerator; only a mechanical [Planck Equivalent] v>c solution can solve the problem on equal impulses [linear momentum]: p = mv = m1v1 = m2v2

———————————————

The GRB objects in related physics — screams from dying or new born? ¦ GRB ¦ Primary neutron bio-chemical matrices ¦ Chlorophyll and Hematine ¦ DivergenceIGNITION ¦ K-cellExpansion ¦ Dmax

The TNED deduced K-cell expansion physics involves successively ejected neutron masses from the initial Dmax ”BigBang” occasion — the pulsating contracting-expanding K-cell with a half period of some 336 Gy, TNED says. As earlier suggested — CWON from CAP ¦ Primary neutron bio-chemical matrices — all celestial bodies (named J-bodies in TNED cosmology) expose their topmost surfaces in the last (hydrogen + lower oxygen = ICE ¦ MACcREF) J-body mineralogy history on developing atomic binding matter — consisting of primary tight Dmax lying neutrons. As a J-body enters positive divergence in the K-cell expansion (Light’s Gravitational Dependency LGD), short heavy nuclear reactive energy surges appear from J-center (iron-core production). These inevitably involve J-body surface Dmax neutron ejections — with (very ¦ vREF) high mechanically caused ejection velocities. As these can be readily calculated from the TNED deductions, corresponding theoretical quantitative tests can be accomplished, comparing cosmological instrumental observations.

CARING for the possible K-cell dimensions on the present universe observations (cosmic background radiation and others ¦ OriginalDebris), TNED results include calculations of reasonable and possible ejecta distance time travels on given ejecta velocities, composing, for test, a possible explanation to the observed 16 Joule cosmic ray energy observation — apparently otherwise impossible to explain by present Earth science technology instrumentation.

The general idea in TNED (LGD) — forbidden in modern quarters — is that all macroscopic electromagnetic dynamics is in a mode OFF if v>=c — particles travels faster than local light divergence — or c<=0 — strong local gravitation does not allow positive divergence. In these cases, a neutron decay cannot be physically — macroscopically — related. That is: A Dmax neutron bead can travel practically unhindered (ZmrREF) if its mechanically caused velocity exceeds the local c, or the general top c0 = 2.99792458 T8 M/S. Also given its maximum tiny cross section of a such Dmax neutron bead, it has all possible profitable chances of traveling far through spaces during long periods of time without impacting on any other mass — until the actual impact (Earth atmosphere or other).

So the end PLANCK EQUIVALENTS calculating solution becomes simple — with a corresponding (impossible) present Earth science technology particle accelerator (E=UQ) spouse IF the impact energy is especially large:

Calculated quantities according to the Quoted text book example — one single neutron/proton impact;

SolenT2022.ods T4 A13

Single neutron/proton Mechanic/Electric comparing examples show comparable results — but definitely not on the 16 Joule observed type.

SolenT2022.ods T4 M45

• An ELECTRIC particle accelerator for a particle/atom with mass number A > 300 — heaviest possible nucleus — is impossible: in this comparing case: a neutron bead with A = 1.18 T10 = 11.8 Giga. No way.

The cosmic radiation impact results — modern academy favoring relativity theory

ESTABLISHED RESULTS:

The established textbooks (FÖRSTÅ RELATIVITETSTEORIN G. Lindahl, Biblioteksförklaget 1971, s22) mentions a value vR = 0.995c. with h=6 KM. With h=30 KM (FYSIK FÖR TEKNISKA FACKSKOLOR, R-Westöö, Esselte 1975, s59), and N=1000, the result gives a value of A = 31. With the Lindahl1971 lower h=6 KM, the result shows A = 498. The authors also claim these values to to be the experimentally observed.

INTRODUCTION

Quote:

FÖRSTÅ RELATIVITETSTEORIN En vägledning till självstudier av Göran Lindahl och Nils Norlind

Biblioteksförlaget STOCKHOLM 1971 ¦ s22-23

Understand relativity theory — a guide to self-tuitions

”Av tusen µ-mesoner på 6 km höjd borde endast en kunna observeras vid jordytan. Detta strider mot experiment som har gjorts. I själva verket når hälften (i vårt fall cirka 500) av de ursprungliga µ-mesonerna ner till jordytan.”, G. Lindahl s22”, translated:

Of thousand µ-mesons at 6 KM altitude only one ought to be observed at Earth ground. This contradicts experiments. In fact half (in our case circa 500) of the original µ-mesons reaches Earth surface.

The detailed explaining mathematic is given illustrated in MULTIPLEcPRROF.

Exact same mathematical ranks as in established textbooks (Quote). But the different inwardly contradictory explanations exclude any unitive resolution; Only one explanation can relate the other as primitive: Both cannot possibly hold.

According to established sources (ENCARTA 99, Cosmic rays, and further[‡]) one has observed extremely high energetic particles with impacting energies up to T11 GeV = 1 T20 eV = — that is 16.02 Joule. If that energetic impact would refere a single incoming proton, its corresponding mechanic velocity would be

v = √ 2E/m0 = √ 2(T20eV · 1.602 t19 C)/(1.67332 t27 KG) = 461 568.39c, witch c = c0 = 2.99792458 T8 M/S.

• No here known or reported established instance knows how such high energy surges could be generated.

• Not even close to.

MODERN ACADEMY ON MULTIPLE c

As already suggested in Introduction.

• Modern (1800+) prominent academic cosmological descriptions in physics and mathematics makes it practically impossible to relate naturally occuring dynamics in a fully explaining and rational, logical sense.

• As viewed from the related TNED deductions in physics and mathematics, the Planck equivalents apparently explains (Introduction) the essential details as illustrated above in MULTIPLEc[‡]. Cosmic radiation energy observations on the Planck equivalents’ explaining frame, apparently connect a more rich background and explaining base to the measured quantities. Especially the most energetically high of these observations (the 16 Joule = 1 T20 eV example): Its demanding rational answer is apparently impossible to reproduce with present (13 T12 eV) particle c-limited accelerators.

• Along with the impulse (linear momentum p=mv) providing equality on Planck equivalents (Introduction): not at all with any kind of electric instrumentation.

• As related below (Wikipedia, Observable universe) the academic attitude to a multiple c issue also seems (greatly) compromised — only bringing further disorder to a possible ACADEMIC resolution for a cosmic unitive idea of physics: consensus is still no scientific subject. But a related answer is.

MACcREF: MULTIPLEc

MODERN ACADEMIC MULTIPLE c example:

Compare the modern academic ”accumulated expansion”

(Wikipedia article Observable universe [1Mar2012]):

Universe age: 13.7 Gy (t = 13.7 T9 · 365.25 · 86400 S = 4.3233912 T17 S) with a radial extension of 46 T9 ly (d = 46 T9 · 3 T8 M/S · 365.25 · 86400 S = 4.3549488 T26 M) giving a mean expanding velocity (v=d/t)/(c=3T8 M/S) = 3.357664234 c:

• Not even in modern quarters can a reasonable explanation be given to our cosmic situation without ideas of a multiple c.

• Compare the corresponding average vEXP from the TNED deduced K-cell expansion [***present t = 20.82 Gy on radius [K-cell Mass and Radius] r = (T²Gm₂/2)^1/3 with m₂=4.1747 T53 KG], r=1.818 T26 M;

(v=d/t)/(c=3T8 M/S) = 0,9224150675 c.

From the first surge, the expansion velocity is humongous but short [ref.: EarthMass2021IAU.ods T3 G53].

————— ***

20.82 Gy: PROVING VERIFICATION: MoonRecession.

• Modern academy has all the data on the table: geological compositions both in Earth and Moon crust, especially the radioactive material on Moon (up to ten times higher than on Earth). It is all lying there — except this one: TIME. The modern academic 5 billion years (5 Gy ¦ 4.35) fits excellently with FIRST WATER ON EARTH SURFACE fact (The NASA Article 2005). But THAT BY ITSELF is a too short time for relating all the puzzling pieces together: not enough time. The TNED deduction makes is (gallantly — especially on the radioactive part introducing some extra controversy into modern corridors).

Everything fits, as the glove over the hand.

FAST CWON on CAP:

• All celestial bodies — beginning from a Dmax — develop concentric atomic production (IronCore) with a last (LGD) surface neutron decay — hydrogen long before any local starlight appears — these need some start up time (»typical Windows Operating System»). Beneath is a layer of oxygen (and further layers of other elements and their mixes below [NeutronMatrices]). It is the last phase on the primary geophysical celestial body’s build up: At the celestial body’s surface is forming ICE. More or less, depending on primary body mass. ICE (BAref3, comets as ”dirty rocks of ice”), IceVERSIONgraph — THE ICE detailed.

Related physics and mathematics solutions

EXEMPLIFYING ON THE MOST PROMINENT OBSERVATION

— the rare 16 Joule = 1 T20 eV Earth atmosphere cosmic radiation energy surge observation range:

Problem:

ALSO TNED — related mathematics and physics — would stand flat with no answer — IF the 16 Joule energetic cosmic particle impacting Earth’s atmosphere would — really — be a one single proton. No such TNED/related cosmic sources exist:

The necessary velocity parameter v on the E = mv²/2 = 16J on the far (TNED) available sources needs a rough v=461500c0. Even if a such ejecta exists in a TNED deduced ideal macrocosmic c0-space,

SolenT2022.ods T4 N64

A Dmax sphere with radius ca 9% of the distance Earth-Sun has a corresponding gravitationally energy collected surface ejection capacity of v = 461 500 c0.

• That is apparently NOT the type object [K-cell mass / 208000] we are trying to relate the 16 Joule cosmic radiation impact energy on. See vREF.

1.:

• the far out dim universe rim edges where the last (TNED deducible) divergence ignitions existed

• will set up definite conditions that exclude certain masses and exhibit others as potential candidates. And

2.:

• in any case all with considerably lower v, and with a demanded higher mass than only one neutron. See Original Debris.

The only possible remaining solution[‡1]¦[‡2] consists of a very small (picometer = t12 M) Dmax neutron bead on a considerably lower ejecta velocity (3-15c0), as suggested[‡]: exact time on perfect assembly. Mechanics. No electric.

• Because a pure kinetic explanation contradicts an already 100 year accepted relativistic sensational cosmology, no established instance will take a kinetic argument seriously — unless further proved on some explicitly (very, exceptionally — »ultra high») strong foundation.

TheTEXPLAN: MULTIPLEc ¦ Introduction

The TNED EXPLANATION — Light’s — macroscopic electric and magnetic interaction physics — Gravitational Dependency (LGD):

The continuous birth of stars and galaxies — high energy surges — as the K-cell — our universe — continues to expand: beginning from Dmax:

HOW the K-cell evolves — DebrisOrigin

Given The Seven Principles of Physics in Universe History [APARC, FUNTOP, POM, NEONS, GRIP, DEEP and PASTOM], only [P4] Newton’s Three are known in modern quarters, the rest gave itself up with not much resistance: like pouring water from one bucket to another. No big deal. However, it took its sweet time.

See also from EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATIONS.

• The general K-cell cosmological property (General State Equation) resembles that of an organic cell (The c0-body): The Energy Law — energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only converted — certifies that any ultimate origin of mass — gravitation: energy — is impossible to relate: no origin: »modern academy’s favorite pet». Following the lead, the resulting mathematics and physics points out a cosmic central pulsating K-cell (half period some 336 Gy). Its explanation is all based on the central Light’s Gravitational Dependency (LGD) explaining all the mathematical details. The energy law: mass can be given no rational idea of an ultimate origin. Its energy content (E=hf=mc²) is a detailed relatable never created, impossible to destroy provision in physics science — necessary for bringing the light out.

• The surrounding c0-body[‡] in negative divergence certifies that its dormant non decaying neutrons follow the central K-cell contraction with a filling up of the vacancies from the previous corresponding neutron mass in the expanding period that was spent on mass destructions for light and heat. That certifies the energy budget and guarantees the pulsing:

• The refill exactly replaces what was spent on light and heat in mass destructions from the previous period.

In modern corridors (1800+), one has adopted the idea that our universe (the K-cell) is the only existential, rational och logical mass holder. A limited mass it is, modern academy says. And hence a dead end — contradictory — energy explanation: »life has no meaning beyond the death, lights out, of this present universe».

Not directly so proclaimed, but so directly interpreted. Joy everywhere in modern corridors. Very positive attitudes. MustBuyBook.

• One thing we humans KNOW for sure: Everywhere we look, there is ALWAYS more mass behind. So: from where — the idea — NOT? Please share. Apparently not from under the stars: consensus is still no scientific subject. But a related answer is: nature.

Beginning from a DENSITYmax:

AFTER »THE BIG BANG» — universe begins to expand (again) — the Dmax neutron masses follow a history of DIVERGENCE IGNITION: a c-traveling WAVE FRONT — light propagation-divergence governed by gravitation (LGD) — follows the expanding K-cell mass bodies as they divide into smaller. At its rim the J-bodies enter a positive divergence: the neutron masses begin to decay.

When they do, related physics identifies these as The GRB-objects at the present rim of our visual universe:

• The (very) high energy surges release (enormous) amounts of energy when the neutron decay takes over. Formation of the local bodies’ material elements begin building heavier elements from lighter by the Dmax spontaneously tight occurring fusion reactions (FusionRings).

• However the TNED calculation have no chance in explaining a single neutron or proton up to the mentioned high linear momentum levels (the 16 Joule example), as observed and reported in the Earth’s atmosphere (the counting of my-mesons). But a neutron bead can. And then again: completely outside electric particle accelerator provisions.

The SUMMINGreference (Introduction) and MULTIPLEc illustration give the general TNED explaining details with links.

With further tests on the experimentally known results — all of them, all branches as known here — The Planck Equivalents show a consistent resulting picture — no deviations: explaining the overall reported instrumental observations — or not at all.

MULTIPLEc

TheSolarEclipses: Proving the light deflection from the eclipses ¦ MULTIPLEc ¦ ExperimentalConfirmations

LIGHT PHYSICS DOES NOT CONNECT KINETICS

THE SOLAR ECLIPSES EXPEDITIONS 1900+ ¦ TwoArguments

MODERN ACADEMY (1800+) does not reason so.

• But it uses the same end mathematics:

e = rc²/2Gm₂

light has no connection to kinetics — a light path does not exhibit centrifugal — no mass — force properties — no way:

• So the simple mathematical deduction is to remove the centrifugal aspect factor from the general celestial — kinetic — normals.

• Same end mathematics — simple Classics — as is claimed from established corridors — claiming »relativistic explanations».

———————————————

POTENTIAL BARRIER — apparently unknown in modern quarters ¦ LGD — apparently unknown Concept in modern quarters ¦ TwoArguments

Dodge that one, if you can, Modern Academy (normally so full of denial and utter contempt to any aspect questioning its already established authority):

• Light develops not centrifugation (The Kepler-Newton Kinetic Trajectory).

Explanation:

• KNOWING that Light propagation has no kinetic properties — no centrifugation — the easiest way to deduce (LIGHTPATHS IN GRAVITATIONFIELDS) the trajectory math for a light path associated with a central mass is to double the gravitating factor. That is because (Application 1 — KEPLER MOMENTUM BASICS) kinetics associated with central action physics is based on a balance between centrifugal- and centripetal tug (Application 2 — The Gravitation Law).

• That leads us to the final end mathematics as deduced. See further from e = rc²/2Gm₂.

• See also Max Planck on the PHOTON concept.

Modern academy rejected Planck’s suggestion that the photo electric effect reflected properties of the atom, not of light. So, instead: modern academy adopted the Einstein idea of perfectly massless inductive quanta [COEI in related physics: E=UQ-basics] as a moving particle: excellent for mathematical treatises [You know .. 1 2 3 ..]. But completely worthless — and hefty misleading — in explaining the deep of physics ¦ Planck’s idea was — apparently — on the verge of discovering a way to deduce the atomic nucleus, as it seems. But that type of line-thinking was not approved at the time — and still isn’t in modern corridors — and never will be: modern academic suicide if so.

Background:

• It is perfectly valid to state that the deflection of light near Sun follows the (first 1900s relativistic proposed) expression aRADIANS = 4Gm₂/rc² and NOT the Newton physics 2Gm₂/rc². Yes.

• But it is also a perfectly valid claim to state that Newton physics — kinetics — does not connect to the phenomena. Not at all. Newton had no idea of LIGHT’S GRAVITATIONAL DEPENDENCY. No way. And present modern academic aces seem even less acquainted:

• Light physics develops no centrifugation — resembles no moving mass particles.

• And it is therefore incorrect, and only stupid, to introduce Newton physics in a comparing battle between classic and relativistic physics: they have nothing in common.

• Modern academy aces seem to have grasped that too — but definitely not its content.

We study the details of that in the following.

Tables:

SolenT2022.ods T1 A51

———————————————

Electric Constant — enhancing the IAU-test precision on G and mS — see also TheRESULT on the Perihelion Precessions ¦ TheGtest and TheElectricConstant on G and mS

The comparing CalCard cell blocks show slight (measurably insignificant) values, all inside the already claimed general accepted 1.75’’ result. It should be noted, though as already established, that the measuring technique is quite far from any direct precision in significands. The end value precision highly depends on the measured (or estimated) light beam radial distance from the ideal gravitational center. The only reasonable instrumentation to make such measuring accurate is from high altitude satellites where Earth atmospheric distorting phenomena is minimal. The last remarkable argument: Solar eclipses of the 1919+ kind expeditions happen only with intervals of thousands of years.

— The B(Einstein) values have used the present established standard (Wikipedia) values for G = 6.6743 t11 JM/[KG]² and mS = 1.98847 T30 KG.

— The B(LGD) values have used results on G and mS from the present (Nov-Dec2022) IAU-test charts: G = 6.6701000093 t11 JM/[KG]² and mS = 1.98963199773 T30 KG. These values also certify the results on the perihelion precession calculations and their comparing measures, as well as the planet’s anomalistic periods. See TheRESULT.

In a below real scale comparison between TNED (LGD) and MAC (Schwarzchild) the difference disappears towards zero as distance from a central mass approaches infinity. Exemplifying the established Solar radius (6.957 T8 M), the c-relation in TNED/MAC is the practically insignificant figure 1.000002123 with a c-difference (r=6.657 T8 M) of cTNED — cSCH = 636.356 965 839 900 M/S. With the observed light deflection near Sun (The Eddington expedition 1919+) this difference is, what we know, apparently totally insignificant.

Large central mass distances r makes the difference between the two c-results disappear. Schwarzchild w² = GmS/r. GmS=1.

For light’s deflection near the Sun, the present instrumental resolution is, what we know, not sufficient if the examination is

to determine who is which in what.

And, as seen by the comparing end values (the established claimed deflection 1.75’’), they are also practically the same as seen by the limited resolution of the measuring instrumentation.

So: We should not wonder on the amaze the Solar Eclipse expedition awoke around year 1920 when it was clear — on stated assumptions — that it was the

4Gm₂/rc² (1.75’’) and NOT the Newton physics 2Gm₂/rc² (0.87’’)

that won the match.

— Intelligence in Modern Academy is apparently on the Up (global Joy1).

The Related/Schwarzchild differences:

• There is what we know, no reasonable way to settle the question on the narrow c-margins.

• Only with a (macroscopic) high value central mass the differences become measurably significant;

• Light deflection near Sun is apparently not the object for settling the c-differences as such.

• The Solar Eclipse expedition (1919+) and its result on the Schwarzchild c-formula expression, is said to have been the turning point when Einstein’s theory of relativity won a world wide fame.

Why?

• Because it was held, and still is in modern corridors, that the result launched ”a new theory of gravitation”. That was some deeply sensational News. Not »a new discovery in physics» named Light’s Gravitational Dependency: light connects NOT to kinetics. No sir. No way. That is how DRIFT works. Say.

— Natural Insight in Humanity is apparently on the Up (global Joy2).

Proving the nature of light

— by comparing established ideas of its nature on already well known observations:

— All celestial — mechanical: kinetic — orbits have these gravitational properties:

• They develop centrifugation (Coriolis Effect — Coriolis’ first theorem 1882)

on changes in linear motion (rotation).

• Light propagation has no known quality of gravitation — no centrifugation

LIGHT (GripDeep)

— divergence, electricity and magnetism — is

• different for all matter, can be shielded from: time dependent

GRAVITATION — convergence — is

• equal for all matter, can NOT be shielded from: time independent;

• They (Gpotential) are deduced (The CEPH Equation) from Kepler Momentum Mathematics.

Light paths should hence neither have any centrifugation property in any exposed (orbital) path. Such as for example the one (Solar eclipses 1919+) close to a (high) gravitating mass (as our Sun: the measuring expeditions 1919+). That is also the mathematical explanation, as exposed in this article.

TheSolarEclipses — Light physics does not connect kinetics

THE PHYSICS OF LIGHT AND ITS KINETIC LIBERTY

The only reasonable here known voice of its time was Max Planck (ref. Gamow, Thirty Years That Shook Physics, 1966, Swedish version p33). He concluded that the Photoelectric Effect reflected properties of the atoms. Not properties of light. Related physics: light is massless, propagates massless (and so proven in explicit by the Eclipse experiments 1919+). But has electromagnetic quanta (photons: COEI in related physics: conservation of energy by induction) capable of exchanging their energy with matter (The Compton effect) ¦ PotentialBarrier ¦ ComptonEffectIllustrated.

— BUT: »Modern Academy constantly fucks with nature» (TheLIST ¦ persistently 1800+ insisting on introducing academic consensus — agreed inventions, not deductions: INVENTING (InertialSystem) still new ideas (”dark energy”) of interpretations — based on already established more basic inventions SAFELY SECURING THEIR FUTURE SURVIVAL TOO. Perhaps the most prominent of these highly beloved academic pets is the illustrated v+ic-error below. The short version: PRESERVATION OF an already increasingly apparent surface minded idea of cosmic existential purposefulness) — because having invented the above hinted menu of Blocking Ideas. And so an Academic Consensus formed a specific such future (please do disclaim) by consequences: DRIFT. Not plan.

ThePlanckWay: The Solar Eclipses

The right way

— Planck equivalents:

The System’s mass and energy are preserved constant — Planck Equivalents:

m₀c² = mcc_u = constant = E: no mass is created, no mass is destroyed. u = electrically accelerated charge speed:

Q = √ (m/R)(A/dT) follows Planck Equivalents: m and R varies exact in proportion as certified by a constant charge Q

Q is electrically — light — accelerated by U to a velocity u — never even touching c, no matter the energy input.

TheEinsteinError: ThePlanckWay The v+ic-error:

Light physics does not connect kinetics

The wrong way:

The v+ic error

ADOPTING [1905] »The c Cocoon Association»: ”nothing is faster than c”— by DRIFT. Not plan:

— »NOTHING CAN TRAVEL FASTER THAN c»: the v+ic error in Einstein’s Special Relativity Equations:

There are no known physical laws in our universe proving that light connects to kinetics.

No way ¦ ProvingTheEclipses: Light develops not centrifugation: no Kepler-Newton classic celestial orbits.

— By erroneously featuring an idea that light propagation c and kinetic velocity v ARE additive — compromising v on credit of c — we EASILY derive the Einstein’s special relativity basic equations as above. See the math details part in the original Swedish edition of the The v+ic error, unless already familiar. Planck equivalents[‡] it is. Electric and Mechanic does not match. No way.

While the Einstein solution introduces ELECTRIC features as a The Universe Authority [PlanckRelatedEquivalents] — and the following 1900s scientific development apparently became very much characterized by That Electric part [6Aug1945+: Hiroshima, Nagasaki] — the Mechanics part [Days of Thunder, Tom Cruise 1990 — car industry in general] went in a state of permanent oblivion as even a possible SUCH candidate.

GRIP DEEP:

LIGHT DOES NOT CONNECT KINETICS. NO WAY.

— No such observable, provable or relatable physics exist. PROOF on already well known historical experimentation:

ProvingTheEclipses:

TheEinsteinError

PROVING the light path trajectory from THE Solar ECLIPSES 1919+

THE SOLAR ECLIPSES EXPEDITIONS 1919+

Deflection of light by the Sun —— The Eddington experiment and expedition [1919+]

light has no connection to kinetics — a light path does not exhibit centrifugal — mass — force properties

Gpotential: Proving

EXACTLY NEWTON’S CLASSICAL CELESTIAL ORBITS (The CEPH Equation: CircleEllipseParabolaHyperpola)

— minus the centrifugation aspect : no mass property: same observed light path, same math, same value:

• As deduced from the Kepler Area Momentum CENTRAL ACTION mathematical physics: kinetics

Deducing the elementary velocity expressions [CephEquationDeduced] beginning from the normal distance d=r on x;y=0;0 for the different types of orbits gives

v_n²= (1+e)Gm₂/r where v[n] is the normal velocity at start, e is the characteristic eccentricity, and m2 is the central mass on distance r=d from the orbiting object and G the universal gravitation constant.

With e=—1: a free fall ¦ v[n] ² =0; e=0: the circle ¦ v[n] ² =Gm₂/r; e=1: the parabola ¦ v[n] ² =2Gm₂/r; and e>1: the hyperbola ¦ v[n] ² = [1+e]Gm₂/r. THE EQUILIBRIUM between g-force and centrifugal force for an orbital mass m at distance r=r from a central mass m₂ is defined within Mechanics through the gravitation potential w²=Gm₂/r from F = ma = Gm₂m/r², Fr = mar = Gm₂m/r, Fr/m = ar = Gm₂/r = [M/S²]M = [M/S]² = w². It hence works independent of the orbiting body’s mass quantity — centrifugation by mass.

WHEREAS the g-force F is directly proportional to the central mass m₂, which for all massive bodies corresponds to an exact balancing centrifugal force[‡A1], defining the actual path of the orbit at any moment in time, weather it is in a state of increase or decrease,

• our closest nearest way for eliminating the centrifugal aspect would be the simple test of doubling the centripetal (gravitating) g-force. Analogously: doubling the central mass.

On the kinetic-mechanic gravitation-centrifugation balancing credit in concern of a hyperbolic orbit path

• the result is — apparently — forced to accept a net zero removed not acting at all centrifugal influence

— our related light physics liberty from kinetics: light does not connect kinetics See more related from LightPathsInGfields.

v[n] ² = [1+e]2Gm₂/r, = c² for a light path close to the visual rim of our Sun [Solar eclipses from 1919]:

• The Mechanical — kinetic, v — motional aspect of the moving object ceases. And is replaced by a massless gravitationally controlled CONDITION OF PROPAGATION on the speed of light — ideally as in empty space vacuum.

The eccentric number then yields

• e = (rc²/2Gm₂) — 1.

TNED related values — see extended electric constant IAU-test

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

m₂ = 1.98963199771721 T30 KG, our Sun mass from

rG = 6.96575835977117 T8 M. the electro-gravital Solar Rim Radius

G = 6.67010000933003 t11 JM/[KG]², gravitation constant

c = c₀ = 2.99792458 T8 M/S, top speed light propagation in vacuum

rS = 6.957 T8 M established Solar radius [Wikipedia, Solar radius]

The deflection depends [on precise measures] on the radial distance from Sun’s center:

Not specified in available sources — »visible rim» [rS] appears implied.

Here e (236 431) becomes much larger than 1, giving a hyperbola just slightly different from a straight line. Apart form the minus 1 the simplification gives us

e = rc²/2Gm₂ ......... Proving the light path trajectory

Further familiar with the CEPH-geometry [here in PREFIXxSIN] our hyperbolic e is equal to 1/cosH, H equal to the hyperbolic asymptotic angle. The total deviating hyperbolic light path then with e=1/cosH, cosH=1/e, becomes

a = 2cosH = 2/rc²/2Gm₂ = 4Gm₂/rc² ..... the light deviation around the central mass

INCLUDING (LGD) LIGHT’S GRAVITATIONAL DEPENDENCY

(we use the local real c instead of the general c0):

Gm₂/rc² = 1 — 2/(1 + 1/√1 — 4Gm₂/rc₀²) ;

:

c = c₀(1/2)(1 + √ 1 — 4Gm₂/rc₀²) ; Deduction

= c₀(1/2)(1 + √ 1 — 4[P]) ;

c² = c₀²(1/4)(1 + √ 1 — 4[P])² ;

= c₀²/[(4) / (1 + √1 — 4[P])²]

= c₀²[P]/[(4[P]) / (1 + √1 — 4[P])²]

= c₀²[P]/[(1 — R²) / (1 + R)²]

= c₀²[P]/[(1 — R)(1 + R) / (1 + R)²]

= c₀²[P]/[(1 — R) / (1 + R)]

= c₀²[P]/[(1 — √1 — 4[P]) / (1 + √1 — 4[P])]

= c₀²[P]/[(1 + √1 — 4[P]) — (2√1 — 4[P]) / (1 + √1 — 4[P])]

= c₀²[P]/[1 — 2√1 — 4[P] / (1 + √1 — 4[P])]

= c₀²[P]/[1 — 2/(1 + 1/√1 — 4[P])]

= c₀²(Gm₂/rc₀²)/[1 — 2/(1 + 1/√1 — 4Gm₂/rc₀²)]

= Gm₂/r[1 — 2/(1 + 1/√1 — 4Gm₂/rc₀²)]

Gm₂/rc² = 1 — 2/(1 + 1/√1 — 4Gm₂/rc₀²) ;

The same result is claimed from established centers — based on mathematics from Albert Einsteins general theory of relativity: Same end expression. No sign of Einstein. No way.

Small H-values directly corresponds to a radian angle (in PREFIXxSIN: cos1° = 0.0174524 = 0.0174532RAD). The a-value here gives (LGD) with the above specified Gm₂ rG c₀ values

a = 8.479207885 t6. With a in degrees (a° = 180a/π, or direct from arccos a) hence

a° = 4.858228254 t4 = 1.7489621716 ’’ — rounded

= 1.75 ’’ .................. =1.75 arc seconds:

Calculated values [B(Einstein), Schwarzchild] with standard constants (general Source: Wikipedia) using the c-expression from Schwarzchild’s solution (LGD ¦ Tables) give so small comparing differences between TNED and MAC that these, what we know, are completely irrelevant to the resolution of the measuring instrumentation.

SolenT2022.ods T1 A51

” Sammanfattningsvis kan vi säga att en ljusstråle som passerar nära en tung partikel kommer att böjas i första hand beroende på den icke-euklidiska karaktären av kombinationen av tid och rum. Denna krökning motsvarar den som beror på den Newtonska gravitationen och kan beräknas på det vanliga sättet under antagande att ljus har tyngd liksom en materiell kropp. I andra hand kommer den att krökas beroende på den icke-euklidiska karaktären av rummet ensamt, en böjning som ej förutsägs av Newtons lag. Om vi kan observera krökningen av en ljusstråle kan vi utföra ett prov som avgör huruvida Einsteins eller Newtons teori gäller .. 1,75’’ (Einsteins teori .. 0,87’’ (Newtons teori) ..”., Arthur Eddington from Newman 1959 The World of Mathematics 1956 Band2 Chapter 21, Sw., En matematikens kulturhistoria. Here freely [back] translated:

SUMMING UP we can say that a ray of light passing near a heavy particle will bend on a first hand depending on the non-euclidean character of the combination time and space. This bending corresponds to the one depending on the Newtonian gravitation and can be calculated the usual way under the assumption that light has weight as a material body. On a second hand it will bend depending on the non-euclidean character of space alone, a bending that is not predictable by Newton's law. If we can observe the bending we can perform a test which determines weather Einstein's or Newton's theory holds .. 1.75'' (Einstein's theory) .. 0.87'' (Newton's theory) ..

(Excuse me: we have read a lot of eminent descriptions in the known history of science. But this part from Eddington seems to take a price of its own).

The value 1.75’’ is the standard astronomically specified reported from the 1919+ Solar eclipse observations:

• The light path follows a curvature free from centrifugation properties.

— The Eddington assumption as quoted apparently has no physical solidity.

— If it HAD centrifugation properties, mass, it WOULD apply to a regular Kepler-Newton kinetic trajectory: it didn’t.

• Which, apparently, is the exact mathematical classical Kepler-Galilei-Newton physical explanation:

• LIGHT DOES NOT CONNECT KINETICS: e = rc²/2Gm₂ it is. See also TwoArguments.

Conclusion:

• There is no relativity theory applications in the real world physics. No way.

(»Mathematics conquered modern academy, and led it on a path it did not know». Drift. Not plan).

The result — apparently — advocated the birth of a new branch in physics (LGD) that modern academy never got to.

Some quotes:

ResearchGate — PDF [26Dec2022]

THE 1919 EDDINGTON ECLIPSE, 2019

Domingos Soares ¦ Federal University of Minas Gerais - Brazil

:

” Modern science is both authority-driven and — a novelty — money-driving.

The prototype of the authority-driven type is the 1919 astronomical missions

to observe a solar eclipse and designed to “prove” that General Relativity

Theory (GRT) was right in a particular prediction, namely, the amount of

light deflection by a massive body.”,

:

” It is worthwhile mentioning at this point that none of later solar eclipse missions in 1922, 1929, 1936, 1947 and 1952 yielded conclusive results about the amount of light deflection (Newtonian or Einsteinian, cf. [10, p. 68]). The GRT result has been indeed confirmed later by observations in the radio wavelength range.

Only recently, from observations of the total solar eclipse on August 21st, 2017, it was claimed that the 1.75 arc second bending was observed in visible light, with an accuracy of 3% (cf. [11]).

It is an instructive exercise to compare the extreme rigor, the modern techniques and instrumentations used in ref. [11] with the rough experiment undertaken in the Dyson-Eddington missions. The impossibility of a conclusive result therein will clearly emerge.

Nobody really knew, then, the specifics of the data reduction process realized

by Dyson in conjunction with Eddington. Marmet and Couture, Appendix C [9]

describes the praise of authority in a section of the Royal Astronomical Society:

The results from the 1919 expedition were quickly accepted by the scientific community. When preliminary results were announced, Joseph Thomson (from the Chair) said:

“It is difficult for the audience to weigh fully the meaning of the figures that have been put before us, but the Astronomer Royal [Dyson] and Prof. Eddington have studied the material carefully, and they regard the evidence as decisively in favor of the larger value for the displacement.”

”,

ResearchGate — PDF [26Dec2022]

THE 1919 EDDINGTON ECLIPSE, 2019

Domingos Soares ¦ Federal University of Minas Gerais - Brazil

Absolutely.

e = rc²/2Gm₂ it is. See also TwoArguments.

Conclusion: AS SO ALREADY Stated:

LIGHT DOES NOT CONNECT KINETICS. NO WAY.

See also Two Arguments.

TheSolarEclipses

Suns4: LightAndGravitation: — LGD — The Einstein Error ¦ ThePerihelionPrecessions

PART OF elementary related AND DEDUCED STAR PHYSICS

INTRODUCTION TO THE PLANETARY PERIHELION PHENOMENA — A FULL DYNAMICS EXPLANATION

Related physics description

Of the Sun’s 4 TNED Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law connected and deduced heat degrees

T Tg Tw Tp — only the Planck heat degree Tp is known in modern academy

three have a direct cr connectivity to the corresponding cr factors in the perihelion precession complex. The three-row table, left below, shows the associated constants. But only one of them — if at all — can have a fully rational and relatable, quantitative, provable connection. The resolution of that exciting task is given further below in CaseClosed and (fully mathematically) in TheExperiment.

The mathematics of the planetary perihelion precessons according to classic mechanics RELATED PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS — relativity theory ideas expires.

EXACT MATH — cr perihelion precession background:

The Sun’s 4 heat degrees all emanate and are deduced in related physics and mathematics from Stefan-Boltzmann’s radiation law —

——————————————— ¦

SOLENS VÄRMEGRADER ¦ Solens 4 Värmegrader — Kalkyl ¦

Used constants:

Illustration’s designations (original Jan2008) — related physics and mathematics — we leave no one behind:

m₂ actual at present star mass ¦ see Sun mass analysis : 1.989661830 T30 KG ¦ further in ElectricConstant

m_A atomic Hydrogen weight: U = 1.0078252: actual mass: m_A = Uu — u atomic mass unit ¦ HOPtable

r₀ Proton radius: 1.37 t15 M — based on pioneer scattering experiments: 1.37 Fermi. See further tests in the NeutronSquare.

u atomic mass unit, Carbon12/12, = 1.66033 t27 KG

G gravitation constant — see TheG-test ¦ old school [1966-2000] nominal value [HOP] 6.67 t11 JM/[KG]²

R Star Anvil Radius: SunR = 4012 M [ from DayOne ..]

r distance from R — BasicEPSmath has adopted/compromised R as »distance from Sun» [ r, elliptic orbit’s half minor axis]

a absorption coefficient, nominal 2/3 for all first class hydrogen normal stars

k_P 2k/c₀ : 3.781904041 t16 NM^–2°K^–4

k_e electric vacuum constant: 1/ 4πε₀ : 8.98744 T9 VM/C

e elementary charge-quantum — electron charge : 1.602 t19 C

ρ_C rho: maximum Coulomb density on given star atom base m_A — primary Hydrogen:

8.13444 T16 KG/M³ = mA / [ 2r0 ]³ = 1.0078252u/[2·1.37 t15M]³

b Boltzmann constant: 1.380550287753 t23 J/°K

k 2π · b⁴π⁴/(15h³c₀²) Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law constant, as deduced , = 5.6699807232 t8 WM^–2°K^–4

h Planck constant: 6.62559 t34 JS

kW 2.89794 t3 M°K Wien law constant

c₀ light’s linear free space divergence velocity: 2.99792458 T8 M/S

Z atomic number — primary stars = 1, Hydrogen base

ρ rho: actual shell/spherical density: 3m₂/(4πr³) — also accounted for over any distance [r] from Sun ; D=m/Vsphere

γ_P gamma: γ_P = p – p_e = g-pressureCONTRACTIVE minus e-pressureEXPANSIVE¦Coulomb pressureRepulsion

p_e Coulomb pressure : k_e(Ze/πr₀r)²

p gravitational contractive pressure : G(m₂/r)²/4πr², = G(m₂)²/4πr⁴ = 4πG(ρr/r)² = ρ^4/3(4π)^1/3G(m₂)^2/3

γ_P = G(m₂)²/4πr⁴ – k_e(Ze/πr₀)²/r² ; only AS pe becomes negligible outside StartSurface, GAMMAp varies as

γ_P := G(m₂)²/4πr⁴ discernible Coulomb pressure outside star surface

Results: LightAandGravitation

Sun’s Four Temperature Degrees, as deduced:

Concordant with comparing quantities on magnetism, sun spots, sun period, corona physics,

and all other foremost studied details of our Sun — especially the Photometric Effect: The IAU Test (Oct2018):

— The general UniverseHistory cosmological test (»love me or leave me»): a direct hit.

In modern academy only the Planck temperature TP is known:

— Why? No atomic nucleus deduction. Not even a hint. Not a sound. Not a spell. Not one word: No Dmax Begin: no StarANVIL. No Nothing. Why? Ask them. Say again.

• Look up any available source in any available instance: there are no other references to the results here other than the results here — unless deduced likewise. Say.

As deduced from the above parameters in UniverseHistory [2008+]: In modern academy only the Plack temperature TP is known:

T = (4πG/ak_P)^1/4r^–3/2(ρ_CR⁴/3)^1/2 °K heat degree radial variation, Sun’s first equation — ceases at Sun’s g-surface

TP = (P_{3.84 T26}/a[4πr²]k_{5,7 t8})^1/4 °K Planck radiation — not represented inside Sun’s g-surface ¦ [ 3.84 first approximation ]:

= (√1/r)(P_{3.84 T26}/a[4π]k_{5,7 t8})^1/4 = (√1/r)·constant ;

r = (constant/TP)² ; checked TP

Tγ = (γ_P/ak_P)^1/4 °K temperature equivalent thermo nuclear radiation pressure — extends limitless from R

:= ([G(m₂)²/4πr⁴]/ak_P)^1/4 = r^–1([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^1/4 ; Sun’s coronal radiation physics, as deduced

r = (Tγ)^–1([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^1/4 ; direct proportionality to Star distance — over shorter time periods:

r = (Tγ)^–1([G(m₂)²/4π]/a[2k/c₀])^1/4 ;

r = (Tγ)^–1([c₀G(m₂)²/2ak4π])^1/4 ;

r = (Tγ)^–1c₀^1/4([G(m₂)²/2ak4π])^1/4 ;

rc₀ = (Tγ)^–1c₀^5/4([G(m₂)²/2ak4π])^1/4 ; the perihelion precession cr parameters: °K.-equivalents: heat

= (Tγ)^–1 · constant ; checked Tγ

Star mass decreases as light and heat emits from E=mc² mass destruction

AminorTermConflict: LAG

The BasicEPSmath’s Rr mean distance from Sun, half minor ellipsis axis and the Suns4 Rr AnvilRadius, distance from SunCenter should be explained/clarified/elucidated in the running text (The AnvilR is explicitly not used in the following).

The reader should know that in general, what we know here, none of these following Suns4 parts have any whatsoever corresponding familiarity in present academic corridors. So, it is imperative to give exact mathematical referrences here. The reader should also know that there is an interesting — ButLOOK — resolution in this apparently present academic nature oblivion (as earlier hinted at [‡]).

TW = r^–1(m_AGm₂[kWIEN=2.89794 t3 M°K]/hc₀) ; G-energy WienTemperature equivalent

TW = (rc₀)^–1 (m_AGm₂k/h) = (rc₀)^–1(9.7129143335161 T23 °K·M²/S = H)

= H/rc₀ ; checked TW

Elliptic Designations uses R for Sun distance (r above) = ellipse’s half major axis, with r/R = E = √ 1–e² ;

r=RE ; in a corresponding rc match:

TW = H/Rc₀ = H/(r/E)c₀

= HE/rc₀ ;

rc₀ = HE/TW ;

The modern academic missing part: explaining apparently the perihelion precession physics — by mathematical/observational detail

R = (TP/constant)² = r/E ;

r = E(TP/constant)² ; part in denominator’s k-factor also includes c0; 2π· b⁴π⁴/(15h³c₀²):

TP = (P_{3.8275 T26}/a[4πr²]k_{5.7 t8})^1/4 ;

TP = ([(15h³c₀²)/(2π· b⁴π⁴)]P_{3.8275 T26}/a[4πr²])^1/4 ;

= ([(15h³c₀²)]P_{3.8275 T26}/2π·b⁴π⁴a[4πr²])^1/4

= ([(15h³c₀²)]P_{3.8275 T26}/8·b⁴π⁶a[r²])^1/4

= ([1/r]²[(15h³c₀²)]P_{3.8275 T26}/8·b⁴π⁶a)^1/4

= ([1/rc₀]²[(15h³c₀⁴)]P_{3.8275 T26}/8·b⁴π⁶a)^1/4 ;

TP⁴ = [1/rc₀]²[(15h³c₀⁴)]P_{3.8275 T26}/8·b⁴π⁶a ;

TP⁴[rc₀]² = [(15h³c₀⁴)]P_{3.8275 T26}/8·b⁴π⁶a ;

TP²[rc₀] = √([(15h³c₀⁴)]P_{3.8275 T26}/8·b⁴π⁶a) ;

= constantTP ; checked TP precisely

rc₀ = (constantTP)/TP² ; constantTP = TP²rc₀

r=RE ; in a corresponding rc match:

Rc₀ = (constantTP)/TP² ;

rc₀ = E(constantTP)/TP² ; the elliptic orbit spouse

WE FOLLOW THIS — Details in :

FormallyKeplerMath ¦ ThePerihelionPrecessions ¦ CoriolisResolution ¦ PerihelionPrecessionRotationalCenter ¦ AllKeplerMath ¦ KeplerMomentumBasics

ConcludingAllKeplerMath ¦ KeplerMomentumBasics ¦

If the reader — at this stage — can follow the following short presentation: be my guest,

A normally equipped person though, should need a few first enlightening hints to what the following is all about:

— So: If the following should fail on the reader, try the more in detail explaining elementary ThePerihelionPrecessions.

In there are connections. Should be no problem. It is all elementary AllKeplerMath.

CENTRIFUGATION v²/r and KEPLER Area Momentum vr

The » Kepler-Planck connection » — not mentioned in modern quarters, what we know:

åK = (v²/r)(vr) = v³ ; (= →) uc² : formally : v³ = v₁v₂v₃ ; v₁ = u ; v₂ = v₂ = c ; v³ → uc² ;

Dn v³ = (v³)’ = 3v² ,= CONSTANT = uc²/v₀ ; THIS makes absolutely no normal sense — on present known basis.

3v²/c² = u/v₀ ; But WAIT until The EndStationResult: PerfectAssembly.

:

The integral connects to the elementary centrifugal-Kepler/Planck area momentum complex:

ConcludingTheMath

The perihelion precession — RELATED SIMPLE-KEPLER AND PLANCK-MATHEMATICAL PHYSICS

CENTRIFUGAL(å=v²/r)KeplerAreaMomentum(K=vr) »consolidates» a v³ function — framing an extra rotation u — on c:

åK = (v²/r)(vr) = v³ ; (= →) uc² : formally : v³ = v₁v₂v₃ ; v₁ = u ; v₂ = v₂ = c ; v³ → uc² ;

u/v₀ = 3(v/c)²= 3(TanA°)² ¦ v₀ = 1/M defines unity between the two rank parts

—————————————————————————————————————

Dn (v³) = (v³)’ = 3v² = d(uc²)/dv₀ = uc²d(1)/dv₀ = uc²/v₀ ; the derivative/variant defines the function

—————————————————————————————————————

3v²/c² = u/v₀ — The Eddington form, as quoted

—————————————————————————————————————

du/dv = 3(v²/c²) ; du = 3(v²/c²) dv ; the formal integral: [see details in FORMLAWS unless already familiar]

3(v²/c²) dv = (3/c²) v² dv = (3/c²)v³/3 = v³/c² ; = → uc²/c² = u the precession ; v³ → uc² ;

åK = (v²/r)(vr) = v³ ; (= →) uc² : formally : v³ = v₁v₂v₃ ; v₁ = u ; v₂ = v₂ = c ; v³ → uc² ;

LEAD: because there are TWO different detailed physical provable domains responsible for the phenomena — gravitation and light-temperature physics — and because light has no kinetical connection (SolarEclipses: light paths develop no centrifugal force ¦ TwoArguments), we will see a phenomenal explanation to the celestial perihelion precession complex on related details that modern academy most definitely cannot handle — on both a gravitational and a light-physics based foundation — that once and for all explains and exposes relativity theory for what it is, down to its last atom.

crREF:

WHAT EXPLAINS THE PHENOMENA? We have a ”v/c” and a ”cr”. But what do they mean and tell?

THE PLANETARY PERIHELION ORBITAL PRECESSIONS

ONLY FROM THE DEDUCTION OF THE ATOMIC NUCLEUS: Planck constant: The Neutron — never known in modern academic teaching system. Not one word.

The perihelion precession rotations — first observed with planet Mercury: natural physics apparently entails phenomena readily mathematically expressible — with an apparently provable 1800+ modern academic real crappy idea of the nature behind:

THE MODERN ACADEMIC MISSING »WIFE»:

Copied significands from SolenT2022.ods T1 ¦ 27Nov2022 —— as deduced in Suns4

————————————————————————————————————————

rc₀ = E·Cg (TG)^–1 ; Cg = 5.09345773954984 T24 °K·M²/S ¦ °K TGamma

rc₀ = E·Cw (TW)^–1 ; Cw = 0.97129143335161 T24 °K·M²/S ¦ °K TWien

rc₀ = E·Cp(TP)^–2 ; Cp = 8.50996997680304 T24 °K·M²/S ¦ °K TPlanck

————————————————————————————————————————

EXCEPT FOR THE here termed PLANCK TEMPERATURE DEGREE Tp [ direrctly from Stefan-Boltzmann’s radiation law ]

— these parts are not present, not known, not understood, not even imagined IN MODERN ACADEMY.

Why is that?

— Apparently not because of any lack of intelligence. Absolutely not. But APPARENTLY rather because [‡] of a

• 1800+ deep and strange nature opposition of using its — intelligence’s, you know the Nature Brain Construct Part,

no 1800+ or other medical Juice: left, right .. 1 .. 2 .. — innate content:

• more interested in INVENTING [ The Einstein Error ] than DEDUCING.

ACTUALLY the Tp-form relates directly to the Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law

(P = aAkT⁴). However. As the entire light (c) radiation mathematics relies on The Planck radiation law

— deduced here in related physics from Planck’s Entropy Connection S = b · lnW, not Boltzmann’s

[ we use the more rich Powers n^n instead of the more narrow academic permutations n! — meaning:

the concept of STATISTICS disappears — completely: the deduction points at an exact solution ]

[ basically Ludwig Boltzmann’s concepts: b = Boltzmann’s constant ]

also its accompanying the Wien displacement law is given by deriving Planck radiation law with respect to all wavelengths. Then, all electric (light) radiative phenomena relies on the Planck radiation (law, mathematics) concept (somehow with Stefan-Boltzmann’s radiation law implied). It was (hence) convenient in Universe History to associate the Sun’s most elementary heat degree Tp on a general Planck terminology convention (Planck energy E=hf=mcr·1/t=mc²): The Sun’s Planck heat degree, Tp = (P/aAk)^1/4.

rc₀ = E · constantTγ · (Tγ)^–1 M²/S constantTγ = c₀^5/4([G(m₂)²/2ak4π])^1/4 ............................. °K · M²/S

rc₀ = E · constantTw · (Tw)^–1 M²/S constantTw = (m_HYDROGENGm₂k_WIEN/h) ............................ °K · M²/S

rc₀ = E · constantTp · (Tp)^–2 M²/S constantTp = ([(15h³c₀⁴)]P_{3.8275 T26}/8·b⁴π⁶a)^0.5 .. °K² · M²/S

Increasing the number of — precision — constants

RETURNS EITHER A WEAKER (bad basics) or a stronger (WELL RELATED) THEORY

THE rc SOURCES IDENTIFIED

— the planetary perihelion precessions

— experimental mechanical principle

Deducing the planetary perihelion precession phenomena from Kepler’s Third (also a basic centrifugation Kepler momentum math: v²/r · vr = v³) needs a completing pair of components: the cr pair (AllKeplerMath). But in celestial mechanics light does not connect kinetics the ”c” is compromising. It apparently suggests that the precession phenomena has electric-magnetic features — a stand with no, zero, known attesting observed physics: more parameters are needed for that. In relativity theory — where it is held that gravitation propagates with velocity c in a mathematically complex of ”space curvature” — the cr factors »were introduced naturally». And so a relativistic mathematical formula was synthesized, precisely matching the observed Mercury precession — and later others too. On that credit, the general relativity theory gained a solid established trust. Here, in related physics, the cr-factors have a classical physics explanation — based on (partly, mostly..) unknown (read: never related) phenomena in modern corridors (which was to be expected .. [‡]):

— Sun’s 4 heat degrees. Only one of them is known in MAC: the Planck temperature. But all four are derived from Stefan-Boltzmann’s radiation law — on credit of the related physics deduction of the atomic nucleus: also unknown in modern quarters: thermo nuclear radiation pressure (best attested by Corona physics phenomena and quantities ..).

THERE ARE (3) cr STAR/Sun THERMO NUCLEAR RADIATIVE PRESSURE TEMPERATURE EQUIVALENTS

EXPLAINING THE MATHEMATICS — COMPLETELY

on a nuclear physical basis and scale that never were discovered in modern academy — apparently and provably down to last atomic nucleus. Why? Apparently Because nobody in modern quarters never cared do deduce the atomic nucleus. As related: Planck constant h=mcr, The Neutron with the following exposed Neutron Square — the atomic masses, practically identical with the ones already measured. Familiar as a spouse to the mass Kepler area momentum K= mvr: T¦GammaWienPlanck — all from star thermonuclear reactions in ways modern academy apparently never cared to investigate: unrepresented;

Extraction from the more exhaustive AllKeplerMath:

—————————————————————

6πRGm₂ = 24π³R⁴/T² ; R⁴/(Tcr)² = R²/(Tc)²/(1–e²) ; (R/r)² = 1/(1–e²)

6πRGm₂/(cr)² = 24π³R⁴/(Tcr)² ; what we know: substituting cr/cr=1 does not introduce relativistic arguments.

= 24π³R²/(Tc)²/(1–e²) ; also The Wikipedia/Einstein RADIAN expression ¦ 1–e² = E² = (r/R)²

= 6π(v/c)² ; THE RADIAN EXPRESSION

:

rc₀ .................. = CE(TW)^–1 ; E large eccentricity coefficient r/R, H °K·M²/S constant, TW °K G-energy Wien-temperature equivalent;

r(TW) ............ = CE/c₀ ; constant for a given elliptic orbit — elementary Deduced Related Star Physics

THESE KEPLER/PLANCK DEDUCED DETAILS ARE APPARENTLY ABSTRACT TO MODERN ACADEMY: never represented.

The cr phenomena apparently has nothing at all to do with relativity ideas: no math, no physics. No way. Just simple elementary Kepler and Planck math — complemented over elementary mathematical substitution: 1 = (A/A)^n. No relativity ideas what so ever. So:

• APPARENTLY based on physics completely unknown in modern corridors.

— Why? How? Test most (historically) popular answer [‡]: »so many cannot be wrong» — the book of wisdom by the many:

— »We already know everything»:

• Once the herd of the crowds have started to move in their daily circle — merits, education, job — no single individual claim will make them stop and turn.

• No way.

• If we suckers are going to stop and turn, it can only happen by our own will.

Nature2022:

EDUCATIONAL BASICS — morality, code of ethics, and social intercourse

How humanity handles The environment reflects the level of cultural scientifically educated population intelligence. Say. We surrender immediately.

SWEDEN 2018 — once a placid place .. and growing .. as bad as it can be ..

Sweden is exaggerating its further global governmental care for Universal Animal Rights .. MustBuyBook.

— VEGETATION — Leaf&Needle — was apparently intended — nervous system construct — for maintenance of basic biological NATURAL HEALTH CARE.

— NOT for any kind or sort of industrial scale energy consumption or business profiting: NOT for Trafficking Humanity, but Developing it. Say again:

— What replaces the chemical reduction? 3Gy of undisturbed natural evolution, no cuts, up to 1800. 200 years later: more than 30% reduced forest area.

— »We’ll do fine with 70% for the developed 100 — we can always compensate with modern academic medical Juice». Have a nice Mad day.

• Not within the nearest 200 years [least Natural Grow-Decay cycle] will a Nature Forest bee seen again by humans — in sites like the one before the photo.

• We are apparently living in the worst of all human civilization times: STATE ignores LIFE — by state authorities not lifting a finger to stop the mad.

Who — what — educated these?

EDUCATION in humanity is apparently on the Up.

DivergenceConvergence:

”.. because of the curvature of space-time ..”, the general modern academic argument — see article details from ThePoint

LIGHT AND GRAVITATION

Time independence and Time dependence — their related differentiation is, apparently, not represented in the modern academic teaching system

IN RELATED PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS

The birth of related science

— .. Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Isaac Newton, James Bradley .. Max Planck

The most prominent of all found features in nature (physics)

• The nature of Gravitation

• The nature of LIGHT

was — both — apparently fundamentally forgotten — replaced by invented substitutes — by the 1800+ modern academic cosmological idea.

Bradley’s discovery of the Aberration phenomena (1725, published 1729) seems to have had no focus of interest at all in modern quarters, although its obvious connection to The Subject. All from 1725.

And so neither the following electric features (Coulomb law) or the further instrumental light discoveries (Light’sPolarization) gave leading clues to such imperative details as the PotentialBarrier and the (MathPrinciples) decisive Electric Charge — and its connection to gravitation (ExperimentalConfirmations).

Modern academy 1800+ lost it all. Completely. Not a sign. Not a hint. Not a spell.

———————————————

James Bradley’s discovery 1725 of the Aberration phenomena ¦ ThePerihelionPrecessions ¦ GripDeep ¦ Potential Barrier

Dmax ¦ The atomic nucleus cannot be compressed — it is already standing on a physically mathematically deducible Planck constant perfect Zero

The time independent property in gravitation — only inertial — kinetic — properties count — was never understood — and definitely not accepted (The EinsteinError) — by modern academic thinking. And so most of the elementary physics had to hide (BasicMathRanks) behind the modern academic new mind inventive ideas and bills of society. It is such a joy.

SolarCycle: TheSTARanvil

As calculated from the thermo nuclear radiation pressure (γ[p]) in related physics (a nuclear inductive heat inertia, deduced from Stefan-Boltzmann’s radiation law)

— not to be confused with the very weak (Planck temperature associated Tp ¦ ButLOOK) electro-kinetical radiation pressure (^{pRAD) known in modern quarters}

— related physics gallantly was able to deduce the power engine inside stars in general (^{SunPHYSICS ¦ PULSARS), and of our Sun in specific. It has a (default) fusion tp period of 11.44112839 years (As the Sun is burning Hydrogen to Helium, a slow decrease in this period is possible: at present an average of 11.1y in some literature; Internet NASA 1Sep2004 specifies 11.4 yr). See also here in StarAnvil} and How is temperature generated.

StarBASE: TheGtest

TheIAUtest

(Our Sun is a preference [NORM] star in related physics, TNED says [P = A²ε₀]).

In the following further tests of the results

— all UniverseHistory TNED calculations collected 25Oct2018 and contained into one singe extensive IAU Test spread sheet for comparison with the internationally set and measured standard value

— the Sun’s Photometric Effect as measured and (IAU) internationally quantified

A direct hit:

was verified — through a direct hit.

— All TNED deduced K-cell related mathematics and physics included:

• The (mathematically very extensive) General Test DID verify the TNED deduced parameters.

Really.

(neutron mass mN = 1.0086652u)/u = U(m_n) = 1.0086652 ¦ u = 1.66033 t27 KG = mC12/12 ¦ h = mNc₀rN = 6.62559 t34 JS ¦ 18: see Atomic Mass Defect scale.

The IAU test uses this compressed TNED related physics deduced expression »WITH INNER RESOURCES» to calculate the IAU testing object: The Sun’s Mass from mSbegin at DayOne as it burns through the ages till now [mS¦nowResult — mS¦KeplerNow SHOULD = exactly 0, if TNED holds] — using the IAU standard photometric Sun effect [3.8575 T26 W± 0.0014] in a general cosmological [TheKcell] comparing cross reference with the TNED calculated results. The present calculated Sun mass will be the present Sun mass [TheKeplerCalculated from Earth’s anomalistic period] from removing the original Sun mass’ burning waste as solar wind particles and the mc²-transfer to light and heat during the burning period [present K-cell age, (20.805 Gy ¦ UniverseAge) related physics says]:

• RELATED PHYSICS: All primary Hydrogen based stars burn with a constant photometric effect from day begin to day end — as an alcalic battery with constant voltage output until it ends, says related physics. Deduced and related thermo nuclear basic details here in TheStarAnvil.

The G and mS values are further tested and explained by precision in results from The Electric Constant.

THE IAU TEST RESULT (”a direct hit”) has afterwards been used to test other fundamental natural constants such as G — in concern of further tests on The CAP and CWON results — and whatever is stated or investigated on these constants in available sources.

See further details in TheGtest and further in The Electric Constant and IterativeConstantTest and IAUtestDETAILS.

So:

Continuing in ThePerihelionPrecessions.

Suns4

CaseClosed: 3Dec2022 — The Perihelion Precessions

Number 5 ¦ TheRESULT — aC arcSeconds/Century ¦ Tanom, planetary anomalistic period: twice the same elliptic point: r Sun-Planet mean distance

rc:

(5.1) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/rc₀(1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; 1y = 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022]

Tgamma c:

(5.2) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/[γ(Tg °K)^–1](1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ;

Tgamma rc:

(5.2).1 (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/[ γ ( r^–1([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^1/4 )^–1](1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ;

(5.2).2 (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/[ 5.093457740 T24 °K·M²/S · r([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^–1/4](1–e²)^–1 × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; checked

(5.2).3 (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀][ 5.093457740 T24 °K·M²/S · r]^–1([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^1/4(1–e²)^–1 × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; checked

Tgamma r: TNED related star physics deduced thermo nuclear temperature pressure:

(5.2).2.1 (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3Gm₂ · [( 5.093457740 T24 °K·M²/S )² r([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^–2/4(1–e²)]^–1 × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; checked

(5.2).2.2 (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = (r[1–e²])^–13(√[G³(m₂)⁴/4πak_P])[( 5.093457740 T24 °K·M²/S )^–2] × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; checked

5.093457740 T24 = c₀^5/4([G(m₂)²/8πak])^1/4

(5.2).2.3 (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = (r[1–e²])^–1 × 4429.80849084701 M × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; checked

Compare Sun’s central Nuclear Star Anvil: 4012.1338 M according to related physics — initially 3281.4823 M — absolute smallest on Hydrogen-1 base: 731.0696 M

SolenT2022.ods T2 AP21 — exactly same values ¦ 5Dec2022

γ = c₀^5/4[G(m₂)²/8πak]^1/4 = c₀^5/4[G(m₂)²/8π(2/3)2b⁴π⁵/(15h³c₀²)]^1/4 = c₀^5/4[3G(m₂)²(15h³c₀²)/32b⁴π⁶]^1/4 = c₀^7/4[3G(m₂)²(15h³)/32b⁴π⁶]^1/4 ; checked verified.

b = Boltzmann constant: 1.380550287753 t23 J/°K ¦ m₂ = mS = 1.98963199771721 T30 KG ¦ G = 6.67010000933003 t11 JM/[KG]² — see The Electric Constant

√[G³(m₂)⁴/4πak_P] = √[G³(m₂)⁴/8πak] = G^3/2(m₂)²/(8πak)^1/2 ¦ × ¦ c₀^5/4[G(m₂)²/8πak]^1/4 = c₀^5/4G(m₂)^2/4/(8πak)^1/4 ¦ = G^3/2(m₂)²/(8πak)^2/4 × c₀^5/4G(m₂)^2/4/(8πak)^1/4 ;

= G^2/4(m₂)^6/4/(8πak)^1/4 × c₀^5/4 ; [ notChecked ] ;

(5.2).2.3 = (5.1):

u/v₀(1–e²) = (r[1–e²])^–1 × 4429.80849084701 M = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/rc₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀²](r[1–e²])^–1 ;

u/v₀(1–e²) = (r[1–e²])^–1 × 4429.80849084701 M = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/rc₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀²](r[1–e²])^–1 ;

u/v₀(1–e²) = (r[1–e²])^–1 × 4429.80849084701 M = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/rc₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀²](r[1–e²])^–1 ; verified : JM/[KG]² · KG · [S/M]² = JM/[KG] · [S/M]² = [M/S²] · S² = M.

; JM/[KG] = NM·M/KG = KG[M/S²]·M · M/KG = [M/S²]·M · M = M³/S² ¦ · [S/M]² = M.

There can be no doubt about it: same math, same values:

— Modern academy uses apparently and provably in to the last atom not understood mathematical physics for connecting a AN APPARENT INVENTED level of explaining physics OUTSIDE Rational and Logical explaining physics. What?

AllKeplerMath. Explaining planetary perihelion precessions — on exact principal principle mathematical physics [Kepler area momentum]:

StefanBoltzmannDetails: Case

MODERN ACADEMY HAS APPARENTLY EXCLUDED

A general 100% explanation of cosmology — 100% outside Einstein’s theory of relativity: a primitive, never developed, not fully discovered idea of physics.

Precisely as IT was apprehended from square 1:

— (”The philosophers got a shock”:) Humanity in Modern Academy 1800+ lost its NATURE manifest — eager to INVENT a new one.

Say any related argument AGAINST. We will surrender immediately:

TheCircleArgument: Details

The simple Circular application — Eddington form

• Only BASED ON THE SIMPLE FACT by the eccentricity factor (1—e²) — e=0 defines a perfect circle — the actual precession quantity (>95% for Mercury, >99% for Earth) is defined to >90%, as calculated, column % CIRCLE in the table below.

• In a perfect circular orbit (Quote) : no velocity variation exist. And thereby: no relativity theory input:

• relativity theory input on the precession phenomena — only by the >90% effect circular part — is apparently relativity theory suicide:

— As also clarified in AllKeplerMath;

SolenT2022.ods T2 AR20

The orbital eccentricy plays apparently a [very] small part in the actual quantity of the planets perihelion precessions — see also comparing values with present stated measures in TheRESULT. It apparently is the circular part — 1–e² = 1 — that generates the main quantity: >95% except for Pluto [uncertain parameters] with >93. That is apparently a death sentence for any relativistic idea of the phenomena. In a circle there is no velocity variation, and hence no relativistic mass changing idea.

Compare RelativisticMass quote. The Circle part kills relativity theory.

— By unknown reasons here, that observation seems to have slipped out of sight on the modern academic attempt to explain the phenomena.

SolenT2022.ods T2 U22

— In related physics explanation — same math — also perfect circular orbits are included.

The phenomena [FirstLIGHTtable] apparently relies on a small temperature pressure, first two columns in the table above — N/M² in the Sun’s planetary light field [Directly from Stefan-Boltzmann’s radiation law: p = constant · T^4 · 1/3, N/M² = Pascal, Pa].

Se further explaining mathematics on the thermal pressure detail in ButLOOK.

In modern quarters the T^4 associates to star’s innate energy production.

In related physics

— Suns4, unknown in modern academy, although deduced from the same Stefan-Boltzmann source

— the T^4 factor has connection to the Tgamma deduced heat degree [also connecting Sun’s Corona Physics].

And, as seen here, its mathematics contains the modern part [ButLOOK] — applied on a level of physics apparently not familiar in modern corridors: explaining the full dynamics of the planetary perihelion precession phenomena.

See also more in detail from ThePerihelionPrecessions and TwoARGUMENTS.

• Besides that observation, the rest of the mathematics apparently reveals unexplored domains of elementary physics in modern corridors

(thermo nuclear pressure details unnoticed in modern corridors — because of a completely different idea of WHAT a star is).

• In modern corridors some quite different ideas prevail on the origin of »general physical phenomena»

— especially on the level of relativity theory critics: so mathematically and very strongly established now during some 100y+;

———————————————

Number5

What is the most prominent in this »UH attack» on modern academy teaching system?

• Star Physics. In to the bone of it. Absolutely. Mathematics. Every atom of it.

— Modern academy apparently IGNORES VITAL PARTS — caused by the DRIFT of INVENTING explanations instead of DEDUCING them.

— Rightfully: It is, was, and will always be the human natural interest in existential explanations that drives the strong power-engine-science of cosmology in general. In modern academy 1800+ it — apparently — got wild. Sanity don’t do that.

DynamicsExplanation:

THE PLANETARY PERIHELION PRECESSION CLASSIC DYNAMICS/MATHEMATICS EXPLANATION

The Coriolis Resolution

Based on the modern academic idea that (T→p) temperature generates pressure

——————————————————————————————————————

QUITE THE OPPOSITE FROM RELATED PHYSICS (p→T) on the level of star physics

How is temperature GENERATED and the deduced General Gas Law Mathematics

——————————————————————————————————————

is stated and claimed (BA1978s52) a formula presented as ”radiation pressure impact”

(electro-kinetic radiation radial pressure)

Prad = (1/3) a T⁴

”där a är strålningstäthetskonstanten (a = 7,56 × 10^–16 J m^–3 K^–4)”, translated:

where a is the radiation density constant (a = 7.56 t16 J/M³°K⁴)

where ”Strålningstrycket är det tryck som utövas av fotonerna”, the Radiation pressure is the pressure performed by the photons.

In related physics’ terms, this (Prad) is (material physics: mechanics connected) a heat degree kinetic pressure expression, affecting all mass matter:

• Taken on the regular Planck heat degree form (TP ¦ Suns4 ¦ max ca 6000 °K at Sun’s surface) it has no direct significance — only a very poor representation. See comparing Reckoning example in HOW IS TEMPERATURE GENERATED.

In modern academic terms, the form has significance only »inside high temperature stars» (BA1978s52sp2mn).

APPARENTLY SO:

MAC has no idea at all of Suns4 — and neither did we have of the connection between Suns4 and the planets perihelion precessions at the time of the original production (1990 ¦ Jan2008) (the deductions in UniverseHistory, UH). It came to a dramatic and sudden resolution:

ButLOOK: 1Dec2022 — temperature pressure

As revealed by the deeper analysis in the perihelion precession dynamics phenomena

• BUT: Taken on the related physics deduced Suns4 heat degrees, especially the central thermo-nuclear radiation pressure fundamental form (TGAMMA)

— what drives the whole fundamental star physics, as deduced in related physics all from Stefan-Boltzmann’s radian law with the TNED deduced atomic nucleus, not present i modern quarters, as recently reminded really

— IT concludes »a common value» (Radiation pressure in related physics):

NOTE THAT THIS SINGLE GRAVITATION PRESSURE EXPRESSION (p) in the TNED deduced star physics general thermo nuclear pressure equation (Rex)

includes the Coulomb repulsion minuend (p_e) — from Sun’s surface and further out in further decreasing : IT takes importance first from around the 17th decimal:

• it is quantitatively completely omittable outside the Sun — BUT BELONGS TO THE DEDUCTION OF THE NUCLEAR RADIATION FORMULA AS SUCH. Not to forget.

LOOK:

Stefan-Boltzmann’s radiation law:

P = aAkT⁴ ; = E/t = Fd/t = Fv ; v = c₀ :

F/A = a(k/c₀)T⁴ = p ; a = 2/3 ;

k = 2π· b⁴π⁴/(15h³c₀²) Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law constant, as deduced , = 5.6699807232 t8 WM^–2°K^–4

2k/c₀ = 3.781904041 t16 NM^–2°K^–4 ; = k_P

2(k_P) = 7.565214266 t16 (NM^–2°K^–4 = [NM=J]/M³ · °K^–4 ; pressure per °K⁴)

2(2k/c₀) = 7.565214266 t16 (NM^–2°K^–4 = [NM=J]/M³ · °K^–4 ; pressure per °K⁴)

= a’ = 2k_P ;

p = (1/3) a’ T⁴ ; same expression: temperature pressure

SAME EXPRESSION. SameMath. Same. Same.

It is apparent that the conventional »free-space electro-kinetic radiation pressure» expression

p = (1/3) a’ T⁴ ALSO connects to the same foundation as the TNED deduced nuclear radiation pressure basics through the contractive (StarAnvil) gravitational star-mass pressure

p = G(m₂/2r²)²/π. Both provably rely on and depart from the Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law,

P = aAkT⁴ .

So much in fact (outside Sun’s surface) that, as it shows up:

TNED — RESULTS FROM THE PERIHELION PRECESSION-DYNAMICS MATHEMATICS 4Dec2022

———————————————————————————————————————————

———————————————————————————————————————————

Only the TGAMMA heat degree in Suns4 connect the perihelion precession cr math factors.

And it is completely unknown in modern corridors. Apparently.

[ p = (1/3) · a’ · TNED(Tg¦°K)⁴ ] = [ p = G(m₂/2r²)²/π ]

TNED(Tg¦°K) = r^–1([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^1/4 ;

Exactly on the decimals see table below — with 2k_P = a’ = 7.565214266 t16 J/M³°K⁴ . Really.

Investigating — clarifying the exact mathematical correspondence:

— Thoroughly — so also the modern PhD:s can catch up:

a = 2/3 ;

3a(k_P/2) = k_P = 2k/c₀ ;

3a([2k/c₀]/2) = k_P = 2k/c₀ ;

3a([k/c₀]) = k_P = 2k/c₀ ;

a([k/c₀]) = (1/3)k_P = ak/c₀ ;

:

(1/3)3 ak_P = ak_P ; 3ak_P = a’ = 7.565214266 t16 J/M³°K⁴

(1/3) · a’ · [(1/ak_P)] = 1 ;

(1/3) · a’ · [r^–4(1/ak_P)] = 1/r⁴ ;

(1/3) · a’ · [r^–4([1/4π]/ak_P)] = 1/4πr⁴ ;

(1/3) · a’ · [r^–4([1/4π]/ak_P)] = (1/2r²)²/π ;

(1/3) · a’ · [r^–4([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)] = G(m₂/2r²)²/π ;

(1/3) · a’ · [r^–1([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^1/4]⁴ = G(m₂/2r²)²/π ; verified.

(1/3) · a’ · [TNED(Tg¦°K)]⁴ = pG ;

thermo nuclear radiation StarPhysics g-mass pressure at r from star — as TNED deduced,

exactly the same as conventional electro-kinetic StarPhysics TNED deduced

thermo nuclear radiation StarPhysics Tgamma temperature pressure at r from star. Exactly, into the last decimal.

Modern academy astronomy apparently — COMPLETELY UNAWARE — uses — verifies — deduced mathematical star physics from TNED. Say something intelligent. Please.

SolenT2022.ods T2 U22

.. collecting data for verifying the planets perihelion precessions .. »cosmological governed dynamics» ..

We didn’t see that coming.

• Exactly the same expressions IN THE DEEP — apparently unnoticed in modern corridors:

• TNED deduced star physics. It has absolutely no modern academic representation (Radiation pressure in related physics).

• AND apparently provably NEVER WILL HAVE.

Explanation: TheExplanation

Explanation:

While modern academy teory apparently has no concept of a TNED deduced TGAMMA as the ”T⁴” factor in the established Prad expression, the established Prad expression apparently defines — and resolves, really, apparently — the kinetic-MECHANICAL dynamics explanation.

• No relativity theory ideas whatsoever. AllKeplerMath.

The whole — complete — perihelion precession phenomena, apparently appears by precise exact mathematics — already well known (AllKeplerMath).

CaseClosed ¦ TheExplanation ¦ CoriolisResolution ¦ PhysicsFirst ¦ PhysicsFirstMATH ¦

Why not a modern academic resolution?

Without a true atomic nucleus deduction (Planck constant h=mcr = m · Kepler area momentum), there is neither a possible — relatable, rational, causal, logic — understanding of basic star physics. That so, even IF the mathematics (Basic Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law mathematics) is visible on the table: »Understanding eludes explanation» without a proper natural foundation of 100% Related Logics: zero consensus. Just knowledge. Modern academy is an expert in NO SUCH recognition, as exemplified.

SHORT VERSION OF KNOWLEDGE DEFINITION: the related way nature works. Disclaim the one who can:

• no consensus.

WHAT MODERN ACADEMIC 1800+ TEACHING SYSTEM provably in to the last atom HAS NOT:

Relatability — a complete cross referring explanation down to the basics that leaves no one behind because it is and can be detailed down to the last atom of what we are — on recognizing the foundation of HumanRight. No denials.

— Get the fuck out of my beach.

Detailed:

As already familiar (the Aberration phenomena)

(1725, James Bradley discovers Aberration: apparently the first general observation of light’ gravitational dependency, however never so mentioned, as known, in the 1800+ modern academic history)

a light path (carrying a specific detailed phenomena) — a »thermal» — physical connection between Sun and an orbiting planet has no ideal STRAIGHT line connection (Bradley’s v/c aberration). Instead it follows a deflected — elongated — (generatrix) curve on the (now) familiar function of a v/c relation.

Any affecting — impacting — physics related to this »Solar Thermal Generatrix» (STG) curve will — the vector laws in mechanics — also relate to a (planetary end related) mechanically/gravitationally corresponding straight line — featuring a (SolarThermalGen) STG-tangent : a corresponding PlanetResultingDirectrix (PRD).

Where (the CENT point) the PRD intersects the (direct mechanically/gravitationally related) angular v/c related right angular triangular component direction (the »v-action-skewed» SunThermalDirectrix, STD), there apparently has been established a new composed rotational center — an orbital precession — along with the original elliptic orbital one. But (and, apparently): these do NOT interfere(5 ArguePoints):

— Kinetics does not connect light physics[‡];

• Taking the circle part (TheCircleArgument) of the Earth quantity — 99.972%, e=0 —

• complete excludes relativity arguments from the scene (RelativisticMass):

— A perfect circular precessive relation holds no velocity variations, not at all. And consequently also then no onset at all for any kind or sort or nature of a relativistic arguing. No change.

Compare the already relativistic favored established precessional idea on quote in Relativistic Mass.

• Then, apparently:

• explaining precessional physics contains no corresponding relativity theory at all in physics (AllKeplerMath).

Relativity Theory, as explained and proven (LGD ¦ GripDeep ¦ TheSolarEclipses ¦ TheGPSexample ..) in every detail, apparently and provably in every detail exists only inside modern academy corridors and quarters, so:

AS A PRIMITIVE AND PROVISIONAL IDEA OF PHYSICS which content MODERN ACADEMY NEVER BOTHERED TO INVESTIGATE, RATHER INVENTED AS A PSEUDO IDEA OF PHYSICS NOBODY AS YET UNTIL THIS DAY UNDERSTANDS NOT one ATOM OF.

Say again. But look at the math: (more or less) exactly The Related.

Math never fails (conclusion). But the inducement of pertaining to its innate Nature apparently does.

The dynamics then — as was concluded some 400 years ago — follows Newton’s Third — action and reaction balances all mechanics. (See also detailed action-reaction example in the Coriolis first theorem example: COR2 — featuring a CoriolisResolution). And so the perihelion precession end station dynamics can be related to a (build up) thermal-mechanical impact — exactly on the simple Eddington form — on a thermal-kinetic resistance relational basis connected to the TNED deduced TGAMMA temperature physics.

However definitely unknown in modern corridors. And: It cannot be included or integrated into its teaching system.

Between Galaxies:

Consequences

Further out

As the g-potential between stars — and galaxies — tend to cancel in-between them (de Sitter’s analyze from around 1920), the general huge spaces between stars (and galaxies) tend to have zero affect on bypassing visitors — weather a smaller or a larger body. No thermal motional velocity resistance exists.

The general cosmic background radiation of some 2.7 °K is further related below.

TNED — RESULTS FROM THE PERIHELION PRECESSION-DYNAMICS MATHEMATICS 4Dec2022

———————————————————————————————————————————

———————————————————————————————————————————

Consequences:

ANY (MOVING) BODY inside — any gravitational potential of — any significantly CHANGING — accelerating or decelerating light emitting field generated by an active thermo nuclear heat source, will one way or the other experience a corresponding »perihelion precession» effect. That is: as so related between ordinary gravitation motional mechanics

(Kepler area momentum, angular momentum details)

and (changing) temperature pressure resistance effects in the light field from the THERMO NUCLEAR (Tgamma) source.

Zero motional resistance:

Explanation

In the vast distance spaces between stars and galaxies — their gravitational potentials cancel on zero: pG = 0 — there is no (specifically directed) light resistance to refer to — Except for the general cosmic background radiation temperature (ca 2.7 °K). In related physics we also have (TNED, K-cell expansion) the general gravitational red shift mass governing light divergence (LGD). But THAT part — the K-cell mass gravitational influence with increasing mass and decreasing light divergence from the K-cell center — has no light source. It is just pure gravitational mechanics — and therefore has no (can be given no related) resistive effect on moving objects. That is: the above equations lose their meaning in such regions and applications.

Classical physics — into the bone. Reason. Logics.

Not because of the classic. But because of the apparent power of reason.

(»The Third Industrial Revolution»).

CaseClosed

SuperPositionPrinciple:

The SUPER POSITION PRINCIPLE The Superposition Principle

Also basic wave-physics- and mathematics principle

• Each individual body has and preserves its own specific individual gravitational field (atoms in explicit, the atomic nucleus ¦ PlanckRing 2, gravitation’s fundamental mass form — but it is not explained as such in modern corridors)

• independent of interaction and interference with other bodies (superposition principle).

— »You may say whatever the fuck you want. I am still me».

Simple practical examples in ELEMENTARY WAVE MECHANICS.

SuperPositionPrinciple

Basic:

ALL BASIC KEPLER MATH, TNED RELATED STAR PHYSICS, AND EXPLAINING CORIOLIS EFFECT DYNAMICS

THE PERIHELION PRECESSIONS

THE LOCAL GRAVITATIONAL kinetic force DOMINANCE

— WHERE OBJECTS FALL TO : F = ma = Gmm₂/r² ; a = Gm₂/r² = F/m : the local dominant (Galilei constant Force Field) acceleration constant M/S²

Local Light Divergence follows — is contained along with — the local gravitation kinetic force dominance:

M&M:s Experiment 1881+ ¦ superPositionPrinciple ¦ James Bradley’s discovery of ABERRATION 1725 ¦ The Solar Eclipses 1919+ ¦ The GPS Example ¦ The Planets’ Perihelion Precessions

TwoArguments: TheSolarEclipses ¦ ThePerihelionPrecessions ¦ TheCIRCLEargument

LIGHT HAS ACCELERATIVE PROPERTIES [ExperimentalConfirmations ¦ Q] — and is governed by TIME INDEPENDENT gravitation [LGD]

WHAT CAUSES THE PHENOMENA — the simple Eddington form: u/v₀ = 3(v/c)² (CaseClosed):

The PLANETARY PERIHELION PRECESSION PHENOMENA

What is the Dynamics explanation? (‡)

1st relativity Argument:

The 3(v/c)² Eddington argument — more than 95% of the effect comes from the circular component:

In a perfect circular e=0 orbit 3(v/c)²/(1–e²) no v-variation exist. Only by that fact (1900s conventional Relativity explanation Quote) any what so ever relativistic explanation becomes out of the question: excluded.

2nd relativity Argument:

The Kepler area momentum ellipsis mechanics explaining the general planetary motions (Kepler’s 3rd):

LIGHT PHYSICS (c) DOES NOT CONNECT KINETICS (Ligth’s liberty clause in related physics):

GripDEEP ¦ SolarEclipses ¦ Multiple c

• IF the (v/c) function would have any the slightest smallest IMPACT modern academy idea that ”gravitation propagates through space with c on the ordinary Kepler area momentum elliptic orbital mathematics (T²/R³, Kepler’s IIIrd) THAT orbital mechanics — apparently —would be equally disturbed: compromised. A »PhysicsCrash».

• AS IT IS NOT — it apparently continues independent of the (v/c) functional phenomena — the (v/c) function phenomena apparently is a complete isolated phenomena existing BESIDES and co-operating together with the ordinary preserved mechanics: there is no relativity theory phenomena in these, or other, physics:

LIGHT PHYSICS (c) DOES NOT CONNECT KINETICS:

• Relativity theory explanations apparently and provably in to the last atom have nothing to do with the phenomena.

• The relativity theory was, apparently so provably, set up — by DRIFT, not plan, what we know — as a primitive idea for explaining natural phenomena based on NOT YET UNDERSTOOD or banned to be understood by other, more academically conveniently invented consensus BASIC SIMPLE NATURAL PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS. Say again. We surrender immediately:

Basic — The PLANETARY PERIHELION PRECESSION PHENOMENA

Sections1234: Number5

TwoArguments

The Perihelion Precessions — how is temperature generated? See HOW.

SEE COMPARING FINAL NUMBERS IN TheRESULT

USING NUMBER UNIT (The simple Eddington form): u/v₀ = u(M/S)/v₀(M/S) = uREV/1REV = u°/360°

INTERNET (Nov2022) has several (many) voices on THE PLANETARY PERIHELION PRECESSION PHENOMENA. Much mathematical text is presented — but on credit of favoring the theory of relativity, of which no human today still understands one single bit: ask the average pedestrian. It is just the mathematical formula that protrudes as the most (breeding) scientifically interesting — as its quantities (precisely) matches the observations.

See AllKeplerMath in WikipediaEinsteinExpression — here in short as below.

— further developed ranks in CaseClosed ;

Compare from the simple Eddington form — in a fraction u M/S of one revolution v0 1M/S — or degrees per 360°, or radians .. further here below:

(1) u/v₀ = 3(v/c)² = 3(2πR/T)²)/c² = 12π²R²/(Tc)² ; 2π = 360 · π/180 = degrees times radians ; transfer:

(2) 2πu/v₀ = 2π3(v/c)² = 2π3(2πR/T)²)/c² = 24π³R²/(Tc)² ; for the circle it holds perfectly clear that EPSe=0 with [r/R]²=E²=1—e² = 1:

(3) 2πu/v₀(1–e²) = 24π³R²/(Tc)²(1–e²) = 6πRGm₂/(cr)² ; no trace of relativity math. Just elementary Kepler-Planck AreaMomentum:

IN A CIRCULAR ORBIT THERE ARE NO VELOCITY VARIATIONS, AND HENCE NO ROOM FOR Relativity Theory Effects

Apparently: Relativity theory has nothing at all to do with the phenomena. Circle’s e=0 in 1—e²=1 accounts for >90% of the result.

EXACT SAME MATH. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT IDEAS OF THE ORIGIN OF PHYSICAL EXPLANATION.

(4) u/v₀ = 12π²R²/(Tc)² = (1) = 12π²R³/T²Rc² = 12π²[Gm₂/(2π)²]/Rc² = 3[Gm₂]/Rc² ; arcSec/100y = (360°·3600’’·100y/[T/y]) = aC ;

(5) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/Rc₀(1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[T/y]) ; 1y = 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022] ¦ SolenT2022.ods T3 D16

The Explaining Perihelion precession mathematics — relativity theory explanations expire. Related physics apparently explains all details — Say again;

The first section (1) in explicit is the Wikipedia-Einstein form Tests of general relativity article’s expression in radians per revolution. Sections (234) are just equivalents, here developed further for comparison (BasicEPSmath). More details also in The G Test; Sections 3¦4 offer a unique opportunity to expose a specific precision G-test value (6.67015..) with respect to sections 1¦2 (6.67000..). The quoted Eddington Degree Form below relates to the Radian Wikipedia/Einstein expressions (L=R) as:

3v²/c² = 3[(2πR/T)²]/c² = 12π²R²/(Tc)² ; 2π3(v/c)² = 24π³R²/(Tc)² ¦ · [1–e² = E² = (r/R)²] , = 24π³R²/(Tc)²/(1–e²).

• The cr factors in the phenomena apparently have a related explanation (far beyond modern corridors). Details in Sun’s4.

• More details on the G factor and Sun mass m2 in TheGtest and TheElectricConstant.

Sections1234

TheEddingtonForm:

THE PERIHELION PRECESSIONS — how is temperature generated? See HOW.

SOURCES INTRODUCTION:

AS SPARSE AS THEY COME:

ThePerihelionPrecessions ¦ AllKeplerMATH

The Eddington form

” Den exakta förutsägelsen i Einsteins lag är, att under varje omlopp som en planet gör kommer omloppsbanan att vrida sig en bråkdel av ett varv, som är lika med 3v²/c², där v är planetens hastighet och c ljushastigheten.”,

Arthur Eddington SIGMA, En matematikens kulturhistoria, James R. Newman, Forum 1959, Band 2 kapitel 21 (s835-844):

English translated:

The exact prediction in Einstein’s law is, that during each revolution a planet makes, its orbit will turn a fraction of a revolution, equal to 3v²/c², where v is the planet’s velocity and c the speed of light.

ALSO COMPARE ONE only found MORE DIRECT CLEAR CUT RELATIVISTIC EXPLANATION IN QUOTE.

• The papers, and the writings, on the subject are huge. But we seldom find any direct — even an attempt — for any physical explanation — other than the type of wording: ”space-time curvature”. Occasionally with some associations to ”changes in relativistic mass” (m/M=[1—(v/c)²]^½): Different velocities corresponds to different quantities of mass. And as The FOCUS quote says (elliptic orbits), these mass fluctuations between farthest and closest to Sun in the planet’s orbit would be the closest rational existing explanation to the planetary perihelion precession phenomena. Case closed.

• The mathematical explanation to the observed and measured results is excellent, all through:

AllKeplerMath.

• The corresponding established theoretical approach on an explanation is also excellent — in crash:

AllKeplerMath.

THIS [Eddington form] IS THE SO FAR (9Nov2022) only (here) PRESENT ESTABLISHED found direct simple expression associated with the modern academic claim:

• it is theory of relativity that explains, says modern academy, the perihelion precessions of the planets.

The pioneer observation came through planet Mercury, as reported by many sources. And the mathematics is as quoted below.

Comparing figures follow.

Other general text book sources (Nov2022) very well give the measured values. But they neither have nor show nothing, if at all, such simple as the 1959 Newman-Eddington source above.

Eddington apparently suggests this simple (but somehow cryptic) »relativistic» mathematical form as below:

The Eddington form as quoted

The Arthur Eddington [Newman 1959]-stated balancing-expression for the phenomena

— the planetary perihelion precessions, first noted for planet Mercury:

The more originally claimed Einstein mathematics is as quoted below from Wikipedia Nov2022.

NOTE: v .. ”the planet’s velocity”:

In an elliptic orbit the mean orbital revolving velocity is calculated (CEPH) from where the body position exactly touches at the minor ellipsis axis either end point (r, illustrated below): here R denotes half the major axis, same as the circumscribed circle radius (R). This mean orbital velocity is calculated as deduced:

v(MeanEllipse) = R · 2π/T = Rω ¦ for the revolving period T, see Kepler’s Third below

TheWikipediaEinsteinForm: TheEddingtonForm

ThePerihelionPrecessions ¦ Sections 1234

Wikipedia refers the general Einstein’s perihelion precession expression (in radians per revolution) on the ”approximated” form below (but these expressions have both vast, complex and further established mathematical preferences way beyond this presentation — as will be seen): L = R;

24π³ L² 24π³ R⁴

σ = ————— ¦ = ———— ¦ see complementary parts below ¦ verified

T²c²(1–e²) T²c² r²

Left: The Wikipedia/Einstein expression in radians per revolution.

Right: developed equivalent from BasicEPSmath. See further equivalents below.

Exact math. See more detailed in Sections1234.

Wikipedia, Tests of general relativity 9Nov2022, specifies the Mercury U = 42.9799 ”/100y [arcsec/Julian century]:

• With a testing t(v)Mercury adjustment [47890] of 48917 M/S — on the Eddington form — this corresponds to 5,018.. t7 Radians/Turn

¦ [pi/180] · U/[3600·100] · t0 —— and matching the above Wikipedia form [on the same 5.018.. t7 Radians/Turn]:

• All units MKSA standard: Meter, Second .. KiloGram .. Ampere ..

• So: The Wikipedia forms as above seem to carry the equations out equally precise as the simpler Eddington 3v²/c² form.

The Wikipedia article [Tests of general relativity], as specified in formal parts :

σ perihelion shift, radians per revolution

L semi-major axis — the circular radius of the circumscribed circle, in the case of an elliptic orbit

T orbital period — no unit specified ¦ Wikipedia is famos for having multiple unit presentations ..

c speed of light [2.99792458 T8 M/S in vacuum]

e orbital eccentricity coefficient ¦ 1—e² = E² = [r/R]² : illustrated here:

BasicEPSmath: TWEF 10Nov2022

r/R = E = cos(EA)° ¦ Cf/R = e = sin(EA)° ¦ E² = 1 – e² ¦ PREFIXxSIN ¦ EA, elliptic angle ¦ Cf, centerToFocus

KEPLER’S THIRD: Gm₂m/r²= F=ma=må=v²/R ; v=2πR/T=rω ; å=v²/R=rω²=R(2π/T=2πf )² ;

mRω² = mR(2π/T)² = Gm₂m/R² ; R³(2π/T)² = Gm₂ ; R³/T² = Gm₂/(2π)² = constant ¦ m₂ = SunMass (1.989 T30 KG);

R³(2π)²/Gm₂ =T² ; T = 2πR√ R/Gm₂ .

Perihelion Mercury: v_P = √(1+e)Gm₂/P ¦ P = R(1–e) = R – Cf = R – Re ¦ e(M) = 0.2056 ; R(M) = 5.790924 T10 M

v_n = √(1+e)Gm₂/R(1–e) ¦ r² = (RE)² = R²(1 – e²) ; r = R√(1 – e²) ¦ 1 – e² = E² = (r/R)²

The Kepler discovered three laws of planetary motion, Johannes Kepler 1609 (Astrono’mia nova) and 1619 (Harmo’nices mu’ndi li’bri) BKL.VI.1925sp744mn; I: The planets move in ellipses with Sun in one of the ellipse’s two focus; II: The line Planet-Sun sweeps equal areas in equal times (K=A/T=vd ¦ Kepler area momentum); III: The orbital time period squared divided with the cube of the Planet-Sun mean distance is a constant (T²/R³=constant).

———————————————

Kepler Area Momentum — basic angular momentum definitions ¦ See also THE PERIODIC SYSTEM from the Kepler Resonances.

The Ellipse is only a simple projection of a circle under different angular turning positions.

CEPH EQUATIOIN MATHEMATICS ¦ CRL EPS PRB HRB ¦ m₂ central mass ¦ m orbiting mass

For the elliptic orbits: the eccentricity coefficient e varies between 0 (CIRCLE) and 1 (LINE):

——————————————————————

(e → 0) = [1/(1–e²)] → 1 ¦ (e → 1) = [1/(1–e²)] → ∞

——————————————————————

u/v₀ = 3(v/c)² .................... The basic Eddington expression: the clean circular impact: no orbital velocity variations

u/v₀ = 3(v/c)²/(1–e²).......... The full and Complete expression: the impact increases where e → 1:

v(P) = √(1+e)Gm₂/R(1–e) the Perihelion — most close to the Sun: highest — velocity

v(A) = √(1–e)Gm₂/R(1+e) the Aphelion — farthest from the Sun: lowest — velocity

See further (full) mathematical rank equalities in Sections 1234 and Kepler Area Momentum Mathematics.

TheEddingtonForm

TheEddingtonArgument:

BasicEPSmath

In the light of the proofs ..

— Modern Academic Personnel 1800+ did not know or understand what it became involved in — apparently SO occupied by its own that it forgot its origin [MAC1900+]:

THIS ALSO PROVES THE FATAL MODERN ACADEMIC IDEA CLAIMING THE PHENOMENA TO HAVE A RELATIVISTIC EXPLANATION ¦ the pure and clean Eddington form: u/v₀ = 3(v/c)² → > 90% of the measures have a circular basis: no v-variation = no relativistic component

— See in explicit The Circle Argument.

Established literaure explains the modern academic idea:

RelativisticMass:

” En planet i en elliptisk bana kring solen rör sig snabbare då den är nära solen. Relativistiskt ökar emellertid en kropps massa med dess hastighet. Nära solen är då planetens massa och därmed solens dragningskraft på den något större. Den orkar därför inte riktigt in i sin förra bana, utan vrids en aning för varje varv.”,

FOCUS MATERIEN 2/1975 s85n the planetary perihelion precession phenomena ¦

English translated:

A planet in an elliptic orbit around the Sun moves faster when it is close to the Sun. Relativistically however a body’s mass increases with its velocity. Close to the Sun is then the planet’s mass and thereby the Sun’s pulling force on it slightly greater. It therefore cannot manage into its previous orbit, but is slightly rotated for each turn.

In a perfect circular orbit — the Eddington form, u/v₀ = 3(v/c)² — there is no velocity fluctuation of any kind, sort or nature. Any so named, as quoted, relativistic effect would definitely be out of the question.

But the expression as such still holds (for Mercury with > 95%) and is still well valid for the phenomenal confirmation of the quantity as such:

Well known quantity Example by Mercury

The Mercury perihelion precession in arcseconds/100y on the pure Eddington form — no elliptic aspect included — shows

41.1635913481 ’’ / 100y — the simple basic raw form: no elliptic aspect

The Full Kepler connection (å=v²/r)(K=vr=h/m)=v³ → uc², (v³)’=3v² with the ellipsis eccentricity included

the unitive form .......... u/v₀ = 3(v/c)²/(1–e²) = 3[(2πR/T)²]/c²(1–e²) = 12π²R²/(Tc)²(1–e²) ¦ u°/360° ¦ uM/S/vM/S

the radian form .......... u/v₀ = 2π3(v/c)²/(1–e²) = 24π³R²/(Tc)²(1–e²) [the Wikipedia/Einstein form] ¦ uRAD/rev

— shows the dregree form, and measures as reported (Wikipedia, Tests of general relativity, Nov2022) —

42.9809863472 ’’ / 100y — with elliptic aspect

this is also what Wikipedia testifies [Nov2022] to be the accurate measurre’s spouse

The difference in this case is insignificant for putting the light on the central scene:

• apparently no room for relativistic phenomena at all. No way. >95% Mercury proof.

Testified:

But it is in that light — no modern academic clarification — that (BA1978s161sp2m, translated) modern thinking still takes credit on what it apparently never did understand:

”Within the limit of precision in the measurements (circa 1 arc second per century) prevails here full agreement between the general relativity predictions and the observations. This, plus the corresponding results concerning perihelion precessions for Venus and Earth, stands as one of the great experimental testimonies about the general relativity theory accurateness.”,

BA1978s161sp2m, here freely translated.

— ”great experimental testimonies”.

Absolutely.

The testified academic persistence in the mathematical attitude only proves and further conserves the fatal idea in modern academy, that its own inventions are free from flaws.

>95% Mercury proof:

Modern academy apparently does not understand the phenomenal nature of the complex:

• the math is perfectly Ok AllKeplerMath. But look at its interpretation. And as seen:

• there is NADA any at all relativistic foundational concept in the complete mathematical expressability: 3(v/c)²/(1–e²).

This was only to be expected from an instance 1800+ so deeply involved in inventing its own ideas of physics and mathematics, THAT instead of deducing them, IT apparently created a syndrome of DRIFT — carrying with it all those who trusted its beloved inducements.

No plan. Just DRIFT. It is a horrible statement, unless disclaimed.

• Kepler/Planck math it is — apparently also on an elementary scale, as deduced.

• The Wikipedia/Einstein form is apparently a — pure — Keplerian/Planck expression form — costumed by provable ignorance to serve relativity theory.

Drift. Not plan. AllKeplerMath.

TheEddingtonArgument

LocalGdominance: TheEX ¦ LGD

PREFIXxSIN

EARTH’S LOCAL GRAVITATIONAL DOMINANCE

— Michelson and Morley’s certified interferometer zero result response from the measurements 1881+

— over Sun’s local gravitational dominance begins at 40.5762136184 Earth equatorial radii from Earth’s mass center: GmSREF:

(aJ = aS) = (GmJ/rJ² = GmS/rS²) = (mJ/rJ² = mS/rS²) ; mJ/mS = (rJ/rS)² ; rJ/rS = √ mJ/mS ; rJ + rS = 1AU ; rJ = 1AU – rS ; rJ/rS = (1AU – rS)/rS = 1AU/rS – 1 = √ mJ/mS ;

1 + √ mJ/mS = 1AU/rS ; 1AU = 1.4959787 T11 M ; rS = AU/(1 + √ mJ/mS) = 1.49339074909542 T11 M ; AU – rS = rJ = 2.58795090457855 T8 M ;

rJ/rJequator = 40.5762136184 ; a = 0.0059505648 M/S². At Earth’s surface it is (industrial standard) ca 9.81 M/S² called 1 g.

rJ/(AU – rJ) = 1/(AU/rJ – 1) = √ mJ/mS ; AU/rJ – 1 = 1/√ mJ/mS ; AU/rJ = 1+ 1/√ mJ/mS ; AU/(1+ 1/√ mJ/mS) = rJ = AU/(1+ √ mS/mJ) .

On the perihelion precession phenomena

With the convenient INVENTION ”c everywhere”, there is nothing to explain for in terms of a MECHANICAL interaction: it is excluded. The appearance of a veered second momentum point, creating a new centrifugal action center responsible for the effect (then by consequence) has zero vocabulary in modern quarters. And so modern academy — starting to INVENT an explanation instead of DEDUCING it — continued its own blocking famous noble history of the natural understanding of LIGHT’S GRAVITATIONAL DEPENDENCY. See also THE GPS EXAMPLE and ABERRATION (partly illustrated in ThePerihelionPrecessions).

That is the picture explained by related physics and mathematics, TNED says. Compare also TheAbsoluteMetrics:

• ATOMIC Tick displays c = c0 = 2.99792458 T8 M everywhere in free space where any the slightest electromagnetic activity exists.

a = GmS/dS² = GmJ/dJ² ; mS/mJ = (dS/dJ)² ; dS/dJ = √(mS/mJ) ; local gravitational dominance — force field dominance balancing point ¦ rJ = 6.378 T6 M

dS = AU – dJ ............. ; (AU – dJ)/dJ = √(mS/mJ) = AU/dJ – 1 ; dJ = AU/[√(mS/mJ) + 1] ............ 40.5762136184 rJ

dS = AU + dJ ............. ; (AU + dJ)/dJ = √(mS/mJ) = AU/dJ + 1 ; dJ = AU/[√(mS/mJ) – 1] ............ 40.7170897273 rJ

dS = AU + 0 ............... ; dJ/dS = dJ/AU = TanA = √(mJ/mS) ; dJ = AU√(mJ/mS) ....................... 40.6465296082 rJ

F1d1 = F2d2 ¦ m1ad1 = m2ad2 : LEVER IN a Galileo GALILEI Galilean FORCE FIELD — same acceleration constant everywhere: m1d1 = m2d2 ¦ m1/m2 = d1/d2:

mSdS = mJdJ ; mS/mJ = dJ/dS ; dJ/dS = mS/mJ ; two body central gravity point :

dJ = AU – dS ............. ; (AU – dS)/dS = mS/mJ = AU/dS – 1 ; dS = AU/[ mS/mJ + 1 ] .............. 449 251.213 M = 450 KM

SolenT2022.ods T3 A31

All related math in PREFIXxSIN.

Below is the table with the corresponding Sun-near gravitational balancing point for each of the planets — in Earth’s case the 40.576 rJ value. It is the point — only between Sun-Planet on the Sun’s near side — at which a dropped mass will fall neither to any side but stay put in perfect balance (all other masses disregarded).

LocalGdominance

ThermoElGraDis: The perihelion precessions ¦ THEcrFACTORS ¦ ABERRATION — James Bradley 1725

GENERATRIX and DIRECTRIX are established geometrical terms, conveniently used here

GRAVITATIONAL ELECTRO-THERMAL DISPLACEMENT

CHANGES — accelerating decelerating intensisity — in thermal light pressure TAKES INERTIA on the masses’ local gravitational dominance

REGULARc:

SolenT2022.ods T2 R18

———————————————

TheGtest — the G-value from the IAU-test¦ TheElectricConstant — calculating the present Sun mass mS¦ Also compare: The Andromeda Test :

— our possible position in the cosmic K-cell, according to TNED related physics and mathematics — we leave no one behind

— very close to G-center: Andromeda — [VERY strongly indicated: all simple basic Cheops math] possibly.

See also BASIC ELEMENTARY CONCEPTS — super position principle ¦ Transverse Wavelength Indepencence — unless already familiar

See also related physics ABSOLUTE METRICS unless already familiar: measuring time with atomic clocks anywhere in universe shows c=c0=2.99792458 T8 M/S.

See also TheExperiment.

Terminology

SCHEMATICALLY

GENERATRIX and DIRECTRIX in this production

———————————————

PerihelionPrecessionRotationalCenter ¦ GripDEEP

The WeakHIGH and StrongLOW terms connect to (LGD) the local dominant gravitational field’s influende over light’s local divergence (light propagation velocity in a local space point. See the Electric Constant ¦ SpaceElectricResistance).

ThermoElGraDis

Number5: ThermoElGraDis ¦ Number1 — further developed ranks in CaseClosed ¦ AllKeplerMath

• The mechanically balancing equilibrium exhibits a push-out along the Sun’s directrix towards its satellite directrix intersection [CENT] — apparently creating a situation very much resembling an ordinary (first theorem) Coriolis effect :

• the center of orbital centrifugation is (COR2 ¦ CoriolisResolution), repositioned between the both masses, resulting in a new (extra rotational preference), adding a small velocity factor (u) to the satellite’s clean ordinary orbital velocity direction.

How the two different centers of rotation (ordinary Kepler Anomalistic and perihelion orbital precession) are related to each other is described as deduced in detail in The Coriolis Resolution.

• Using the deduced end perihelion precession expression in (5) with

aC = arcSeconds/100y — Tanom denotes the independent (anomalistic) orbital period, see further notes in TheRESULT — corresponds to the (5.1) BasicEPSmath used terms.

(5) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/Rc₀(1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; 1y = 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022]

the Elliptic basics R=Sun-Mass GraviTRIX has the (originally earlier) Suns4 denotation r=Sun-Mass GraviTRIX,

(5.1) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/rc₀(1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; 1y = 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022]

Then the related physics TNED deduced THREE Suns4 THERMATRIXES — as the Suns4-rc0 designated terms below, the °K constants Tg Tw and Tp — can be applied (for test) as equivalents for the rc0 factors, whichever.

These three temperature degree constants and their Suns4

deduced mathematical physics are the only here known candidates:

• relating the phenomena to CHANGES IN temperature pressure inside Sun’s light field

— if at all.

IF THERE IS [ButLOOK] A MATCHING CANDIDATE, it apparently will hold for each of the perihelion precessing objects.

These (for candidature) equivalent expressions just underlines the deduced NATURE of physical phenomena at this present level (AllKeplerMath — no relativity theory):

• the objects has — guaranteed — no corresponding RELATING EXPLAINING nomenclature in modern quarters [‡AgainInConclusion].

As it has turned out: Only the Tgamma satifies the temperature pressure equivalent in the perihelion precession complex. However also the other have significant functions: Compare the [TwienAffection] table where Sunlight’s energy in high Earth atmosphere split water molecules, forming the Ozone Shield (The HESC-process illustration mentioned in rPdMATH).

• With these clarified points, what we know, the expression and phenomena is fully explained and defined in terms of elementary Kepler-Galilei-Newton-Planck physics (TNED): AllKeplerMath.

related physics THERMAL-NUCLEAR RADIATION EXPRESSION FROM Suns4 — m2 = Sun mass mS = 1.98963199771721 T30 KG, G = 6.67010000933003 t11 JM/[KG]²

See TheRESULT for comparing (5) with actual figures in reported observations.

— Only with an appropriate determination of the gravitational constant (G) and our present Sun mass (mS) we can successfully calculate a planet’s anomalistic orbital period (Tanom). Then we can also successfully calculate precise corresponding observational values (in our example in to 12 significands) for all the planets’ perihelion precessions — for comparing on observed measures.

TheComplete: Number5

For exact comparison with other sources — The first compiling results Nov2022 — ».. the national treasure is closing in ..»

THE COMPLETE PERIHELION PRECESSION ¦ TheRESULT

related physics THERMAL-NUCLEAR RADIATION EXPRESSION FROM Suns4 — m2 = Sun mass mS = 1.98963199771721 T30 KG, G = 6.67010000933003 t11 JM/[KG]²

Connecting to the Kepler Area Momentum related and deduced expression (5) of the arcSeconds/100y precession quantities

(5) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/Rc₀(1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[T/y]) ; 1y = 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022]

(5.1) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/rc₀(1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ;

adjusted as (5.1) with former parametric denotations in Suns4 — r the ellipsis mean distance from the Sun — the expression receives the following additional equivalents taken from the deduced Suns4 three possible rc equivalents:

(5.2) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/[γ(Tg °K)^–1](1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; 1y = 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022]

(5.3) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/[β(Tw °K)^–1](1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ;

(5.4) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/[α(Tp °K)^–2](1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ;

The Perihelion Precessions — How is temperature generated?

WHAT CAUSES THE PLANETARY ORBIT PERIHELION PRECESSION? FirstLIGHTtable.

Compare first TwoArguments — relativity theory cannot explain a perfect circular orbit (zero velocity variations: no relativistic mass changes):

— BUT: the circle argument (the simple EddingtonArgument ¦ Eddington form [1–e²]: e=0) represents more than 90% of the actual precessions.

The actual elliptic orbital eccentricity factor represents only a fraction: Relativity aspects are definitely ruled out — by The simple circle argument.

Number5

TheExperiment: Testified ¦ The actual experiment — Experiment: ThermoElGraDis ¦ TheEXPERIMENT

The actual early Experiment

PROVING THE DOUBLE MECHANICAL MOMENTUM ARM INTERACTING PRINCIPLE

From an Experiment 1990 on a 33 RPM record plate with a separately mounted balance

INVESTIGATING THE MECHANICAL PARTS ON THE LEVER CONSTRUCT — PERTAINING TO THE quest of the PLANETARY PERIHELION PRECESSION ISSUE

A simple cardboard lever m1d1 = m2d2 was constructed balanced by two steel needles and metal bricks m1 and m2 at gravity distances d1 and d2, certifying that the greater m1 on the shorter d1 do rest against the support (left) when the gramophone plate is at rest.

— By experimenting with weights and distances on a testing displacement, given the lowest rotational turn 33 RPM of the record turntable, it was soon observed that

• the m1d1 gravity center raised in a perfect balance with the m2d2 part when the turntable speeded up and reached its 33 RPM.

• The same mechanical end situation should be the case in the phenomena with the observed — or concluded — planetary perihelion precession:

• Adding to the normal balancing two-body lever (Sun and planet), is a secondary lever momentum — BECAUSE an ADDITIONAL (corresponding) mechanical influence between the two bodies has been introduced : the phenomena have nothing of Einstien’s theory of relativity.

• It apparently is the only remaining candidate of a mass influence if no electric or magnetic charge is provable in the region;

• ADDITIONAL (UpStart) MATTER (inertia) flows, is being pushed or veered, from the heavier onto the lighter — the metal brick-balance explainis the physical principle behind the Sun-Planet issue. Compare The spinning TOP Experiments (Axial Gyro Precession Basic Mathematics): how the angular velocity adds or removes INERTIA to/from the spin axis depending on speed: »same level of understanding difficulty». A formidable riddle unless experimentally experienced: gyro Physics IS a (mathematical) challenge.

The Kepler-Centrifugal-AreaMomentum (Eddington form) mathematics connects to the established mathematics (Wikipedia/Einstein expression) through Kepler’s Third Law, as it now has been found and deduced. The phenomena points out no relativity aspect at all in the perihelion precession physics.

Compare [AllKeplerMath] the further below formal Kepler developed connections on Modern Ideas .. :

THE DEGREE [unitTurn] EXPRESSION:

——————————————————————————

v = 2πR/T ;

3(v/c)² = 3(2πR/Tc)² ; the basic Eddington u/v0 form: the clean circular impact:

No orbital velocity variations: no relativity argumentation:

= 12π²R²/(Tc)² ; the degree/unit expression

——————————————————————————

THE RADIAN EXPRESSION:

——————————————————————————

2π = 360 · π/180 = degrees times radians;

——————————————————————————

2π3(v/c)² = 2π12π²R²/(Tc)² ;

6π(v/c)² = 24π³R²/(Tc)² ;

= 24π³R²/(Tc)²(1–e²) ; with e=0 = a perfect Circle: 1/(1–e²) = 1.

So: The factor 1/(1–e²) is automatically included as 1 on a [ >90% ] basic circular application:

See tabled quantities in TheCircleArgument;

= 24π³R²/(Tc)²/(1–e²) ; also exactly The Wikipedia/Einstein RADIAN expression ¦ 1–e² = E² = (r/R)²

= σ ;

——————————————————————————

Arguing Relativity theory — The Circle argument: >90% — on this physical phenomena is apparently relativity suicide.

TheExperiment

AllKeplerMath: ConcludingAllKeplerMATH ¦ FormallyKeplerMath

Experiment

The connections — claimed by Wikipedia as »Einstein’s relativistic equations»

are apparently drawn directly from Kepler’s Third, as deduced: but modern academy apparently cannot show this — unless we have missed something:

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Gm₂/(2π)² = R³/T² ; Kepler’s Third

G = (2π)²R³/T²m₂ ;

Gm₂ = (2π)²R³/T²

= 4π² R³/T² ; 1–e² = E² = (r/R)² : the circle has e = 0 :

= 24π³ R⁴/(T² · 6πR) ; These [TheMATH] have apparently no connection at all to relativistic mathematics. No mother god loving way.

6πRGm₂ = 24π³R⁴/(T)² ;

; a substitution with (rc)² introduces a Temperature constant which connects the phenomena to Sun’s Light Field: temperature-pressure:

CENTRAL ACTION PHYSICS — Kepler area momentum K=vr (Planck momentum h/m=cr):

6πRGm₂/(cr)² = 24π³R⁴/(Tcr)² ; substitutions on cr — incorporating a [ thermal ] LIGHT factor c — along with 1–e² : celestial orbital equalities [CEPH]: ¦ vr → cr : Kepler/Planck: r=R:

= 24π³R²/(Tc)² ;

= 24π³R²/(Tc)²(1–e²) ; with e=0 = a perfect Circle. So: The factor 1/(1–e²) is automatically included as 1 on a [ >90% ] basic circular application: see TheCircleArgument.

= 24π³R²/(Tc)²(1–e²) ; The Wikipedia/Einstein RADIAN expression — STILL no sign of relativity theory here. Just plain [substitutional] Kepler math.

————————————————

6πGm₂/(cr)² = 2·3·4π³R³/(Tcr)² ; 4π²R²/T² = (2πR/T)² = v² ;

————————————————

6πGm₂/(cr)² = 2·3·πR(2πR/T)²/(cr)² ;

6πGm₂/(cr)² = 2πR · 3 · v² /(cr)² ; R = r : mean Sun distance: leads to the simple circular [e=0] Eddington form:

3Gm₂/rc² = 3(v/c)² ; checked, verified, = u/v0 . See Sections1234 ¦ 2π · 3Gm₂/Rc² = 6π Gm₂R/R²c² ; the Wikipedia/Einstein radian form

; STILL No sign of any relativity theory aspects or arguments.

These ranks also connect to Number5 ¦ Sections1234 ¦ CaseClosed ¦ ConcludingAllKeplerMath ¦ FormallyKeplerMath ¦ KeplerMomentumBasics

————————————————

3Gm₂/rc² = 3(v/c)² = u/v₀ ; fractional rotation Eddington quoted form — u/v₀ = u(M/S)/(v₀=1M/S), = u°(v₀=360°) .. ¦ c = c₀ :

u/v₀ = 3Gm₂/rc₀²

= (3Gm₂/c₀)/rc₀ ; INTRODUCING THE Suns4 TNED DEDUCED THERMAL [ ButLOOK ] PRESSURE COMPONENT:

= (3Gm₂/c₀)[γTNED(Tg¦°K)]^–1 ; γ = 5.09345773954984 T24 °K·M²/S ;

= (3Gm₂/c₀)[r¹([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^–1/4]^–1 ; (5.2).1 ¦ ; (5.2).3 :

= 3(Gm₂/c₀)[ 5.09345773954984 T24 °K·M2/S · r]^–1[([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^1/4]

= (1/r)[4429.80849084701 M] ; (5.2).2.3

These above are the simple Eddington form CIRCULAR e=0 expressions where the full elliptic orbit morphology has the form witn an added 1/[1–e²] : AllKeplerMath

m₂ = mS = 1.98963199771721 T30 KG ¦ G = 6.67010000933003 t11 JM/[KG]² — see The Electric Constant .

u/v₀(1–e²) = [r(1–e²)]^–1[4429.80849084701 M] ; (5.2).2.3 , = (3Gm₂/c₀)/rc₀(1–e²) = 3(v/c)²(1–e²)^–1 ;

The TNED — Suns4 — deduced Tgamma — the Sun’s Light Field thermal pressure [from Stefan-Boltzmann’s radiation law, see ButLOOK]:

[ p = (1/3) · a’ · TNED(Tg¦°K)⁴ ] = [ p = G(m₂/2r²)²/π ] ; thermal divergent pressure and radial gravitational contractive pressure are in exact balance:

TNED(Tg¦°K) = r^–1([G(m₂)²/4π]/ak_P)^1/4 ; See details in CaseClosed. Adding the aC full arcSeconds/100y, column 1 from left:

(5.2).2.3 (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = (r[1–e²])^–1 × 4429.80849084701 M × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) .

SEE ALSO THE COMPARING QUANTITATIVE RESULTS in TheRESULT :

So:

RELATIVITY THEORY APPARENTLY HAS NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH THE PHENOMENA. NOT 1 ATOM.

All basic Kepler math.

AllKeplerMath

PhysicsFirst:

PHYSICS SEVEN PRINCIPLES — »enhanced Newton’s 3 — included as P4 NEONS» on the deduction of the atomic nucleus

from Planck constant h = mcr: THE NEUTRON

PHYSICS FIRST PRINCIPLE — STATE

Related physics and mathematics — apparently and provably unknown in modern academy 1800+

———————————————

The MAL ¦ Physics 7 Principles

Physics First Principle

What apparently modern academy 1800+ never cogitated, never cared about, never got to the nerve about, and hence never understood

which highly includes the basics of mathematics, especially on the level of the higher analysis, the calculus (integrals, their derivatives and their differentials):

PhysicsFirstMATH: PhysicsFirstPrinciple

Inability to relate these basic-apprehending provisional-details, trying to change them, alter them or in any way ignore them, inevitably and unequivocally leads to confusion, paradoxes and other misconceptions both in mathematics and especially in physics — tempting, or suggesting, an institutionalized industry of INVENTING ideas of logic and reason TO FIT. Exactly what happened in modern academy 1800+ [Cantor, Dedekind and Weierstrass]. Leonhard Euler [1707-1783] stands as the only true classic school representative for, apparently, having grasped the essence in the above illustrated. Also respected — and further developed — here in related physics and mathematics [The Euler Equivalents][FormLaws][Variants and Universals].

We use — when ASSOCIATING from position points xyz to values the [not established »overGoesINTO» or »transfersTO»] the »OverEqual» sign as in dt 0 the time differential from positions to values is zero in using the differential position form for developing variants [differential equations] to universals [integrals ¦ an integral has no constituents]. The closest »OverEqual» available Windows font sign is the Symbol Font [MicrosoftWord2000: Alt+0219, marked with Ctrl+Shift+Q gives] . But that sign has a reserved notation in conventional mathematics [Wikipedia, Mathematical signs] as ”logical equivalence” with ”is equivalent to” or ”if and only if”. But BECAUSE modern academic nomenclature has no definition of TRUTH=certainty [the IF-clauses, the CONDITION-clauses, and the STATE-clauses — especially as quoted on the use of the imperative dx and Δx notations] these conventional terms may cause [and do so] more confusion than education in scientific matters [compare ResultExample ..].

We could use the ATsign @ as »a good substitute»: dt@0: ”dt AT 0” taken →, or ”0 AT dt” taken ←, whichever. But that would demand this here presented reference: »related physics first principle mathematics».

But again: that is not allowed in MicrosoftWORD, to exemplify: the program automates such notation to ”mailto:dt@0” in trying to establish a LINK. So: that way is SHUT. See also The Zero Integral: modern academic math ideas in general. [The conditions Were better year 1311].

as the basic foundation of physics, apparently is: the related generalized formulation: physics first principle:

STATE: PFM ¦ PF

PHYSICS MEASURING OBSERVATIONS IS BASED ON INSTRUMENTATION — EQUILIBRIUM BALANCE, state. NOT »INERTIAL SYSTEMS».

instrumentation:

A BALL HANGING IN A THREAD FROM A ROOF IN ANY PHYSICAL BODY, in any kind of situation or movement, guaranteed no exception.

STATE — ABSOLUTE PHYSICAL REFERENCE: APARC

Related Physics first principle

THERE ARE NO »INERTIAL SYSTEMS»: Physical laws hold FOR systems. Never ever IN them:

• Physics contains no state — absolute position determination during zero time extension. Physics is restless (atomic, nuclear: mass, spin and charge), continuous CHANGE with no absolute preference of REST whatsoever: no rest in physics. No mother god loving way: h=mcr.

ONE SINGLE INSTRUMENTAL READOUT — anywhere, anyplace, anytime, no restrictions:

• But physics is necessarily so described, fathomed, apprehended and definitely certainly understood: THROUGH such a STATE (Hollywood Rendering: one definite position for every object everywhere, independent of distance, per one single movie picture: the ideal no time freeze state):

— the distance between bodies independent of time: the now: dt0: No time at all.

• Thereof the principles. Inevitably and unequivocally we must DIFFERENTIATE — distinguish — between the World of PHENOMENA — physics: change — and the world of UNDERSTANDING — timeless state: no physics. Phenomena World — differences Δx. Understanding world, differentials dx. Mathematically these are explained (as it seems also apprehended by Leonhard Euler, see The Euler Equivalents) through a MasterUnit defining both these imperative concepts into one single understandable unit. See TheMasterUnit (∞: »endless») or THE QUANTITY INDEPENDENT:

• points cannot be added: there are no infinite amounts.

Δx = x/[n→∞] ............... the interval or difference: not continuous to zero

dx = x/∞

= x · 1/∞ ................... the point or the differential: continuous to-with zero

See also related: RECKONING LAWS FOR THE quantity independent ENDLESS.

In the first case [n→∞] is interpreted n grows unlimited — approaches the infinite endlessly.

In the second case ∞ is interpreted quantity independent: dx 0 when positions = values: 0.

• These two can — hence — never be misunderstood or misapprehended, mixed or mingled,

BECAUSE A DIFFERENCE — THE INTERVAL — CAN NEVER BE DESTROYED: the AtomTriangle:

No matter how distances — differences, intervals — are divided:

the part closest to zero can never be divided: The Atom Triangle.

See examples in The Intervals’ Indestructibility, synthesized in Zenon’sTheorem [coined term here in related physics and mathematics only from Zeno’s classic aphorism, Achilles and the Turtle] :

— the nature of continuity.

In modern corridors (sometimes”Δx = dx”) these distinctions are banned — by DRIFT, not plan. Nature2022: The modern academic resistance against adopting admiration for natural preferences.

IN EXPLICIT gravitation and light.

See DivergenceConvergence and GripDeep, unless already familiar.

See also Isaac Newton on Grasping the Gravitational Action Principle [From BLAVATSKY QUOTES NEWTON, The Secret Doctrine by H. P. Blavatsky -- Vol. 1, s490 (1888)] — or »The Transport Syndrome»: Neither Newton did understand the meaning of the differential concept (Newton’s infinitesimals — see Swedish edition Why did Newton miss the differential). But apparently Leonhard Euler did (never really apprehended by modern academy[‡]).

Summing:

The WAY we think — and apprehend. Do Say. First principle. Definitely the first. The APARC.

Having seen that in mind once, integrals and derivatives and differentials become a Joy (»they tend to develop erotic properties to the interested individual ..»).

.. Days passed to weeks, that passed to months .. and ..

.. suddenly the word processor program became so loaded with integral indexing expressions that it started to lose contact with the already written ..

PhysicsFirst

GripDeep: DivergenceConvergence — Gravitation Principle, CONVERGENCE principle GRIP, and DIVERGENCE principle DEEP ¦ Physics 7 Principles — unknown in modern quarters

GRIP ¦ DEEP ¦ PhysicsFIRST ¦ TheSolarEclipses ¦ ExperimentalConfirmations

Again (REGULARc):

In modern academy, no idea of the difference between the nature of gravitation and that of light (electricity) exists explaining — relating — that

Gravitation works equal to all matter, cannot be shielded from: hence independent of time.

LIGHT works different for all matter, CAN be shielded from, and hence is time dependent.

• light is not gravitation = mass: LIGHT IS MASSLESS = GRAVITATION-LESS — completely centrifugally dead.

• light = no kinetics. No way. Give us the argument against — and we will surrender immediately. Absolutely.

♦ c and v are not additive in physics. Any such claim or idea, leads to fundamental misconceptions — culture crash.

By DRIFT. Not plan. Say.

———————————————

SolarEclipses ¦ TwoArguments

:

INSTEAD again — our famous magic world science history

• because the modern academic adoption of Einstein’s special relativity did so state: the v+ic error, and

• Although every person in modern corridors knows that LIGHT DOES NOT CONNECT KINETICS,

— Modern academic thinking persists in the idea that »gravitation propagates through space».

Meaning: Every detailed related DEEP explanation of our cosmic existence becomes BANNED BY MODERN ACADEMIC IDEATION — by DRIFT. Not plan, even though it may seem so. That is:

• The consequences of turning ones back to nature — gravitation and electricity: LIFE —

• generates spontaneous destructive characters against HumanRight, Nature Respected.

DRIFT. Illustrated,

On the planetary perihelion precession phenomena

APPARENTLY AND RELATEABLY so blocked by its own inventions, modern academic thinking has (continuously) blocked itself from the simple explanation:

THE SIMPLE EXPLANATION:

— certified as intrinsically clean from relativistic ideas:

• gravitational interaction is linear — absolute APPREHENSIVE STATE:

— time [ UNDERSTATEMENT, MATHEMATICS ] independency principle

— working on a central vector

while

• light-electricity action is not: it is c-delayed: curved.

APPARENTLY Without these principle parts understood any DEEP explanation at all will resist an interested investigating tourist.

See further related details in TheSolarEclipses1900+.

GripDEEP

THEcrFACTORS: crREF

ThePerihelionPrecessions

TheExperiment

THE cr THERMALLY CONNECTED FACTORS IN THE PLANETARY ORBIT PERIHELION PRECESSION MATHEMATICS

———————————————

Number5 ¦ AllKEPLERmath

In the original (Nov2007 ¦ Experimental Confirmations, Planets’ Perihelion Precessions) only the (Circle) simple Eddington form (3v²/c) was known. It was not until recently (Nov2022 ¦ Wikipedia, Tests of general relativity) that the full expression did reveal its hidden secrets (AllKeplerMath).

• The WikipediaEinstein expression exhibited, as we now thoroughly have seen, a regular Kepler Math deduction — by a simple substitution of the cr factors: all Kepler math.

• Further TNED detective analyze exhibited another — dramatically exposed — discovery (ButLOOK):

———————————————

THEcr ¦ FirstLIGHTtable — energy source

Really.

The energy source behind the phenomena — FirstLIGHTtable

• The complex revealed already (thermal: Suns4) earlier TNED deduced connections WITH

• an apparently (earlier hidden) revealed less admirable Modern Academic Feature:

Modern Academy (1800+) apparently and provably in to the last atom

• exists in a self created (ignorant) cocoon, say again any educated PhD on Earth 2023,

• refusing to see, even look, into any of its outside parts,

• constantly consulting relativity theory aspects to fill in the missing natural connections,

• apparently also including — without addressing — the TNED deduced aspects (AllKeplerMath: perihelion precessions),

• that apparently explains the entire complex: no relativityt theory aspects.

But do note that, again:

Apparently by (cocoon) DRIFT. Not plan. No deliberate strategy, what we know.

The reader may very well disclaim any of these (upsetting) conclusive statements, if such arguments are found. Here: searched for. None yet found.

As If — compare the implications:

— »We are of the opinion that ”HumanRight” — environment — issues do not belong to scientific engagements, that science — court — stands above such (childish) nonsense, and that the inducement for scientific research has higher aspirations than that type of childish nonsense».

There is no such open proclamation, what we know.

• But it appears AS ILLUSTRATED to be the one governing it all:

General present academic state educational governmental care for

global ACADEMIC EARTH POPULAR GREEN ENVIRONMENT.

Say again: — that is wrong.

Indignant doctoral protestants.

• Not one word HumanRight.

Humanity IS imprisoned — by DRIFT, not plan: destructiveness; violence is gushing out of it. Say.

THEcrFACTORS

PressureMinMax: crFACTORS ¦ ThePerihelionPrecessions ¦ PrecessionEnergy ¦

The foremost constants used in this production are listed with values and their source links in Suns4.

SolenT2022.odsT2 U22

The column on Tg, Pa gives the actual corresponding thermal pushing quantities that apparently define the different planet’s perihelion precessions,

according to the radial equality balance between gravitational pressure and thermal pressure. See TheRESULT for more details.

— As noted above (all connections in CaseClosed and FirstLIGHTtable):

• Zero thermal pressure RESISTANCE holds on a body resting or moving when THERMODYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM — saturated light field — applies.

• Max thermal pressure RESISTANCE develops when (a radical) CHANGE occurs in the thermal light field.

— See (illustrated) CoriolisResolution ¦ PerihelionPrecessions on the radial and radial-transverse vectorial details.

• Then max (radial) pressure is defined by the equal gravitational-radial convergent-pressure (m2=mS=SunMass)

p = G(m₂/2r²)²/π ; at 1AU fron Sun — Earth orbit — the pMAX becomes [constants in TheRESULT] 1AU: BA1978: 1AU=1.4959787 T11 M

p = (6.67010000933003 t11 JM/[KG]²)(1.98963199771721 T30 KG / 2AU²)²/π ; The Earth case :

= 41953.32196855 Pa ; At the Pluto orbit pMAX is only 0.01733879 Pa.

BETWEEN the stars and galaxies, the g-potentials from the different surrounding star masses cancel (de Sitter’s analyze 1920):

— The above expressions loose meaning in interstellar space.

— With the (Number5 ¦ Sections1234) unit equivalent for the perihelion precession expression,

u/v₀ = 3(v/c)² ; the simple unitive Eddington form ¦ u/v0 revolves a fraction 3[v/c]² of the normal planetary ANOMALISTIC period;

• MATHEMATICALLY DEDUCTIVE SOURCE, see Formally Kepler Area Momentum mathematics;

• the precession magnitude u relative the orbital revolution [v] with v0=1M/S for equal numerical units fraction:

• the precession velocity u M/S relative the mean orbital velocity v M/S: uM/S/vM/S

• the degree u° relative the ordinary orbit’s one turn 360° : u°/360°

• the radian fraction 2pi·u relative one turn 2pi = 360° · pi/180 : See WikiRadianREF ;

• this CIRCULAR ORBIT value holds with >90% for all planets, table below/in TheCIRCLEargument;

the full 100% expression (also the form in Wikipedia/Einstein ¦ Sections1234) is written

u/v₀(1–e²) = 3(v/c)²(1–e²)^–1 ; including the actual elliptic form — it represents an addition of less than 10% of the actual value, all planets, see Table.

♦ Developing through Kepler’s Third in TwoArguments gives the equivalent

u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/rc₀(1–e²) ; which — table below — corresponds to the e column u/v0 values [TheCIRCLEargument]:

SolenT2022.odsT2 AR20

Relativity aspects in a >90% Circular orbit quantity are apparently excluded. Compare traditional 1900s facts textbook quote in RelativisticMass.

The perfect circular orbit has no velocity variations: No relativistic viewpoint.

The precession phenomena is definitely not a relativistic phenomena.

See fully deduced mathematics details in AllKeplerMath ¦ THEcrFactors.

PressureMinMax

TheGeneralREF: — The General Reference — ASPECTS EXPLAINING THE PHENOMENAL EXISTENCE of PLANETARY PERIHELION PRECESSION

BEFORE SUN’S FIRST LIGHT — the related build up energy (POINT ¦ FirstLIGHTtable ¦ The4P), the reasonable cause behind the perihelion precession phenomena — THESE FIGURES DID NOT EXIST:

• Also one of THE REASONS BEHIND why modern academic thinking apparently has locked itself out from UNDERSTANDING the nature of the function,

• AS HERE only certified as understood only as far as CORRECTLY RELATED — or not at all:

THE GENERAL PRECESSIONAL FUNCTIONAL (v/c) RELATION

Multiplying the pMAX thermal pressure with the v/c relation between the planet’s mean orbital velocity and the fix pMAX thermal pressure light DIVERGENCE (c=c0) in Sun’s light field, renders our final answer: the actual thermal Sun light field pressure in N/M² responsible — Newton’s three laws of Action and Reaction — for the perihelion precession phenomena. [connecting the planets revolving T-pressure relative pMAX].

BECAUSE modern academy — apparently on credit of its own invented ideas instead of deduced such: details; obscuring and blocking the tremendous natural possibilities in a rational and logical understanding of natural phenomenal physics — modern academy is also standing outside the simple perihelion precession dynamical explanation. As here, AllKeplerMath explaining the equivalent thermodynamic calculable pressure by which the precession phenomena apparently did evolve, or can so be understood to have evolved during a first short Sun light upstart period (The4P) — or not at all.

———————————————

SolenT2022.odsT2 U22 ¦ CoriolisResolution ¦ POINT ¦ LocalGdominance ¦ FirstLIGHTtable ¦ The4P

Related explanation:

When the first light build up accelerating thermal pressure energy has reached its saturated level, no more energy input (TheExperiment) is given for contributions to a precessional rotation:

Gravitation works equal to all matter, cannot be shielded from: hence independent of time

LIGHT works different for all matter, CAN be shielded from, and hence is time dependent

BESIDES THAT, DURING THE UPSTART:

Light does not connect kinetics (TwoArguments) (But CHANGES IN it can still affect matter through ThePotentialBarrier) — and hence no interactive interference between KeplerMoments (gravitation) and ThermalPressureChanges (light): they apparently exist independent (AllKeplerMath).

Planetary motion in mass-empty free space meets no motional resistance — if also IN A STAR LIGHT ILLUMINATED ENVIRONMENT a state of thermal-pressure-dynamical equilibrium is the case (which latter BY CHANGE can only affect the precession aspect, as concluded in PrecessionEnergy).

Build up (precession) pressure energy is defined on a corresponding temperature accelerating history, before a final saturated state is reached, and a condition of thermodynamic equilibrium is established: no more precessional input (The4P).

FOREMOST REFLECTED CONCLUSION:

• Modern academic 1800+ thinking had it all on the table — but had and still has also on the table some 200 years of ardent INVENTIONS apparently blocking a true path of deduction.

Say again.

The General Reference — ASPECTS EXPLAINING THE PHENOMENAL EXISTENCE of PLANETARY PERIHELION PRECESSION

ByQuality: ThePUSH .. how it came about ..

BY PHYSICAL PRINCIPLE — planetary perihelion precession

QUALITATIVELY

CONFIRMATIONS BY QUALITY

The cr-component (AllKeplerMath ¦ THEcrFACTORS) complete expression and underlying possible physical connection in TheComplete apparently (Suns4) only confirms what was underlined in TwoARGUMENTS (Light’s liberty clause in related physics):

PROMINENTLY DEMONSTRATED IN THE GENERAL MODERN ACADEMIC v+ic-error —— v is not additive with c : no such reasonable relatable mathematics exists in physics

LIGHT PHYSICS (c) DOES NOT CONNECT KINETICS (v)

Over and over and over again, in every physical phenomenal measuring and observing and calculating aspect of our cosmic existence: light physics does not connect kinetics, not gravitation, not mechanics —

but it was a great task for modern academy 1800+ to Invent a Unitive Theory where It Did.

Mechanics is the only apprehensive instrument we have in explaining physics in a rational, reasonable logical way. You know: right .. left .. 1 .. 2 ..

But modern academy 1800+ had to invent other orders (”gravitation is acceleration”).

The precessional rotation does not affect the ordinary Kepler area momentum planetary rotation.

No way. Not the slightest. Not even on my best day.

Why? Comparing todays observations TheRESULT with (timeless) AllKeplerMath. CaseClosed. Say: a direct hit.

Ordinary Kepler area momentum (anomalistic) planetary Sun orbiting and orbital precession apparently exist as two INDEPENDENT phenomena: side by side. »Left AND right».

And too, apparently excellently so related by Action-Reaction physics through Newton’s 3.

Destructor:

IF — as it apparently appears — there would be any the slightest INTERACTION between these — as has been suggested in modern corridors the past 100 years; »light physics forces ordinary planetary rotation into a decreased state of orbital velocity» and which we know is neither the case, nor claimed to be so in modern quarters — the Kepler area momentum physics would not hold. And, what we know, neither would any reasonable mathematical explanation exist to the phenomena. TheCIRCLEargument excludes relativity as such.

Constructor:

The Stefan-Boltzmann deduced expression — GENERAL thermal radiation pressure N/M² from any light source p = (1/3) · 2k_P · T⁴ ¦ 2k_P = 7.565214266 t16 NM^–2°K^–4 — connects the deduced g-pressure in TNED:s general star physics pressure expression (^γp = p_G – p_E)

— never observed in modern quarters due to its lack of an atomic nucleus deduction, TNED

— with the actual Sun’s Light Field EXACTLY radially BALANCING thermal pressure Tγ

— NOT through the only heat degree modern academy apparently is aware of: TP, the familiar Planck heat degree in related physics it begins from the Sun’s surface, BUT

— THROUGH the TNED star physics deduced (Tγ) and apparently Stefan-Boltzmann SUPPORTED heat degree connected to HOW — related physics — a star, our Sun, works.

Conclusive:

APPARENTLY AS SO RELATED: Modern academy physics 1800+ built itself into a Cocoon, apparently forcing all reason onto ITS OUT. Is there a Butterfly in there? That would indeed be nice. Because MAC it is definitely not.

— A »THE ACADEMY OF RELATED SCIENCE» apparently has no present human culture representation: zero consensus: knowledge. ALL HumanRight mentioning, respecting and recognizing: NATURE. Compare today: A complete vandalization.

• After 200 years of .. What? You name it. Education? Say again.

Apparently by DRIFT. Not plan. Ignorance.

Something went really wrong in our world history from around 1800.

Not to say beginning from around 0.

Or perhaps more complementary somewhere from 4000 B.C.

ByQuality

TheNeutronSquareBreakThrough:

BasicMathRanks: PhysicsFirst ¦ TheNeutronSquareBreakThrough ¦ CheopsRectangleMATH ¦ KeplerMomentumBasics ¦ AllKeplerMath ¦

By examples:

RELATED PHYSICS EXPLANATIONS — Nov2022+

THE BASIC MATHEMATICAL RANKS OF THE PERIHELION PRECESSION COMPLEX

COMPARING BASIC KEPLER MATH WITH MODERN MATHEMATICAL RELATIVISTIC CLAIMS — be our guest

All the details in

AllKeplerMATH

THE GPS EXAMPLE ONLY CLARIFIES THESE ASPECTS FURTHER , GIVING RELATIVITY THEORY ITS FINAL

»EXPERIMENTAL OBSERVATIONAL CERTIFICATE»

By DRIFT — Not plan.

— We leave no one behind: explanations. Not claiming any supremacy. Ever. Just pure motherly care.

NOTE WELL — by Drift. NOT BY ANY DELIBERATE PLANNING. And so, by relatable causes and effects. Say again:

MODERN ACADEMY 1800+ INVENTED IDEAS — EXPLANATIONS OF PHYSICS — IN REALITY BLOCKING A TRUE WELL RELATED UNDERSTANDING OF PHYSICS

so that modern academy has developed a skill of being intrinsically unable and incapable of explaining the phenomena in the straight, rational, logic classic dynamical mechanical enlightening way — with preserved 100% brains. Holding humanity in a mental prison — not by any plan.

Only by DRIFT — as developed spontaneously by ideas NOT recognizing HumanRight 24/7: Children and animals handle it excellently.

Proof enough:

— Tell me I’m a liar: MATHEMATICS IS THE MOST FAVORITE AND ABOVE ALL AND EVERYTHING ELSE BELOVED SUBJECT AMONG THE ORDINARY CITY PEDESTRIANS, now (some Dec2022). Yes. It is such a global joy with fresh biological harmony and peace. I have never, ever, felt so secure.

Really.

On the Idea that »We decide for ourselves»

— independent of any other natural authority Than That, free from consequences (the basic delusive mind-kicking fundamental fascistic idea of freedom)

— violence develops.

Oblivious of The Law That Never Fails (children and animals handles it excellently), STATE AUTHORITY IDEAS fail — with no exception — to recognize that:

• Claim, decision, idea, thought, opinion, sentence, suggestion outside HumanRight recognition has only power to destroy.

3Gy of APPARENTLY perfect assembly in an UNDISTURBED nature — plants, animals ..

3Gy of APPARENTLY perfect assembly in an UNDISTURBED nature — plants, animals ..

There are no exceptions. If you find one: please do share. Gravitation, electricity: life. Law. Come again. Swedish police, court, prosecutor. Say again.

— Everywhere where HumanRight is a subject of oblivion. Everywhere where a human live its day in fear of punishment for being a human. Any reason.

China. Russia .. Denmark .. Sweden ..

Humanity is held in a mental prison by modern academy 1800+ — on DRIFT. Not plan. Please do disclaim.

— Nobody wanted it to be like this, that it should develop like this. No way.

As related:

1800+ MODERN ACADEMY INVENTED IDEAS — BLOCKING A FULLY RELATED, RATIONAL LOGICAL NATURAL EXPLANATION

BLOCKING — please say something intelligent — OF

• the perfectly natural physical and mathematical conservation of light’s top divergence propagation velocity in empty free space independent of gravitational influence:

———————————————

ExperimentalConfirmations ¦ CheopsRectangleMATH ¦ Light’sGravitationalDependency ¦ PotentialBarrier ¦ APPLICATIONS

• resulting in a DRIFT — consequence of carelessness and stupidity — that opposes REASON IN every single Natural deducing part in mathematics and physics SUCH AS THE FIRST PRINCIPLE in MATHEMATICS:

• Modern academic teaching system is, apparently and provably, intrinsically locked out from understanding (ask the average pedestrian), explaining and relating THE BASICS in Calculus: integral, derivative, differential — into their last single atom — DRIFTING UP a set of A-people and B-people with corresponding IQ-ideas:

— ”I’m ugly”; ”I have no value”; ”My life is meaningless”; ”LIFE is meaningless”, ”Fuck you asshole”.

— A state of individual depression (heart breaking sadness) — correct if wrong — only appears where the individual is surrounded by BAD COMPANY. The individual is fine. The company crashes it. Bad culture.

• The LIST gives specific comparing and cross referring examples on the look (apparently not much different from THIS) of the different expressions in the different branches inside That type of Culture.

— The individual never gets a change to BE (24/7).

The articles with (further) links in UH exposes the actual details. In a sum:

IT IS AS IF the 1800+ modern academic IDEA had no idea at all of a The Ultimate Purposefulness of Nature. Having grown the human brain during a rough 3Gy, apparently intended for developing a corresponding MIND — nervous system caring — associative set of intelligible explanations to the different wonders of our universe, WHERE the foremost Not existent factor in modern academy became: The Woman. More or less: directly excluded; »a Low minded, pussyWagon for Breeding Higher Status».

— And these days, please: Where is She now? Please do share.

Really. Harmony. Beauty. Purposefulness in all Natures creations.

BasicMathRanks

TheMath: ThePoint ¦ AllKeplerMATH

ConcludingAllKeplerMath

CENTRIFUGAL ACCELERATION å = v²/r ON A KEPLER AREA MOMENTUM K = vr ¦ v³ → uc² ¦ it reflects a Coriolis Effect

THE MATH - detailed in AllKeplerMATH

A deflective time delayed TanA=v/c stream of thermo nuclear c-radiation pressured particles

follow the orbiting body from the central thermo nuclear active star mass. As the pressure effect tugs on the orbiting body,

a direct second gravitational momentum arm is established, and responsible for a small additional orbital revolution.

• In modern academy, there is no »thermo nuclear radiation pressure» physics [electro-gravitational tug]: related physics’ elementary star math :

The way our Sun works ¦ TemperatureBASICS —— basic applied nuclear physics: modern academy is a complete outsider in it

— forced to invent a »space curvature» to compensate for the lack of natural insight:

FormallyKeplerMath: TheMATH ¦ TheExperiment

ConcludingAllKeplerMath

ConvergenceDivergence.

From integral to derivative — All Kepler MATH

Formally — Centrifugation v²/r and Kepler Momentum K=vr (=h/m)

Basically Planck constant properties: h=mcr

åK = (v²/r)(vr) = v³ ; (= →) uc² : formally : v³ = v₁v₂v₃ ; v₁ = u ; v₂ = v₂ = c ; v³ → uc² ;

WHEREAS c and v does not connect in physics (Light’s Liberty Clause: LIGHT DOES NOT CONNECT KINETICS), the centrifugal(å)-Kepler(vr) momentum åK=v³ becomes split into a two (combining)component complex :

• (electro-)gravitational action via v³ the total action and

• an appeared extra orbital rotation (u¦/v₀) in combination with an outer constant v-independent velocity system c:

• v³ (= →) uc²: Variable v transfers (constant v₀) a constant — no variation: just an equivalent — uc² :

— THEN uc² can not be derived as any kind of v-variable:

— uc² must be handled as (derived from) a CONSTANT — with respect to the variable v

— because c is a constant, and u as causally derived from the c-action (the thermo nuclear radiation pressure action) is a constant too — inseparable from the not changing c: FORMALLY:

• constant uc²: Dn (v³) = d(uc²)/dv = uc²d(1)/dv = uc²/(v=v₀) = (v³)’ = 3v²; v [=v0] defines the only variable

• constant uc²: Dn (v³) = d(uc²)/dv = uc²d(1)/dv = uc²/v₀ = (v³)’ = 3v²; v is the only variable — not uc.

The only way to preseverve a MATCHING UNIT is apparently to relate the variable v on a CONSTANT form (v₀):

• u/v₀ = 3v²/c² ;

IN COMPLETING THE EXPRESSION, only a form factor is missing: the additional [1/(1–e²)]=1 with circle’s e=0;

• ................... Dn (v³) = 3v² = d(uc²)/dv₀ = uc²d(1)/dv₀ = uc²/v₀ = (v³)’ ;

The v₀ defines the numerical unit between the ranking parts : (M/S)² = (M/S)² :

hence v₀ = 1M/S — the necessary unit correcting factor.

u/v₀ = 3v²/c² = 3(TanA°)²

• Dn v³ = (v³)’ = 3v² ,= CONSTANT = uc²/v₀ ; 3v²/c² = u/v₀

——————————————————————————————————————

• 3(v/c)² = u/v₀ ; 3(TanA°)² = u/v₀ ; v₀ = 1M/S the necessary balancing unit coefficient

• 3a(v/c)² = u/v₀ ; 3a(TanA°)² = u/v₀ ;

: the cosmic electric-thermal displacement.

BECAUSE — BasicEPSmath — e=0 for the Circle, there is an automated circle factor 1=1/[1—e²] in the above. See also TheEddingtonForm.

The integral connects to the centrifugal-Kepler area momentum complex:

du/dv = 3a(v²/c²) ; du = 3a(v²/c²) dv ; the formal integral:

3a(v²/c²) dv = (3a/c²) v² dv = (3a/c²)v³/3 = av³/c² ; = → auc²/c² = au the precession ; v³ → uc² ;

åK = (v²/r)(vr) = v³ ; (= →) uc² : formally : v³ = v₁v₂v₃ ; v₁ = u ; v₂ = v₂ = c ; v³ → uc² ;

electro-THERMAL-gravitational effect from star thermal nuclear reactions — completely unknown inside modern academic teaching system

The simple Eddington expression has the form factor 1/[1—e²] included as The circle [1] with e=0 — the above is the raw elementary form

TheMath

CalCardRef: TheRESULT

Introductory

EXAMPLE, quantities: Planet MERCURY, Venus and EARTH: — attested as (if) accurately measured :

u/v₀ = 3(v/c₀)² ¦ u/v₀ = 3(v/c₀)²/(1—e²) ¦ c₀ = 2.99792458 T8M/S :

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

CalCard for exact quantity calculated references ¦ 8Nov2022 for UniverseHistory

RELATIVITY THEORY APPARENTLY COMPLETELY EXPIRES

On its own credit:

EINSTEIN GOT THE MATH OK. Yes. But It is apparently not relativistic. It relates a simple Kepler/Planck complex — the math is elementary, no big deal:

In a perfectly Circular orbit, eccentricity coefficient is 0: (1–e²) = 1: no velocity variations = no relativistic effects: RelativisticMass cannot explain The MATH:

the phenomena apparently and provably in to the last atom does not connect to relativity theory.

With a contribution of more than 95% for the first three planets Mercury, Venus and Earth on the simple Eddington circular orbit form — no orbital v-variation, and hence no input for an idea of ”relativistic mass” (Quote) — any whatsoever relativistic idea of the phenomena apparently is out of question — and a relativity theory suicide: the phenomena of planetary perihelion precessions has no doubt any relativistic theory connection at all. No way. All KeplerMath.

Results compiled fromSolenT2022.ods T2 A20+ ¦ Number5 ¦ AllNumber5 ¦ Tgamma ¦ AllKeplerMath ¦ TheExperiment — explaining mechanics ¦ TheCircleArgument ¦ TheRESULT

• tAnomalisticEARTH 1.0000089786 from the t-equation with given G and mS is the same as the Encarta99 value 365.2596425d / [1SiderealYEAR = 365.256363004d, Wikipedia, = 1y] — different from the Wikipedia AnomalisticYEAR

= 365.2596360d / y = 1.0000089608. The latter does NOT satisfy/preserve the IAU test result precision, neither the corresponding Kepler t-equative precision.

DataBaseSource:

BA1978: 1AU=1.495 978 700 T11 M ¦

y ......................... 1y = 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022]

t ......................... AnomalisticPeriod t² = (2π)² r³/(G · mS), see Keplers3rd

G ......................... TheElectricConstant: G = 6.67010000933003 T11 JM//[KG]² ¦ IAU(SunPhotometric)-electric constant test results

mS ....................... TheElectricConstant: mS = 1.98963199771721 T30 KG ¦ IAU(SunPhotometric)-electric constant test results

r ......................... Wikipedia Nov2022

v ......................... v = 2π(r · AU)/(t · y · 86400)

e ......................... Wikipedia Nov2022

—————————————————————————————————————————————

As specified in established literature:

Mercury: 42.9799 ’’ Wikipedia Mercury Jan2017 ¦ Nov2022

42.00 ’’ BA1978s114sp2m, s161sp1m

Earth: 3.8387 ’’ Wikipedia, measured, Tests of general relativity, 9Nov2022

3.83868 ’’ Wikipedia, theoretical,

”results in good agreement with theory”

3.8 ’’ BA1978s161sp1m

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

In earlier [1995+] productions in UniverseHistory, the full context of these connections were not known:

we knew only the corresponding Eddington expression 3[v/c]² and not the full and complete 3[v/c]²/[1–e²].

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

basic: u/v₀ = 3(v/c₀)² ¦ complete: u/v₀ = 3(v/c₀)²/(1—e²) ¦ degree result expressions

radian: u/v₀ = 6π(v/c₀)² ¦ complete: u/v₀ = 6π(v/c₀)²/(1—e²) = 24π³R²/(Tc)² = 24π³R²/(Tc)²(1–e²) = 2π · 3(v/c)² · 1/(1–e²) = u/v₀ ¦

The Wikipedia/Einstein form denoted σ

—————————————————————————————————————————————

CalCardRef ¦ TheMath

TheRESULT:

CalCardREF

Number5 — aC = arcSeconds/100y:

(5.1) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/rc₀(1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ; 1y = 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022]

The crFACTORS

(5.2) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/[γ(Tg °K)^–1](1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ;

(5.3) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/[β(Tw °K)^–1](1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ;

(5.4) (aC)u/v₀(1–e²) = 3[Gm₂/c₀]/[α(Tp °K)^–2](1–e²) × (360°·3600’’·100y/[Tanom/y]) ;

POSSIBLE INTERPRETATIONS AND COMBINATIONS in c ¦ c0

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

As seen from the TNED related and deduced Suns4 different heat degrees and the presence of the term c0, especially with a resolution as in expression (5.1) above, alternatives values — with very small differences — are possible.

The table nearest below exposes these small differences with the 5.1 c0 term in rc₀ replaced by a Regular c from Sun’s gravitational dominance:

SolenT2022.ods T2 V21 ¦ 29Nov2022 — comparing perihelion precession values through expression 5.1

The c column exposes the arcSeconds/100y on the regular local light divergence CheopsRectangleMATH calculated REGULARc value. The c=c0 column is the corresponding clean c0-everywhere value.

— It is apparent, what we know, that the present instrumental measuring precision will not be able to control these small differences:

• See the compiled end comparing values below in Compressed — four decimals.

the perihelion precessions 25Nov2022

COMPARING THE RELATED PHYSICS CALCULATED RESULTS WITH ESTABLISHED SOURCES

continuing from the developing details Iterative constant test

CalculatingKeplerAnomalistic:

SolenT2022.ods T2 — exact Kepler mathematics based calculated planetary perihelion precessions in our Solar system — used Boltzmann constant: 1.380550287753 t23 J/°K

ALL BASED ON RESULTS FROM THE IAU test Oct2018:

m₂ = mS = 1.98963199771721 T30 KG ¦ G = 6.67010000933003 t11 JM/[KG]² — see The Electric Constant

SolenT2022.ods T2 A18

As seen [ Iterative constant test]: Taking the WikiAriz at present claimed Earth anomalistic period of 365.2596360d does NOT satisfy the preserved IAU-tested Sun’s photometric effect. But the Encarta99 spouse does so [their achieved methods are unknown here]. Beginning in UH from 2008, the most near [computerized] encyclopedia was Encarta 99 in this production. And so the Encarta99 anomalistic value 365.2596425d was adopted for further tests; The fact that — as far as no more sophisticated iteration method exists — the WikiAriz spouse suggests a divergent iteration, also suggests that the Encarta99 value really IS of a more naturally precise magnitude. Meaning: There is not much of a candidature to chose on here for the end station result: AS SEEN: The (Wikipedia) reported observations [Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars] lie very close to or are equivalents with the related physics deduced: no present relativity theory. Se details in TheMATH.

———————————————

TestingOtherCandidates ¦ Iterative constant test ¦ TheMATH ¦

EXPLANATION, related physics:

OF THE TWO AVAILABLE ANOMALISTIC PERIOD values (Encarta99 365.2596425d and WikiAriz 365.2596360d) the IAU-test shows in explicit (TestingOtherCandidates) that only the Encarta value preserves the IAU Sun photometric effect precision value (3.8275 T26 W). Taking a further testing stand on that premise, the above table appeared:

• Using these now (12 decimal precision ¦ Iterative constant test) fully deduced, related and IAU-value tested constants

DecisiveParam:

DECISIVE PARAMETERS: 1AU 1.495 978 700 T11 M, BA1978s161 ¦ 1 anomalistic year Tanom 365.2596425d ¦ 1y 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022]

1d = 86400 S = 24h · 3600 S ¦ G 6.67010000933003 t11 JM/[KG]² ¦ c0 2.99792458 T8 M/S ¦ mS 1.98963199771721 T30 KG ¦ photoMetricPSun 3.8575 T26 W [±0.0014]

The established G = 6.6743 does not pass the IAU test — see also in TheGtest

• MEANING: using its value [WikiAriz: GmS = 1,327184555 T20 J/KG], IT will be impossible to receive the above resulting table. See comparison below.

• As earlier: The present established G-value [6.6743] cannot satisfy the IAU results — not at all the new data epoch standard values [2000+]. See TheIAUtestOct2018.

• Only based on that premise, it is — as a final RELATED conclusion, unless other arguments exist — out of the question that the G figure 6.6743 has validity. But the old school’s 6.67 has.

on these — certified, guaranteed and so attested non relativistic — related and deduced mathematical connections

arcSec/100y = 3(v/c₀)²(360·3600·100)Tanom^–1[(1–e²) = E² = (rEPS/dSUN)²]^–1 .... perihelion precession ; v = 2πdSUN/Tanom

= 3dSUN·GmSUN(c₀rEPS)^–2(360·3600·100)Tanom^–1 ....................... see Suns4 for cr ¦ see also crREF

— on direct anomalistic periods [TheTrueKeplerPeriods] for all planets:

Tanom = √ dSUN³/[Gm₂/(2π)²] ........................................................................ theoretically exact anomalistic period calculation, Kepler’s Third Law

the total IAU-test did suggest that

• all the planetary TRUE Kepler orbiting periods can be calculated from Kepler’s Third as the t-parameter above:

AnomalisticPeriod: TheRESULT

t² = (2π)²r³/GmS see Kepler’sThird ¦ CalculatingKeplerAnomalistic

The anomalistic or TRUE KEPLER orbiting planetary period

— passing twice the same elliptic point

— same as: the period where all surrounding influences are excluded [QuoteArizona]

• See Number5 — a principal calculation of the planets Tanom also means a corresponding principal calculation — true observational value — of the planetary orbital perihelion precession.

— That is: the so called anomalistic elliptic orbital period:

— Uses: G·mS, on a given/known precise orbital average Sun mean distance (r).

The G (gravitation constant) and mS (present Sun mass) values should be — TNED says with respect to the extensive IAU tests — accurate. That may indeed be questioned IF irrational results appear. So far: »no impact».

• Consequently all planets precise perihelion precessions

CAN NOW BE CALCULATED FOR TESTS AGAINST INSTRUMENTAL OBSERVATIONS

• along with — never included or mentioned in modern corridors — their corresponding related physics Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law deduced basics (ButLOOK):

• The related physics deduced equivalents from the cr factors (see related physics details from Suns4, unless already acquainted).

Compressed: TheRESULT

SolenT2022.ods T2 B33 — 28Nov2022

Using the established [as Wikipedia reported] values for G and Sun mass mS renders small but significantly revealing differences between related and established cross referring significands in calculated and measured.

• In terms of related physics: neither established G, nor mS passes the IAU test. Not even close [Examination].

————————————————————————————————

CALCULATED

planet measured related established ¦ table above — Wikipedia ¦ Tests of general relativity [Nov2022]

——————— ———————— —————— ———————————————————————————————————————————————————

Mercury 42.980 42.980 42.984 the closer near, the more the differencies differ

Venus 8.6247 8.6246 8.6253

Earth 3.8387 3.8387 3.8390

Mars 1.3510 1.3509 1.3510 the farther away, the less the differencies differ

————————————————————————————————

PERIHELION PRECESSION RESULTS — Solar System planetary revolution mathematics and physics

MODERN (INTERNET) SOURCES ARE not MOST KNOWN FOR ACCOUNTING the METHODS behind THE VALUES

(such behind the scenes material is normally, or may be: HUGE. But without it : no scientific development)

— apparently more interested in »MESSAGING the Weight Quantity info». Also because detailed info »behind the curtains» is a time consuming (data collection) and editorially (sometimes very) demanding exercise.

Without further sources, the composed table above is the only available, here at present.

• NOTE that there are some other (minor) mechanical phenomena (Coriolis effect) associated with the planets around the Sun: The revolving Sun-Planet line with the planetary revolution at its end introduces a small extra centrifugal displacement moment (that can be calculated). These are not included in this presentation. Just observed to be principally included by quantity in any practical observation (compare TheExperiment).

TheRESULT

IAUtestDETAILS: 3.8575 T26 W

TheIAUtest ¦ StarBASE ¦ TheGtest ¦ TheIAUtestOct2018 ¦ Full BETA Explanation ¦ TheREVELATION

IAU testing details (Oct2018+) — the Sun photometric effect: standard IAU value 3.8275 T26 W ±0.0014:

h Planck constant u atomic mass unit = mCarbon12/12 c₀ light’s top speed radial propagating divergence in free space mS Sun’s mass ;

———————————————

Boltzmann Constant related as tested 1.38055028775345 t23 J/°K ¦ from IAU-test Oct2018 — KcellAnalys2022a.ods T2 A68 (also KcellAnalys2018.ods)

SunPhotometricEffect ¦ FME ¦ BetaTable ¦ β = 14.6497311 = (d_S/d_C = 2.65632Å/2.66Å) / (Pinstr/Praw – 1) = (Tγ/TP¦_EARTH)/(Tγ/TP¦_SUN)

20.805 Gy ¦ UniverseAge ¦ rVIZ

RELATED PHYSICS on a general test of The K-cell HEAT PHYSICS : all primary stars burn on a constant photometric effect

based on a first period primary central (see StarAnvil) Hydrogen-Helium thermo nuclear transfer in to the last available hydrogen atom, TNED related physics says: Stars in hydrogen rich regions can refuel and enter a second and further stages in their lifetime, depending on mass

— according to related physics cosmological deductions on The K-cell heat Physics, all its parameters to be tested as well.

METHOD ON TESTING the related physics Sun photometric value as the standard claimed/measured IAU value 3.8275 T26 W

• 1. Departing from a NOW EXISTING definite Sun mass mSnow value (our Kepler Third anomalistic period 1AU Earth orbit calculated Sun mass mS) we add (Cambridge Astronomy data) solar wind mass losses plus mc² losses (Praw) from light and heat during the K-cell calculated present related age of the Sun (20.805 Gy).

———————————————

20.805 Gy ¦ UniverseAge ¦

• 2. That gives a DayOne Sun mass mSbegin — along with the imperative K-cell physics ongoing expansion on power (P=E/t), density and mass parameters — in line with the above G rank equality expression, as deduced.

— The central variation parameter for the whole iterative expedition is the denoted rVIZ — the rim edge of our visually reachable universe (red shift parameters included with averaged density),

• 3. IF that mSnow ON the given IAU value Pinstrumental — with the BETA factor accounted for — satisfies the G equality, THEN, and only then, and by no other means, the mSnow defines the IAU value.

TheENDresult: IAUtestDETAILS

See full table in TheElectricConstant

KcellAnalys2022a.ods T1 A1

That result was achieved in further iterative IAU value tests — after enhancing the previous approximated (8.8543) electric constant to its (originally Q-deduced) four pi related value (8.8541878176): a complete 12(14) decimal exact IAU standard value confirmation on the anomalistic 365.2596425d and G 6.67010000933003 Kepler’s Third calculated mSnow 1.98963199771721 significands (see also further used constants in Suns4);

(neutron mass mN = 1.0086652u)/u = U(m_n) = 1.0086652 ¦ u = 1.66033 t27 KG = mC12/12 ¦ h = mNc₀rN = 6.62559 t34 JS ¦ 18: see Atomic Mass Defect scale.

• 4. IF THERE WOULD BE ANY GmS COMPETITION on this result — on the G-rank constructed spread sheet test block — any parametric mix in any possible constellation under any possible significands WOULD inevitably reach the same end station picture:

KcellAnalys2022a.ods T1 A22

• 5. Alias

IN TNED THAT CANDIDATURE IS APPARENTLY IMPOSSIBLE. BUT WHEREAS MODERN ACADEMY IS SO FULL OF INVENTIVE ASPIRATIONS on new inducements for still higher control of natural intelligence, perhaps we might see some suggested solutions. Please share.

In modern corridors the whole TNED IAU testing scheme cannot be related at all — mainly because modern academy has no deduced atomic nucleus[‡], no Such experimentally fitting atomic masses[‡], and has no General Light’s Gravitational Dependency on a cosmological CENTERED K-cell[‡], our universe. So any comparison on the above given premises, will only have the TNED related physics to rely on (AtomicMassesExample).

Examination: TheENDresult

So: The only iterating, proving, effort that must be observed for testing any established parameters on the TNED IAU testing block

— to see if there eventually (in any possible parametric test) WOULD show some other Sun mass and gravitational constant candidate, provided a strict EXACT IAU touch —

would be »the simple» method (for example testing a Wikipedia G significand 6.6743 and Sun mass 1.9885 — on established or other parametric menu):

No specific CalCard — principle SetUp ¦ Pber—Piau Calculated minus IAU-value ¦ See KcellAnalys2022a.ods T2 from IAU-test 2018

We iterate (KcellAnalys2022a.ods T2 ¦ see CellSamplingExample) on rVIZ only — until the calculated Sun mass minus all losses til now from SunBegin equals the now adopted Sun mass mSnu-value (Wikipedia’s 1.9885 T30 KG). Then we look at the readout result:

• IF the corresponding resulting Sun photometric value lies within the IAU tolerance ±0.0014 there is a candidate. Otherwise not.

— As seen (in the CalCard unspecified cell stripe above), the Pber—Piau difference (0.00xx..) is almost 3 times (0.0042..) over the maximum tolerance with the adopted Wikipedia reported standard values.

RESULT:

• The Wikipedia reported 6.6743 standard values (Oct2018+) can NOT satisfy the IAU photometric value.

See further detailed test/description on the 6.6743 Wikipedia value in Decisive Parameters.

See also the Alternative Constant Candidates Test:

• It seems that only G and ε0 are allowed as precision enhancing components:

— We tested the now prevailing (2000+) Data Epoch’s standard values e (electron charge), h (Planck constant) and u (atomic mass unit) contra their former Instrumental Epoch figures (1960-1999).

Also compare (Compressed) the precision significands between using standard (Data epoch’s 2000+ Wikipedia reported) values on the perihelion precession calculations versus these here more related figures: small but significant (systematic) differences appear (exposing who is [aiming at] what).

SUMMING IMPRESSION:

The successful (for TNED) IAU iterating testing K-cell parametric block has no — and never will have any — representation in 1800+ MODERN corridors. THAT is apparently a »bury relativity theory» expedition. Not by force. Only by consequence of a natural interest to pay respect for natural logics:

Related and deduced physics explanations. Relatable mathematics, as deduced, on observed physics, as experienced. Instrumentation is the only judging agent.

RelatedMath: TheMath

THE MATHEMATICS BEHIND

ThePerihelionPrecessions

CalCardREF

THE MATHEMATICS BEHIND THIS PRESENTATION

was originally collected as quoted — from SIGMA (Newman 1959) Arthur Eddington, as shown above.

IAUtestDETAILS

TheGtest: CalCardREF

10Nov2022

THE G TEST — Kepler’s Third (again ..)

(neutron mass mN = 1.0086652u)/u = U(m_n) = 1.0086652 ¦ u = 1.66033 t27 KG = mC12/12 ¦ h = mNc₀rN = 6.62559 t34 JS ¦ See also in StarBASE

———————————————

G gravitational constant ¦ EarthMass-G-test ¦

It may, or may not, have some deeper significance .. on testing »a more exact G figure other than 6.67» ..

— .. it all hangs on the Sun’s mass, too .. constantly loosing mass .. as it continues to shine upon us ..

See further improvements in The ElectricConstant.

There was opening a rare opportunity:

The (”approximated”) Wikipedia/Einstein expression for the planets’ perihelion precession (perihelion rotation):

L=R ; 1–e² = E² = (r/R)² ; G-test for 3&4 on given Sun mass (m₂ = 1.989661830 T30 KG ) and RTcr ¦ RTce

With the (now, Nov2022) revealed (Kepler ThermoElectric Displacement) connections from the Wikipedia/Einstein form (Wikipedia article,Tests of general relativity 9Nov2022), there was this special appearing occasion:

• At first, in our spread sheet cell composition, we had some different sources on different values:

• The chart below summarizes the results:

With our previously generally adopted G-value 6.67 t11 — also partly tested in some other corners, but with uncertain results — there was a slight difference between sections1¦2 and 3¦4 — depending on the actual Gm2 factors in 3¦4.

• As all 4 sections express the exact same quantity, they should show up the same end quantity figures:

• As they didn’t, we collected the solving equation — for our given mS Sun mass (1,989661830 T30 KG from the more general IAU Sun Photometric Test — the now present Sun mass; the origin was slightly higher):

— The precision figures in mS are far from (significantly) sensitive on the G-factor in these expressions. So in concern of the mS value, we will leave that for further — its end figures have no affect on G here:

Gm₂ = 24π³ R⁴/(T² · 6π R)

= 4π² R³/T²

= (2π)²R³/T² ;

G = (2π)²R³/T²m₂ ; m₂ = 1.989661830 T30 KG from The General K-cell Photometric Test Results

= 6.670156696345 t11 JM/[KG]² as far as these figures shall expose the same exact quantity:

It was then discovered that a seemingly more precise G-value had appeared:

G = 6.670156696345 t11 JM/[KG]²

First enhanced result:

SolenT2022.ods T3 D16 —— Mercury test Nov2022

The previous tests had no such resolving figures — the closest established candidates lie on the order of 6.674 .. and the like, which, apparently, is far from the precision figures here: 6.67015 ..

IF THE PERIHELION MEASURES ARE ACCURATE — and the data seems to point out they are — we might have found a new branch where real and true G-precision value testing is relevant — based on a preferred Sun mass (m2=mS).

• Still further tests on G with mS and the IAU-value (The Electric Constant) showed further improvements.

While the upper 4 cell rows differ between equal sections 1¦2 and 3¦4, the lower 4 cell rows show the expected equality — all through. The only rational explanation to that behavior would be the tested G-value precision: While 6.67 exposes incongruities, the 6.6701566963 does not.

G = (2π)²R³/T²m₂

R radius of the ellipse’s circumscribed circle — the astronomical mean average distance between Planet and Sun.

T orbital period — should be of an Anomalistic type: one specific ellipse position passed twice — we only [here] have such data for Earth:

365.2596425d. [The Encarta99 source]

m2 the central orbiting mass — our Sun’s mass

Because, apparently, it is only the G-factor that is deviating, testing on the other two parameters makes no change; the G-factor alone it is. But then, depending on for example the Sun mass (m2=mS), different mS-values will reflect different G-values:

IF both G and m₂ COULD BE known with any possible certainty, or is THOUGHT to be so — as in a further TEST — THEN

ANOMALISTIC ORBITAL PERIOD means a TWICE exactly the same ELLIPTIC point passage time:

• affections — lags or drags — from other planets are excluded: only Sun-Planet counts.

• See the Kepler T expression below.

”If Earth moved in an ideal Kepler orbit, i.e. a perfect ellipse with the Sun fixed at one focus, each kind of year would always have the same duration, and the sidereal and anomalistic years would be equal.”,

ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY — PDF (not dated) ¦ 23Nov2022

Sidereal, tropical, and anomalistic years

”The anomalistic year is usually defined as the time between perihelion passages. Its average duration is

365.259636 days (365 d 6 h 13 min 52.6 s) (at the epoch J2011.0).[5]”.

• the next safest term FOR TEST of the remaining R³/T² would (certainly) be the anomalistic T (very hard to get at);

— The only here known text book anomalistic period value is for Earth, as above

Encarta99 365.2596425d

Wikipedia 365.2596360d art. Year — Sidereal, tropical and animalistic years [rechecked 23Nov2022]

1,0000084888y EarthTanom/(365.256 363 004d = 1y ¦ Wikipedia, Year) ¦ 1d = 86400 S [ ANOM.y = 365.259636d ]

• R — mean orbital distance from Sun — should, what we know in our time, be known with (far) better precision for all planets than any anomalistic orbital period T, (maybe, mostly) except for Earth’s orbit (365.259425d as above);

• Then a THEORETICAL possibility opens up for calculating the anomalistic T — especially in the precession complex for all planets;

T² = R³/[Gm₂/(2π)²] ............................... theoretically exact anomalistic period calculation

T² = R³4π²/Gm₂

provided RGm2 are known with high precision

Established values (Nov2022), m₂ = mSUN

——————————————————

obj number 10pot MKSA-unit

—— ———————— —— ————

G 6.6743 t11 JM/[KG]²

mS 1.9885 T30 KG

Gm₂ 1.32718455500000 T20 JM/KG

——————————————————

Close approximations are given for T if Gm2 is known with fair precision.

• Gm2 = (2π)²R³/T² anyway = 1,3271356179 T20 M³/S², = JM/KG.

— SOME OF US would think that these »modern high tech astronomical measures» ANYWAY are »inexact» (we don’t, nowadays really, put much trust in »exact» when it comes to Modern Academy neighborhoods outside our windows ..). And that, THAT would be the only sufficient argument for aborting any idea of »analyzing exact precise values».

This (simple) G-test seems to disprove that conclusion.

CONCLUSION: The precession mathematics »most definitely has advanced features».

• With the given parameters m2, T and R, only G remains variable.

• Alternative m2=mS values will also show a corresponding different G-figure: m2 here is sensitive on lowest end G-numbers ..96345.. from ±T18 KG.

More details in ConstantPRECISION.

• With the Wikipedia Sun mass m2 = 1.98847 T30 KG, the corresponding G-tested value becomes G = 6.674154590633 t11 JM/[KG]².

• The preferred Sun mass value m2 = 1.989661830 T30 KG here for test is the one by result from the IAU test (Oct2018) — where the present epoch’s established standard values does NOT reach the testing IAU value threshold — IF the Wikipedia references are used. See the comparing standard units in IAUresultComparingTable, with further comparing values in ResTAB.

• At this present level of interpretation, the Kepler calculated present Sun mass mS = 1.989661830 T30 KG based on Earth’s orbital anomalistic period is, by far, the best fitting in explicit respect to the Sun’s photometric IAU effect test (along with the adopted instrumental epoch’s G = 6.67 t11 figure in that IAU-test).

So IN CONCLUSION: at the present the mS = 1.989661830 T30 KG value seems the best fitted candidate for a deeper — if at all — »exact» G-value test.

A still later improved result is exposed in The Electric Constant (dramatically increased precision).

Continuing the IAU-CalCard tests from Oct2018, now 22Nov2022 — the precision increases ..

RECENT FURTHER TESTS after the above summarized indicates a further continued subject:

• We refined the year period to the more (recent time, Wikipedia Nov2022) exact 1y = 365.256363004d (1d = 86400 S);

• We iterated only on the best precise known (TNED calculated, K-cell Heat Physics) age of or MIiky Way-Solar system (20.805 Gy ¦ UniverseAge);

• We refined the iteration method by adding more direct visually overview on the result cells, making the manually comparing work easier;

• From (TheGtest : 6.6701566963 ¦ the perihelion precession figures) a more precisely suggested G-value, we aimed to test an eventually existent even more precise IAU-match — aiming at a 12 decimal zero difference.

• This was the result, comprised:

TheElectricConstant:

Gtest

G = 6.67010000933003 T11 JM//[KG]² — an impossible exercise to measure practically, what we know;

mSUN = 1.98963199771721 T30 KG: these resulting figures emanate from a further use of the earlier 2018 IAU-test on our Sun.

r_SSUN = 6.957 T8 M present established Solar Radius value [Wikipedia, Solar radius]

r_GSUN = 6.9657583598 T8 M SolenT2022.ods T1 A24 : SunGravitationalRadius:

Sun’s gravitational radius r_G = [ρ_r(8/m_A)^–1/3/r₀]^–1/4(3/4π)^1/3·[(1/m_0SLIM)^1/3 – (1/m_S)^1/3]^–1 ¦ ρ_r = √18ε₀(E)/Gc₀ ¦ E = VM^–1C^–1S^–3KG ¦ Generally deduced TNED Star physics

THE ELECTRIC CONSTANT ε₀ ENHANCES RELATED PHYSICS’ COSMOLOGY CALCULATING PRECISION

PREVIOUSLY IN UH we use the schoolbook value 8.8543. The IAU-test helps clarify that the established numerical value holds with excellence — as deduced in UH (Deduction of the electric charge ¦ Nov2007 ¦ PlanckEquivalent).

KcellAnalys2022a.ods T1 A1 — FURTER IAU TESTS — TheGtest

DECISIVE PARAMETERS: 1AU 1.495 978 700 T11 M, BA1978s161 ¦ 1 anomalistic year Tanom 365.2596425d ¦ 1y 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022]

1d = 86400 S = 24h · 3600 S

A most perfect (12 decimal) match to the nominal IAU-value was found, almost directly:

TNED values (20Nov2022+), m₂ = mSUNnow

after 20.805 Gy on same photometric effect 3.8275 T26 W

— with an included account for mc² + Solar wind losses

——————————————————

obj number 10pot MKSA-unit

—— ———————— —— ————

G 6.67010000930000 t11 JM/[KG]²

mS 1.98963199771721 T30 KG

Gm₂ 1.32710444065369 T20 JM/KG = M³/S²

——————————————————

Close approximations are given for T if Gm2 is known with fair precision.

With 14 decimals the difference between mS-Kepler-Now and the iterated mSbegin to mSnow exposes

-0.00000000000043; The corresponding IAU difference still shows a zero:

0.00000000000000. (Further iterations need more decimals for iteration than available at the present).

• Maybe a certain care must be practiced (here): calculating PHYSICS on »exact» numerical values is a dead end mission — except IF we find a LIMITED numerical solution. Chasing »exact values» normally in physics means »more exact with endlessly growing number of decimals»: we have to cut that chase at some level, anyway. 12 correct decimal answers could be a good start ..

• As seen, the progress enhanced on credit of the tested electric constant (ε0) value. Our former text book’s 8.8543 proved to be a good start.

Are there possibly even more standard constants that can be more numerically specified WHILE still matching the IAU exactness on a similar double iterative IAU-testing way?

Then the Quest naturally arose:

— As the IAU test was made by comparing the two different standard-constant epochs (Instrumental 1966-1999) and the present (Data2000+) it was clearly shown that the latter did NOT reach the IAU limits. Only the instrumental epoch’s standard constants apparently has the values.

THE NUMERICAL VALUE OF one of one of the already established constants, the electric constant (ε0) (ConstantPRECISION) has a direct connection to related physics: the deduction of the electric charge

(the numerical analyzing compression below not earlier in any specific article in UH):

• never included or even mentioned in any visible modern academic teaching system text:

ε₀NUMERIC: ε₀ = 1/[ 4πt7 AM/VS · c₀² = 8.854187818 t12 C/VM

With ε is associated a [relative] dielectric number [εr] for a specific material, so that the end form for ε reads ε = ε0εr:

For vacuum εr = 1.

EXPERIMENTAL measuring of the force in Newtons between two equal charges Q1 = Q2 = 1 Coulomb separated by r = 1Meter —— c0 = 2.99792458 T8 M/S:

F = (1/4πε₀)(Q/r)² = 8.854187818 t12 N ; F/(Q/r)² = 1/4πε₀ ; 4πε₀ = (Q/r)²/F = 1.112650056 t10 C/VM ;

ε₀ = (Q²/4πr²F) = 8.854187818 t12 C/VM = 1/R₀c₀ ¦ ε0NUMERIC: ε0 = 1/[ 4πt7 AM/VS · c0²] = 8.854187818 t12 C/VM ; KcellAnalys2022a.ods T3 A1

R₀c₀ = 1/ε₀ = 1.129409067 T11 VM/C ¦ OHM = V/A · M/S = VM/AS = VM/C ;

R₀ = 1/ε₀c₀ = 376.7303134618 (Ω=V/A) ;

R₀/4π = 1/4πε₀c₀ = 29,9792458 (Ω=V/A) = c₀ t7 Ω = R₀/4π ;

1/4πε₀ = 8.987551787 T9 (Ω=V/A) ;

(R₀/4π)/c₀ = (29.9792458 Ω)/(2.99792458 T8 M/S) = T7 Ω/(M/S) = 10 000 000 Ω/(M/S) ;

c₀ = (R₀/4π)/[T7Ω/(M/S)] = R₀/(4πT7Ω) M/S = R₀t7/(4πΩ) M/S = 2.997924580 T8 M/S ;

R₀/c₀ = µ₀ = 1.256637061t6 VS/AM ¦ OHM = V/A / M/S = VS/AM ;

c₀² = 1/ε₀µ₀ = 1/(1/R₀c₀)[R₀/c₀] = 1/([R₀/c₀]/R₀c₀) = c₀/([R₀]/R₀c₀) = R₀c₀c₀/([R₀]) = c₀² ;

TestingOtherCandidates:

The electric constant

TheGtest

TESTING THE OTHER CANDIDATES e u h ..

— No. No response I’m afraid ..

— Are there any other?

THEORETICALLY IN RELATED PHYSICS the answer should be: no. Why? Because the photometric effect, the IAU value — as deduced in related physics — only relies on two foremost parameters: G — the basic primary Hydrogen star surface density — and ε0 — the actual star shining effect. See details in Sun’s 3 Equations.

• We tested e (electric charge), u (atomic mass unit, 12C/12) and h (Planck constant).

And this was the answer and result:

KcellAnalys2022a.ods T1 A31 —— the alternative e u h test values refer to our present [2000+] Data Epoch’s different sources specifications [Wikipedia in general has these, or close, type SHARP technical calculator .. ]

Testing other values for the alternative candidates e u h resulted in that

• Preservation of exact IAU nominal value cannot keep the Sun-mass-now-Kepler calculated value with the calculated Sun mass from its losses over its present life period (20.802 Gy ¦ UniverseAge). No way. Not even close: the black cells should be all zeros,

The results suggests that these three constants expose (consequent) divergence — while we wished for a contractive success as with ε0 IF testValidPositive:

GENERAL ANSWER:

• No. Unless we find some other revolutionary solution:

Only G and ε0 have a provable precision connection to the adopted/measured standard Sun photometric IAU value — in our IAU-test (Oct2018+). Sun’s Gravitational Radius visibleRim + ca 1000 KM ¦ Sun’s Raw Power/Effect

• That result apparently suggests — for further tests — that G, ε0 and mS¦now — now — have found (very, sufficiently) precise numerical representations, worthy of testing on such normally impossible duties as, type: EXACT ANOMALISTIC PERIOD CALCULATING DETERMINATION for all the Solar system planets. Meaning:

• Precise planetary orbit perihelion precession determination — as deduced in related physics and mathematics for comparing already well known results.

See TheRESULT. Apparently: »a direct hit — on all the planets» (but only Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars have [fairly good, partly poor] measuring data).

FURTHER TESTING SUGGESTIONS propose this:

— WHEREAS the mSKeplerNow value is based on a given anomalistic figure Tanom (from astronomical instrumentation) — and that That Tanom does not change during the IAU-test iterations, how do we know — by example — that NOT any »arbitrary» Tanom input works just the same? We need an iterated test proof to clarify which is what. Our two candidates are first the already IAU-test used Encarta99 Tanom = 365.2596425d in the mSnowKepler calculated Sun mass

m₂ = R³(4π²/G)/T²

(Kepler’sThird) and the Wikipedia/ArizonaUniversity spouse Tanom = 365.2596360d. This is a recent (24Nov2022) iterative test result:

IterativeConstantTest:

TestingOtherCandidates

TESTING THE WikiAriz ANOMALISTIC VALUE ON THE IAU-TESTING COMPLEX

KcellAnalys2022a.ods T2 A1 — »there’s nothing like a brad new horizon ..»

Compiled cells on the specific iterative results from table/Tabell T2 :

mS¦KeplerNOW E50 | G-value C2 | rVIZ-value C13 | mSresult E46 E47 I33 | PfmeSol B43 B44 B45 :

This further test suggests that the Encarta99 Tanomalistic Earth period revolution around the Sun with value 365.2596425d is more reliable than the present Wikipedia/ArizonaUniversity 365.2596360d. Namely so it is IF we chose to continue to refer The IAU standard Sun’s photometric effect as a reliable precision measured/estimated physical constant 3.8275 T26 W ±0,0014 — on the TNED exposed results up to this day 25Nov2022:

• The WikiAriz value can apparently NOT be brought to the same excellent IAU precision reference. Not even close.

• So with these now [25Nov2022] more precise numerically related figures

DECISIVE PARAMETERS: 1AU 1.495 978 700 T11 M, BA1978s161 ¦ 1 anomalistic year Tanom 365.2596425d ¦ 1y 365.256363004d [WikipediaNov2022] sidereal

1d = 86400 S = 24h · 3600 S ¦ G 6,67010000933003 t11 JM/[KG]² ¦ c0 2.99792458 T8 M/S ¦ mS 1.98963199771721 T30 KG ¦ photoMetricPSun 3.8575 T26 W [±0.0014]

we should be able to calculate some other on these dependent physical phenomena quantities :

• direct TheRESULT FULLY RELATED PHYSICS perihelion precession values for all planets

arcSec/100y = 3(v/c₀)²(360·3600·100)Tanom^–1[(1–e²) = E² = (rEPS/dSUN)²]^–1 .... perihelion precession ; v = 2πdSUN/Tanom

= 3dSUN·GmSUN(c₀rEPS)^–2(360·3600·100)Tanom^–1 ....................... see Suns4 for cr ¦ see also crREF

— on direct anomalistic periods [TheTrueKeplerPeriods] for all planets:

Tanom = √ dSUN³/[Gm₂/(2π)²] ........................................................................ theoretically exact anomalistic period calculation, Kepler’s Third Law

— Then we can compare any — a n y — measured observational values, and see if they touch: they better.

See TheRESULT.

Analyzing Competition

ITERATING METHOD ON THE ILLUSTRATED VALUES:

We depart from the previous 12 decimal zero difference result, the top stripe figures[‡] — now expanding to a 14 decimal figure (to expose the deep of it: diff = 4.3 t13):

• We first replace the Encarta Tanom with the WikiAriz Tanom, and — the second stripe figures — note the increased difference mSresult — mSnow :7.0.. t8;

• THEN: We first iterate on G to reach a zero difference mSresult — mSnow, third stripe; The IAU result has decreased, but is still within the IAU margins:

• THEN: We try to iterate on rVIZ in an attempt to retrieve also a zero difference on the IAU value: we adjust rVIZ so that the IAU result becomes exactly the nominal IAU value, stripe four.

— As we see, the end picture on the solar mass difference has increased to —0.0000006601.. 6.6 t7 (almost ten times) between the two attempts in iterating-finding-retrieving an exact match:

• notOK. Not good news for any competitor.

— IF AN EXACT match — a real competitor to the already found — would exist, we would expect that the last mSresult — mSnow should have been smaller, not larger than the first input.

RESULT:

• It seems problematic (from this attempt) to conquer out the already found 12 decimal zero difference result on the Tanom Encarta99 figures.

THE ASTRONOMICAL UNIT

— mean distance Sun-Earth in Earth’s elliptical orbit :

BA1978s161sp2n:

”Den astronoimiska enheten har numera bestämts till 149 597 870 km.”. Translated:

”The astronomical unit has now been determined to 149 597 870 km.”;

1.495 978 700 T11 M: ........................ 149 597 870 000 M

Wikipedia 24Nov2022:

1.495 978 707 T11 M: ........................ 149 597 870 700 M ¦ »strong mean AVERAGE» [ + 700 M ..]

ATTEMPTING to use the extra tailing 7 for a still more precise iterative analysis seems [OpenOffice spread sheet CalCard program] to expose a greater need of iterating decimals than is available — increasing the last figure by 1 in rVIZ results in several position changes in the difference results — while we would wish to have a longer decimal iterative input test line for receiving only single unit end changes — say 20 or 30. We surrender on that until further.

The origin of Tanomalistic period value

With (Wikipedia) 1AU = 1 Astronomical Unit = mean distance Sun-Earth, 1AU = 1.495 978 707 T11 M, the WikiAriz Tanom value 365.259630d gives:

Gm = 4π²· R²/T² = 4π²(1AU)³/(365.256636 d · 86400)² = 1.3271045065 T20 JM/KG ; Using the Wikipedia G value 6.6743 t11 JM/[KG]² gives a Sun mass

mS = 1.9883800646 T30 KG. On the Sun article (24Nov2022) Wikipedia has the figure mS = 1.9885 T30 KG — which corresponds to 365.2486206062 d.

So whichever the WikiAriz Tanom source is, it apparently has not been derived from a classic Kepler calculation

— and neither fits a such on these used references.

TheElectricConstant

RedShiftIssues: — RedShiftReference

TEXPL

Related physics on: Red Shift Issues in present science

THERE IS NO »SPACE-CURVATURE» IN UNIVERSE —

just gravitational redshift: modern academy’s ”dark energy” :

— modern thinking grants it — gravitational redshift [ the Mössbauer effect ] — on specific masses — but NOT on universe as a whole.

Once again: exposing the primitive nature of modern academic thinking — denying its own innate nature of Rational Explanations. Nature denial.

What is the difference?

— Modern academy does not understand, or does not want to understand (CosmicINTRO ¦ CosmoA), that Universe has a gravitational center from which the speed of light decreases with distance (LGD).

That is no opinion. Just a here reported mathematical consequence (CosmicINTRO).

— In modern quarters THAT (heavily denied) performance is interpreted as an extra MOVE — proven by an exact Doppler Red shift besides the general ordinary motional Hubble red shift.

— So: Modern academy names it ”pull from outer dark energy”.

— Why? Because modern academy cannot understand HOW universe CAN have a gravitational center. Meaning: modern academy excludes it, rejects it, denies it, bullies it, by academic consensus.

A receding signal to a stationary is measured as a lowered moving away frequency signal. Red shift.

A decreasing signal propagation to a stationary is measured as a lowered moving away frequency signal. Red shift.

———————————————

TheAbsoluteMETRIC ¦ TheGPSexample ¦ LGD ¦ Deduction ¦ MULTIPLEc ¦ DEEP ¦

A more UniverseHistory exhaustive description of THE K-cell DETAILS is found in

The Andromeda Test — extensive CalCard for testing and investing the general properties in the K-cell expansion history¦ See EarthMass2021IAU.ods T3 B53 in CalCard for testing inputs.

SandTRAVEL ¦ KCHIP — K-cell on the HALTING occasion before contracting, see also KCHIPstart on the vHALTturningPoint value 7.2916204 T7 M/S = 0,243222276 c0, expansive to contractive

Continued on details in THE MODERN ACADEMIC RED SHIFT SYNDROM (TEMORESOM).

RedShiftIssues

THE GPS EXAMPLE:

PLANCK EQUIVALENTS (particle acceleration on Q) deal with laboratory experimentation in one single fix stable frame of gravitational potential, w²=Gm₂/r. A fix propagating velocity c. At different distances (r) from a central mass (m₂) this is not the case (THEMORESOM). At different distances from a g-center (LGD as deduced) also different c-velocities hold — further below: The Absolute Metric (not explicitly formulated in modern quarters, what we know). That is another detail to keep in mind when dealing with light over greater distances (in related physics).

So: When a satellite (cHIGH/f HIGH=λ) sends a c-signal on a given wavelength (λ) to Earth ground (cLOW/f LOW=λ) the signal WILL be distorted by the gravitational influence on the propagation of light between the two different gravi-potentials : cHIGHSAT / cLOWGND = f HIGHSAT / f LOWGND.

What we know: Present science does not explain or present the performance in these terms:

Experimental confirmations

THE GPS EXAMPLE — satellite math on Exact Timing

RELATED PHYSICS:

The electric charge Q = √ (m/R)(A/dT) certifies that Q-mass changes ONLY CONNECT electric acceleration: no kinetics causes

— because kinetics — gravitations, mass — feels and have no Electric Resistance

apparently never clarified in modern corridors

”In 1955, Friedwardt Winterberg proposed a test of general relativity—detecting time slowing in a strong gravitational field using accurate atomic clocks placed in orbit inside artificial satellites. Special and general relativity predicted that the clocks on GPS satellites, as observed by those on Earth, run 38 microseconds faster per day than those on the Earth. The design of GPS corrects for this difference; because without doing so, GPS calculated positions would accumulate errors of up to 10 kilometers per day (6 mi/d).[21]”,

WIKIPEDIA, GPS (17Nov2022)

DeducedConnections:

THE GPS EXAMPLE c_SJ=(c₀/2)(1 + √1 – 4Gm₂/r_SJc₀²) general divergence — linear free-space light-speed — c on r from g-center

———————————————————————————————————

Measuring on one and the same (wave) length d₀; same distance on different times with different speeds

———————————————————————————————————

SJ ¦ SatelliteS TheEarthJ ¦ v=d/T ¦ (cT¦S) = d₀ = (cT¦J) ; cS/cJ = TJ/TS ¦ velocity = distance/time, M/S ;

———————————————————————————————————

TS = TJ + Δt ; additional (Ground related) atomic ticks outside Earth on lower Earth-governed g-potential;

cS/cJ = TJ/(TJ + Δt) = 1/(1 + Δt/TJ) ; 1 + Δt/TJ = cJ/cS ; Δt/TJ = cJ/cS – 1 ;

Δt = TJ(cJ/cS – 1) ; –Δt = TJ(1 – cJ/cS)

TJ = 86400 S = 24h ; sidereal day

rJ = Earth’s averaged Volumetric Radius 6.3710008 T6 M (Wikipedia, Earth radius 18Nov2022);

mJ = Earth mass (related in CWON for further tests) 5.975 T24 KG = m₂;

G = the universal gravitation constant (epoch 1960-1999 for further tests) 6.67 t11 JM/[KG]²;

cJ/cS = 0.99999999947..

Δt = –45.654200420 µS ; atomic 24h day tick difference from Earth ground to GPS satellite orbit

TRANSVERSE frequency-wavelength VEERING time from satellite orbit velocity v:

tJ = TJ(f/f₀=√1–(v/c)²=T₀/T) = (86400 S)(0.999999999917..) = 86399.9999928174 S.

+Δt_v = TJ – tJ = 7.1825617454 µS ; VEERED transfer delay from satellite’s velocity v:

Δ_v = Δt + Δt_v = (–45.654200420 + 7.1825617454 = –38.4716386748)µS ; total tick veer.

f = 10.23 MHz ; GPS Earth ground fix (chip¦military referencing) frequency.

f₀ = 10.229999995445 MHz ; GPS adopted stable satellite transmitting [chip] frequency matching f exactly,

= [(86400 S – 38.4726.. µS)/(86400 S)]10.23 MHz = 10.229999995445.. MHz .

Depending on choice of G, mJ and rJ, minor differences appear ..99544.. to some ..99543.. :

The GPS Example — SolenT2022.ods T2 A64

Complete explanation according to related physics and mathematics — we leave no one behind

FULLSTÄNDIG FÖRKLARING ENLIGT RELATERAD FYSIK OCH MATEMATIK

VEER TRANSFER — in still air (c = sound) or inside same gravitational potential (c = light) — same geometrical/mathematical construct:

ACCOUNTS FOR ANY TRANSPORTING SYSTEM BASED ON A LIMITED TRANSPORTING VELOCITY (c)

f /f₀ = f /1 = y = √ 1 – (x/r=v/c)² = f /f₀ ¦ Ex : f = (1/2) = √1–(v/c)² ; (1/4) = 1–(v/c)² ; (v/c)² = 1–(1/4) = 0.75 ; v/c = √ 0.75 = 0.866025403

THE GPS EXAMPLE ¦ cS–cJ minus v-Veering = 38µS

f /f₀ = √1–(v/c)² ¦ v = c : f /f₀ = 0 = maximum angular deviation ; v = 0 : f /f₀ = GravitationalPotentialDifferenceOnly — no angular deviation;

f = (1/n) = √1–(v/c)² ; (1/n)² = 1–(v/c)² ; (v/c)² = 1–(1/n)² ; v/c = √1–(1/n)²

In a limited velocity system (c), any possible lower velocity parameter (v <= c) can be related to c on a circular function y = √1–(x/r)²;

radius r=c, variable x=v, functional value y (= f/f₀ — if f₀ is a fix reference related as = 1). Then — with a properly defined geometric f/f₀ transfer — any relation f/f₀ can be translated to a corresponding x/r = v/c as f/f₀ = √1–(v/c)².

All related math in PREFIXxSIN

Also resembling a wagon [satellite] traveling on a [very huge circular] road in still air [c] with velocity v, transmitting an audio frequency f0 in a normal [90°] v-direction. f0 is then aimed to be tuned with respect to v so that f0 is heard as a fix stable ground frequency f. v=c mean no response, the signal never arrives. v=0 means f=f0, a standstill. In the satellite case, one extra physical phenomena is added: Light’s gravitational dependency LGD between Earth ground and satellite altitude forces a major basic frequency deviation between satellite [featuring v=0] and Earth ground station [f]. To that major deviation, the minor deviation is added from the wagon resemblance.

• On these two frequency shifts it is shown how the GPS systems works — proving that the function has nothing at all in common with Einstein’s theory of relativity.

— On the other hand it should be mentioned — because Einstein’s mathematics on this level — contra the related light’s gravitational dependency mathematics LGD — will not prove different end results. The parametric differences are [way] to small for that. But the theories belong to completely different realms — so MATH alone will not be an argument for observed matching measures. Proof as below.

VEERING: PE: Planck Equivalents

Modern academic confusions, misinterpretations and misconceptions:

Compare the thoroughly deduced Planck Equivalents versus The Veering Transfer (compare Einstein):

RELATED PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS

The simple veering transfer — in still air with sound speed c as in a given g-potential with light speed c — has no connection at all to the Planck equivalent complex — and besides, the end quantity result is inverted between the two. Modern academic thinking has not The Conceptual Instruments to dissolve these components. No because in lack of intelligence, apparently. But because of BLOCKING ITS OWN DEDUCING PROVISION — due to INVENTED, not deduced, details in mathematics and physics. Say.

c=(c₀/2)[1 + √ | 1 – 4Gm₂/r_Sc₀² | ]

Calculated end result, rJ =6.378 T6 M (Earth [equatorial] radius 6.371 T6 M gives ... 99543..):

(Wikipedia, GPS, generalizes [in the text] rS = rJ + 20200KM with a specific value rJ + 20180 KM: these give a minor difference).

(c_S=(c₀/2)[1 + √ | 1 – 4Gm₂/r_Sc₀² | ]) – (c_J=(c₀/2)[1 + √ | 1 – 4Gm₂/r_Jc₀² | ]) ¦ light’s gravitational dependency: cSATELLITE(faster atomic clock) – cJEarthGround(slower atomic clock)

–Δt = (TJ = 86 400 S)(1 – cJ/cS) ; atomic 24h day tick difference from Earth ground to GPS satellite orbit

1–(√1–[v/c]²)VEERING TRANSFER TWI — there is no relativistic mathematics in this transformation: that is apparently a misconception

THAT HAS apparently GOT NOTHING AT ALL TO TO DO WITH time as such: »A waves a flag slow .. B waves fast ..». Stop fooling around: time = universe’s evolution.

–Δt + Δt_v = –45.6552555761 µS + 7.1825617454 µS = –38.4726938307 µS.

(86400 S – 38.4726.. µS)/(86400 S) · 10.23 MHz = 10,229999995445..

(Wikipedia says ... 99543.. but Wikipedia article has partly incomplete data)[the authors does not care to do the math, just citing the sources — don’t forget to bring A Life Boat .. when consulting Wikipedia ..]

[We find the .. 543 .. if we use the standard volumetric mean radius 6.371 T6 M (contra 6.378) with a present established G = 6.6743 t11 JM/[KG]² (contra 6.67 t11)].

(f/f₀=√1–(v/c)²=T₀/T)(86400 S) = 86399,9999928174 S = (86400 S)0,999999999917..

+Δt_v = 86400 S – 86399,9999928174 S = 7,18256 µS, = ([86400 S][1–(√1–[v/c]²)VEERING TRANSFER — MISUNDERSTOOD FOR SPECIAL RELATIVITY IN MODERN ACADEMY: see math expression])

BASIC ELEMENTARY CONCEPTS

Elementary Simple Basic receiving from transverse sending — APPLIES TO

AUDIO WAVES in free air — as well as

ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES in a given local gravitational dominance (local g-potential = w²=Gm₂/r: spherical shell on r from central mass m2)

— no present relativity ideas or mathematics in either case: to be well noted:

TransverseWavelengthIndepencence, TWI:

Wavelength independence on a given frequency

BASIC ELEMENTARY CONCEPTS

THE VEERING TRANSFER — Part 1: wavelength and frequency does NOT connect:

TIME INDEPENDENCE EXAMPLE IN PHYSICS

See a biking person on a straight road right ahead: Independent of the speed of the bike, the swaying to and fro can have one and the same period. And if we see only the projection of the move, right ahead, we cannot conclude anything at all about the bike’s speed. It can be fast, it can be slow. It illustrates: time independence.

Because frequency [horizontal] and wavelength [vertical] have different dimensions [←↑], the SPEED [v] of the sender is irrelevant to the receiver if the signal is emitted transverse v, and the receiver is standing still or traveling parallel along the same line as the sender, as illustrated above.

• THAT IS APPARENTLY THE transmitting SATELLITE-EARTH receiving SITUATION.

It explicitly means: On a multi-file highway with different files adopted for different vehicle speeds, the speed of the vehicles are irrelevant to the transverse receiving frequency signal; All vehicle drivers will measure one and the same signal frequency.

This is important to keep in mind in the corresponding satellite case; The satellite is surrounded by an Earth dominant gravitational potential [w²]. Its reference to ”velocity” only relies on the balance between centrifugal [mw²/r] and gravitational force: mw²/r = F = ma = Gmm₂/r²; g-potential on r from m2 is: w² = Gm₂/r.

In our case of a sending satellite to a ground station on Earth, we must relate a similar highway fact: The Earth equator surface rotates [electric, magnetic and gravitational super position principle] with a velocity of 463.82 M/S [the satellite on much higher velocity: 3865.61 M/S — surrounded by the gravitational referring SPACE: the actual propagating velocity the signal takes just from near outside the satellite — which has no velocity preference other than the local light divergence propagation: c]:

• A take on the above illustrated context clarifies that: Earth ground mass velocity has no effect on the »frequency shoot» between sending satellite and receiving Earth ground. Same frequency as emitted in the satellite’s g-potential WILL reach Earth’s ground station — minus the gravitational reduction in lights divergence, which we will discuss further below as the main contributor to the end result. Then, in conclusion:

• Assuming the same signal propagation linear velocity [c] divergence between sender and receiver [the sound example]

• receiving stations receive the same sender-emitted frequency — independent of ANY the velocity [within the signal propagation velocity] between parallel lying mass layer regions — the highway vehicle travelers — and/OR the sender’s own parallel pace.

We would wish to have an established reference to the above illustrated. No such is here known, if existent at all. So we have to make a basic deduction — certifying the aspect is completely free from relativistic ideas.

SendingReceivingTransverseNormalization, SRTN: TWI

Sending/receiving wavelength-normalization

THE deflecting ¦VEERING TRANSFER — Part 2: the executing veering action

THE VEERED WAVELENGTH-FREQUENCY TRANSFER

Wavelength-normalization —

WHAT WE MUST UNDERSTAND TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO

understand, TACKLE AND SOLVE THE PROBLEM

v = 0: sending and receiving signals transverse the motional direction — satellite signaling

Preparing part detail in proving that relativity theory has no connection to practical physics

On exact same wavelength transmissions the sending station is rests relative the receiving station:

• no wavelength change is possible: v = 0.

For this situation we use the above simple square relation:

• horizontal = vertical with v=0: transmitted = received.

• Any v>0 introduces an elongation [doppler effect] of the emitted wave signal:

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Because v and c are not additive — not in sound physics, not in light physics — a transmitting [satellite] station will leave over its transmitted wave to the propagation physics of the actual medium:

• in still air [c] and in free space [c] — »pretty much beginning from just outside the transmitting device» in the actual propagating medium — otherwise the medium would apparently not be a medium.

• Sending on a constant wavelength λ(lambda) in c, lambda — hence — becomes elongated in proportion to the Relation between the fix c and its maximum top velocity v — given our circular function.

— v=c means an unlimited [linear] trace of the wavelength signal — no signal at all.

— v=0 means no elongation at all: λ=λ₀.

TheMisconception: SRTN

NOTE THE MATHEMATICAL FORM √1–(v/c)²:

IT HAS NO RELATABLE UNDERSTANDABLE DEDUCIBLE RATIONAL LOGIC INTELLIGIBLE KINETIC v CONNECTION TO LIGHT c — as frequency does not connect wavelength:

— Where in modern academy? Please share:

PREFIXxSIN: allways here in related physics and mathematics

PROMINENT EXAMPLE: perihelion precession explaining mathematical physics

— In Einstein’s special relativity (Einstein’s v+ic-Error) the frequency connection is

λ/λ₀ = √1–(v/c)² = f₀/f .............. EINSTEIN ............... left side: SRTN inverted — right side : a misconception

— In the Sending-Receiving Transverse Normalization circular function as deduced above (SRTN), it is

λ₀/λ = √1–(v/c)² = f/f₀ .............. SRTN ........................ fully deducible KINETICALLY related transfer

These two have apparently nothing in common other than this, related:

• a relatable CONFUSION. Say again.

• AS SRTN (TWI) — a SendingReceiving TransverseNormalization — holds as well for sound in still air as for light propagation in a given gravitational equipotential, the SRTN connection — mathematics and physics — apparently has no deal at all with neither Einstein’s relativity mathematics nor the (electricity system accelerated referring) deduced Planck equivalents (PE).

• It hence seems outstandingly clear that modern academy (1900+) has adopted »a convenient

— but confusing — bridge»

on a automotive DRIFTINGpurposeDRIFT to, by all means, keep any Kepler-Galilei-Newton classic physics out of sight from A related academic as otherwise it is only modern academic suicide on the menu

between different physical realms — in claiming/securing any kind or sort or nature of a relativistic connection. The (v/c)² FORM apparently exposes similar mathematical properties connected to different physical domains (kinetics, light): light does not connect kinetics (Max Planck expressed the correct attitude to the photoelectric effect: properties of atoms, not light[‡]). MEANING (related):

• A such bridge apparently does not exist.

And nothing else, too, was expected (1800+) from a teaching system based on consensus — inventions — rather than deductions:

• Consensus is still no scientific subject. Never was. Is not now. Never will be:

— We don’t know is the only rationally true relatable scientific method UNTIL insight arrives under the rails.

Resulting connections:

λ₀=1, λ=2λ₀ ; c=λf ; λ=c/f : λ₀/λ = 1/2 = f/f₀ ; f₀=1 ; 1/2 = f ; ¦ v=d/t ; d=vt ;

t = 1/f in units of Hertz [Hz]: number of repetitions per second: f = 1/t in Hz:

f = (1/2) = √1–(v/c)² ; (1/2)² = 1–(v/c)² ; (v/c)² = 1–(1/2)² ; v/c = √1–(1/2)²

f = (1/n) = √1–(v/c)² ; (1/n)² = 1–(v/c)² ; (v/c)² = 1–(1/n)² ; v/c = √1–(1/n)²

———————————————————————————————

In a limited signal-velocity system (c), any possible lower velocity parameter (v <= c) can be related to c

• on a circular function y = √1–(x/r)²;

• radius r=c, variable x=v, functional value y (= f/f₀ — IF, and only if, f₀ is a fix reference related as = 1).

• Then — with a properly defined geometric f/f₀ transfer the square relation — any relation f/f₀ can be translated to a corresponding

• x/r = v/c as f/f₀ = √1–(v/c)².

In our satellite case v is the satellite velocity in the empty space related local c = light speed’s Earth’s gravitational potential (w²=Gm₂/[R=r+h]) at distance r+h from Earth’s gravitational center, h the satellite altitude above Earth’s equator.

• THE ENTIRE MISSION is for the satellite to ADJUST ITS f₀ SO that it will be received by any fix Earth surface ground station as a constant f = 10.23 MHz.

The end answer then relies on to (f₀/f ) invert the actual f/f₀-relation for that end purpose.

THE TASK:

— How EXACTLY is the transfer practically, signally electronically calculated? — with 0 relativistic reasoning.

• We leave no one behind — we deal only with a fully relatable universally logic explanation — in mathematics and physics.

• No »MAGIC» whatsoever. Modern academy cannot do this one. No way — so how did they solve the satellite math?

— For small central masses (m₂) the w² figures of the different theories have no significant differences: same practical values.

— For a general cosmological explanation, only a related physics and mathematics will hold: no »MAGIC». Just pure insight.

TS = (86400 S)/2 ¦ rS = rJ + 20200¦20180 KM

v=0: SATELLITE SENDS A HORIZONTAL/RADIAL SIGNAL TO EARTH

The faster the satellite travels inside a given fix gravi-potential shell surface, the more elongated the frequency signal becomes — it approaches a zero Earth response — in that equipotential spherical band

[ red shift effect].

• At v=c | the satellite frequency f0 is transferred to the gravitationally equipotential band and f therefore nullified: f = 0: no signal reaches Earth: the signal follows a vertical direction

• At v=0 —— f0 equals the maximum adjusted f.

• We INVESTIGATE an approximate signal angular deviation using the circular function

f/f₀ = √1–(v/c=sinA°=x/r)² in PREFIXxSIN

— applied on related physics Light’s Gravitational Dependency

Accurate signaling processing precision down to fractions of microseconds and (much) less is imperative on a (26+) satellite constructed global electronic surveillance/navigation system — where exact positioning coordination is needed:

———————————————

PREFIXxSIN

Introductory Exercise — a first Frequency Displacement to solve for:

A satellite with velocity v around the Earth in its gravitational equipotential band at altitude h over Earth ground is sending on a determined frequency f0. Because of v, corresponding »doppler displacements» or shifts appear. Meaning: f0 becomes distorted both up and down depending on from what location the measure is made. To get a measure of f0 in the satellite’s electronic system on a lowest determined fix frequency f [EarthStation] the f0 part must be adjusted — increased — upwards from the displacement effect’s lowest measured value in order to compensate the lag from v against the corresponding solid Earth surface’s gravitational electromagnetic system. Is v=0, given h kept, is f0=f and no adjustment is needed. The faster the satellite then travels with v around the Earth, the more elongated in the equipotential band the signal becomes leaving the satellite, and the higher up f0 must be adjusted for the signal, after it left the satellite’s v-system — if it shall expose the fix determined equipotential frequency f. Determine the function for v relative the top signal velocity c in the relation f/f0.

SOLUTION — the Frequency Displacement [»signal veering related to v»]:

— With the function value for y=f/f0=1 in the range closest to x=v>0, the TANGENT is horizontal.

At v=c is the function value for y=f/f0=0 and the tangent necessarily vertical.

The function becomes ideally a circular limited function of a signal top value[radius] c according to y=√(1—x²), corresponding to

f/f₀ = √1–(v/c)², the figure below.

Sending signals on right angles to vehicle velocity v

The connection is [apparently] a PURE limit-function of c and has no connection to Einsteins relativity theory.

• The same function f/f₀ = √1–(v/c)² also holds IDENTICAL FOR SOUND PROPAGATION (or between any other two relative limited velocity systems):

• The top speed propagation velocity c for a vehicle traveling in still air [c] with v, sending a sound frequency f0 which out in the still air as lowest shall be measured as a fix determined ground frequency f, also follows the function f/f₀ = √1–(v/c)²: f = f₀√1–(v/c)²: adopting frequency to velocity for exact signal.

The so deduced connection has apparently no connection to Einstein’s theory of relativity.

But as we know — LIGHT’S GRAVITATIONAL DEPENDENCY — electric signaling over (larger) distances entails corresponding (gravitationally governed) TIME DELAYS.

So: In order to SYNCHRONIZE the signaling technique into one single »AS IF ALL DEVICES EXIST IN AN ABSOLUTE TIME INDEPENDENT NOW» — the overview we need as constructors, and users — a careful mathematical layout over distances and measures has to be realized.

In modern academic terms, this Global Positioning System (GPS) organization is claimed to be governed through relativistic mathematics — the same timing giving even so much compelling evidence of the reliability of this claimed relativistic mathematics, that, what we know, no one dares to even THINK about in questioning its detailed content: »Practical physics prove the theory», it is held.

ON AVAILABLE DATA (2007+)

The global positioning GPS system has 23 actively working coordinated satellites, 3 in reserve, positioned in orbit around the Earth with a revolutionary repetition of twice during a 24 hour period (T = 86400/2 S). Their altitude over the earth’s surface is 20 200 KM.

The actual GPS example — proving that it has nothing at all to do with relativity mathematics or such ideas at all

TheAbsoluteMETRIC: TheMisConception

EXAMINATION:

use the frequency displacement solution above to calculate the satellite borne GPS-system’s frequency displacement ground-space with the following given/known data:

altitude, h = 20 200 KM [20180],

period, twice per 24h = 86400/2 S with

Earth equatorial radius rEQ = 6.378 T6 M giving a constant satellite velocity

v = 2π(d=6.378 T6 M + 20.2 T6 M)/T = 3865.6134 M/S

Earth mass m₂ = 5.975 T24 KG

Ground station fix frequency = 10.23000000000 MHz

THE ABSOLUTE METRIC

——————————————————————————————————————————

— v = d/t ; local c = λf :

high gravitation near large masses forces low f and too forces λ on a reduced propagation light divergence velocity:

low gravitation far from any mass forces max f and too forces λ on a max propagation velocity:

Their local proportions and product are guaranteed preserved on the Impossible To Destroy Divergence Constant c0 = λf anywhere in universe:

• It is possible to measure different local c:s through — static — the gravitational red shift combined with — dynamic — the Doppler effect because light diverges unlimited in space [accelerates and decelerates depending on m:s] — and so reveals changes between the different local regions

Elementary concept on Light’s Gravitational Dependency in related physics

states that USING ATOMIC CLOCKS to measure TIME in any place in any region at any time in the universal K-cell domain, and under the influence of gravitational physics over light’s propagation in space, ALWAYS GIVES ONE AND THE SAME END READING RESULT:c0 = 2.9972458 T8 M/S — CheopsRectangleMATH:

• FREQUENCY as well as wavelength and c-speed follow the local gravitational Absolute Metrics. And there is no way to measure a local light divergence on those premises OTHER than receiving an independent c0.

• At locations where c=0, the neutron is sequestered, and cannot decay: Macrocosmic Em-radiation = Off.

• an hydrogen atom — nucleus + electron cloud mass — cannot be built in such a SPACE.

BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT TIME ITSELF HAS CEASED TO EXIST (dumass, excuse me).

• The Cheops Rectangle Mathematical geometry on Lights Gravitational Dependency Certifies that c0 is preserved independent of gravitational influence (hence the deduction of the atomic nucleus from Planck constant: h=mc₀r: The Neutron — never noted in modern quarters).

— difference in atomic time and frequency between Earth ground and satellite altitude —

TRYING TO FOLLOW THESE CALCULATIONS WITHOUT A SUPPORTING REAL DETAILED SPREAD SHEET CELL ORGANIZED END STATION ANSWER GUIDE — TheProof — IS LIKE TRYING TO EXPECT THE READER TO DEDUCE THE ENTIRE UNIVERSAL MATH — ON THE FLY. That IS rude.

This presentation came from an original WORD document (@INTERNET_Citat_GR.doc). It had a small CalCard with it (General Relativity Wikipedia @INTERNET 2006-09-27). But that detailed part was never added at the time of the actual htm-edition (Jan2008). Here we will try to make a better impression:

c_SJ=(c₀/2)(1 + √1 – 4Gm₂/r_SJc₀²) general divergence — linear free-space light-speed — c on r from g-center

———————————————————————————————————

Measuring on one and the same (wave) length d₀; same distance on different times with different speeds

———————————————————————————————————

SJ ¦ SatelliteS TheEarthJ ¦ v=d/T ¦ (cT¦S) = d₀ = (cT¦J) ; cS/cJ = TJ/TS ¦ velocity = distance/time, M/S ;

———————————————————————————————————

TS = TJ + Δt ; additional (Ground related) atomic ticks outside Earth on lower Earth-governed g-potential;

cS/cJ = TJ/(TJ + Δt) = 1/(1 + Δt/TJ) ; 1 + Δt/TJ = cJ/cS ; Δt/TJ = cJ/cS – 1 ;

Δt = TJ(cJ/cS – 1) ; –Δt = TJ(1 – cJ/cS)

TJ = 86400 S = 24h ; sidereal day

rJ = Earth’s averaged Volumetric Radius 6.3710008 T6 M (Wikipedia, Earth radius 18Nov2022);

mJ = Earth mass (related in CWON for further tests) 5.975 T24 KG = m₂;

G = the universal gravitation constant (epoch 1960-1999 for further tests) 6.67 t11 JM/[KG]²;

cJ/cS = 0.99999999947..

Δt = –45.654200420 µS ; atomic 24h day tick difference from Earth ground to GPS satellite orbit

TRANSVERSE frequency-wavelength VEERING time from satellite orbit velocity v:

tJ = TJ(f/f₀=√1–(v/c)²=T₀/T) = (86400 S)(0.999999999917..) = 86399.9999928174 S.

+Δt_v = TJ – tJ = 7.1825617454 µS ; VEERED transfer delay from satellite’s velocity v:

Δ_v = Δt + Δt_v = (–45.654200420 + 7.1825617454 = –38.4716386748)µS ; total tick veer.

f = 10.23 MHz ; GPS Earth ground fix (chip¦military referencing) frequency.

f₀ = 10.229999995445 MHz ; GPS adopted stable satellite transmitting [chip] frequency matching f exactly,

= [(86400 S – 38.4726.. µS)/(86400 S)]10.23 MHz = 10,229999995445.. MHz .

Depending on choice of G, mJ and rJ, minor differences appear ..99544.. to some ..99543..

——————————————————————————————————————————

first gives us

c_hT_h=d₀=c_JT_J giving c_h/c_J=T_J/T_h with the faster atomic time T_h=T_J+Δt giving T_J/T_h=T_J/(T_J+Δt). With

(c_h/c_J)–1=(T_J/T_h)–1 then is (T_J/T_h)–1=(T_J/[T_J+Δt])–1=–Δt/[T_J+Δt]=(c_h/c_J)–1 with

c_h/c_J = [1 + √ | 1 – 4Gm₂/r_hc₀² | ]/[1 + √ | 1 – 4Gm₂/r_Jc₀² | ], r_h=r_J+h.

Is Dt negligible to T_J the simpler is given as –Δt/T_J=(c_h/c_J)–1 and thereby –Δt=T_J[(c_h/c_J)–1].

We set here

T_J = 24h = 86 400 S.

With c_h as light divergence at altitude h=20 200 KM, c₀ as »the measured light divergence at Earth ground 2.99792458 T8 M/S»*** and c_J=c₀–0.208429183 M/S at distance 6.378 T6 M from Earth’s center gravity point as (CheopsRectangleLightGravitationalDependencySolutions) c_J=(c₀/2)[1 + √ | 1 – 4Gm₂/r_Jc₀² | ],

must a real addition

–Δt=45.6537 µS per 24h be reduced from satellite’s electronic frequency system on h for receiving an Earth ground f.

The FREQUENCY DISPLACEMENT from satellite velocity v — the increase needed in satellite’s frequency system for receiving the exact lowest tuned frequency f in the equipotential band — then becomes in a corresponding atomic clock time per second advised by the above free from relativity ideas solution (f₀ from satellite, f the steady 10.23 MHz Earth station)

f/f₀=√ 1–(v/c)²=T₀/T = 0,999999999917..

Per 24h hence (T₀/T)(86400 S) = 86399,9999928174 S. The +Δt_v difference:

+Δt_v = 86400 S – 86399,9999928174 S = 7,18256 µS, = ([86400 S](1–[√ 1–(v/c)²]) .

THE ANSWER:

Comparing established results

DAILY TIME DILATION (Wikipedia has a separate curve diagram in one of the parallel articles: GPS 38µS)

The total time/frequency displacement then becomes (satellite’s c is higher:

satellite atomic time ticks faster than Earth surface atomic time on its lower c and higher g-potential)

–Δt + Δt_v = –45.6552555761 µS + 7.1825617454 µS = –38.4726938307 µS.

• The article (2007¦2022) on GPS @INTERNET Wikipedia GPS (Global Positioning System) says

• 38 µS — which means a reduction in the satellite’s frequency system from ground station’s fix

• 10.23 MHz to 10,22999999543 MHz. MAC: »Satellite’s clock is faster». Related: atoms ticks faster.

The Wikipedia article mentions ”38 microseconds”.

(86400 S – 38.4726.. µS)/(86400 S) · 10.23 MHz = 10,229999995445..

(Wikipedia says ... 99543.. but Wikipedia article has partly incomplete data)

• Exactly.

• No involved Einstein’s theory of relativity — and above all: nothing of its claimed mathematics or ideas.

——————————————————————————————————————

 *** Note that EVEN a ”c0±2000M/S »measured on Earth ground»” practically gives same relational value 

c_h/c_J–1(=5.284 t10).

For Δt_v lies a corresponding change in the fourth decimal with Δt_v in µS. The difference is hence negligible, without significance.

TheGPSexample

Reason:

REASON

THE 1800+ INVENTIVE UNIVERSAL STATE GOVERNED EXISTENTIALISM, MODERN ACADEMIC JURISDICTION ALONG WITH THE REST OF the state powers STARTED TO INVENT and proclaim bills — supporting its own continuing idea of representing an absolute »AUTHORITY» (type: ”Law and order”). Yes. Say.

Europe 1800+

EUROPE 1800: Around 1800 an attacking arrogant dictating military design enters the scene, forcing the populations to accept its violent ideas of law and order under threat of punishment. 200 years later, same design but transferred to the public, police, prosecutor and court authorities — not the military system as such, further below — this is heard in Sweden: ”But we live in a democracy, a free society, a free land” — by young people (first) around 15. Same type.

Only a few dare to protest — never heard, never reported in the strongly Swedish authoritative moral consenting self censoring media. The Swedish criminal police openly accomplishes abductions of a few individuals who refuses to cooperate with the state authority violent instances — guaranteed zero threat picture to their fellowmen:

The victim’s home is typically violated, suddenly without notice, by some three criminal police men, threatening to use violence if the victim does follow freely.

The Swedish official public translation of UDHR10Dec1948 is a havoc. It reflects a study of how the Swedish official administration refuses to emphasize the idea behind the HumanRight detail by derogating ITS IDEA ”.. of the greatest importance ..” P7 — the rhythmic and wording of the language compared to the original very strong emphasis (may, Sw., må, not shall: the translation is apparently a derogating insult on humanity, not a respectful translation to it) — as a submissive recommendation, not a fundamental ”recognition”, P1. The treatise is thoroughly exposed in GMR2014 with exemplified wordings in sections and grammar. It is no wonder that the Swedish public, its administrations and organs, has no idea of its content — never mentioned, never related, never exemplified as testified ”You drive with that fucking human right value” (1996), with ”See to adopt to these people”. Also in explicit by Swedish Courts ”That is not something we have a responsibility for”; ”.. every individual and every organ of society ..” P8. It is a havoc report of a society that never cared, never bothered, except on its own decisions, a hierarchy of deciding associations that the individual must obey, never oppose. Just: God have mercy on anyone who dares.

Say again. No media reports. Not one word. Not a spell.

It should be mentioned, that the report was sent to the Swedish Governmental Secretariat (1997). It answered very politely that the treatise work was appreciated, and might be considered in some future on any eventual new official revision.

The victim is then transported in a locked guarded civil police car to a military head quarter where the victim is interrogated about the universe, then sent back home.

After a week, the victim receives a letter from the Swedish criminal police where the victim is ordered to visit the local police head quarter being a suspect for trying to have escaped — as realized by the three criminal policemen who accomplished the abduction under threat of using violence if not obeyed.

Abduction with purpose for accusation of escape — so that the state administration court system can — punish — sentence the victim to imprisonment. Sweden 1900s.

— Has even China such a refined and elegant national media popular jurisdictional authoritative system? Law and order.

Compare Article 29.1 UDHR10Dec1948:

1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

— Is there even one single Swedish example of what that might be all about: ”the free and full development of his personality”?

• Parliament, Government, Academy, Social and general public institutions and administrations, Education in general: Police, prosecutor, court. Medicine. Environment. Technology — without environmental destruction. Any.

— Please, Dear Sweden. Dazzle this author (and the rest of humanity) with only one single example. 1. Please.

That would indeed be encouraging. Very. We would surrender immediately.

— Existential Individual Rights Respected by Sweden, and so proven — independent of nationality, birth, sex, age, status.

Of course, that part is never mentioned in Swedish jurisdictional procedures, as the victim is regarded by the public (except exceptions), the police (except exceptions), the prosecutor (with no exceptions at all), and the court (except no exceptions at all) as an disobedient shitty private property that has to be yelled at as IT does not obey the master’s calls, intrinsically unable to understand the meaning of law and order.

It is the classic fascistic way: those who do not approve must be punished.

It is never mentioned. A Swedish daily paper would not dare to write a single sentence of it. Not a word. It is all covered, swept under the carpet.

And, at Swedish daylight time, it is replaced by the standard Swedish shining kind Swedish mentality smile (except exceptions).

— And an exploding wrath like nothing alike ever seen, IF the victim dares utter one favorable word of rightfulness (the policeman went furious and was within half a second very close to smacking the victim in the face — it is such a joy to share Earth with these eminent teachers, friends of the public).

Some victims unable to bare the bullying commit suicide. Those who don’t only grow stronger — on the bully-killed’s shoulders.

After the criminal police abduction on purpose of helping the state driving a process against the victim with accusations for escaping follows: imprisonment.

Then the victim is sentenced to imprisonment — derogated by the court on the following typical encouraging talk: On what are you taking your stand? And: As you didn’t repent since last time, the punishment will double this time. And the introduction (the favorite »feel guilt»): How would it be if everybody did as you!

How many are the peaceful individuals Swedish jurisdiction has provoked and driven actively into death by bullying their existential individual rights during the 1900s? No Swedish paper dare to write one word about it. Do correct if wrong.

What is the hardest to face? Apart from the imprisonment as such. And even the threatening derogating treatment as such: It is the utter state’s jurisdictional administrative contempt: it will not end it persecution ON peaceful thinking, never leave the individual at peace, never show respect for existential human rights. The state administrative inducement apparently authorizes — by DRIFT — an exercising horror ON its meaning of the word LAW. Namely: The sick LACK of a slightest tiniest sense of the smallest respect on Human Existential Right. Swedish police, prosecutors and court: Easily the worst populated quarters that have ever seen a couple of shoes on Earth. See Swedish Existential Authority Exemplified in environment in general, what it is capable of in underlining itself : not one word HumanRight. No information. No notice. Just raping straight over and on.

Not the military part as such, though, maybe surprisingly. It has from this (here writing) instance never been heard a single mean or derogatory word from that side (captains, regemental commanders ..).

So (in a summing conclusive report):

CHINA is nothing compared to Sweden when it comes to — national popular — bullying, killing individuality — mentally. Swedish Public media openly pissing on The Human Existential Right, seems to be a highly appreciated public joy when given the opportunity (pacifists are general law breakers, full public pedal). Namely: The magnitude of the exceptional contempt (so that the public feels safe in experiencing mental kicks for having impressed the local authorities of their national solidarity, because deep inside they fear to be punished, if not .. The hidden philosophy of The Mob; DRIFT. Not plan; Where HumanRight is not advocated 24/7, DRIFT of the mob and violence rule the day: each society creates its own beloved pets; Swedish Media).

Apart from a minority of exceptions, the pacifistic contempt is exceptionally well established in the Swedish society (well media documented) — and hear this as already mentioned, seemingly crazy part : at all places except in the military system, as experienced: no open disparaging judgments there, strangely enough. Maybe Sweden is a world exception ..

And as in all societies where violence is ruling the jurisdictional system, there are always places with kind and friendly people. However with the negative aspect of having to live with it in the dark, as if on a shame: Swedish authority obedience.

Most popular (Swedish) PUBLIC yell (»The Prosecutor’s Lead»):

— But we must have a defense!

Test answer (the world wide version: say):

— DEFENSE is an innate property of nature, in every molecular aspect of life — nothing we humans can CREATE. Only ORGANIZE.

— And HOW would that MIGHT be arranged? Maybe some Swedish official educated have some prioritized inducement of presenting a suggestion.

IF you WANT violence — authoritative dictating — you GET violence.

IF you want peace — HumanRight recognition — you get peace.

— In no way, by no means, at no occasion, it is justified to ATTACK a person who represents ZERO threat to others. No way. Under no circumstances. Refusing to cooperate with persons demanding automatic obedience, is the first step of DEFENSE (exactly what bothers women in general who suffers disrespect: revolting against dictatorship): Defense is refusing societies that is building on fascistic ideas. It has nothing to to with refusing defense. It IS defense: HumanRight recognition. Get that one. Then we can talk Defense.

Defense is NOT for attack. Never. No way.

Level in Sweden (2022): uneducated, ignorant, stupid: Gushing violence.

Each individual has an innate need to develop its defense. But Swedish state administrative authorities does not understand that concept, still treating its population as tagged cattle that must be punished if disobedient.

Claim whatever you want.

— Nobody did proclaim or declared anything such

— in — here any known — sense of directly addressing a derogation of human rights.

But so it happened: gushing violence.

It »just went on» in familiar footsteps. And so it — The DRIFT — developed.

• More obedience. More punishment. More violence. More obedience. More ..

— These specific prominent leading aces apparently have no clue at all on the idea of HumanRight Recognition.

— Believing IT, and also stating so, to be a Creation of Governmental Humans.

— NOT a necessary — natural — inducement in stating a reasonable sentence: wit:

— The — Namely — Natural reflections through a fantastic nervous system Nature assembled during some 3Gy for humans to appreciate such trivial things as appetite and a gentle touch.

— »We, The Governmental Overheads A-people, have created Human Rights — so that the lower B-people can feel trust in our respect for their lower value».

That must be the New Hi Tech Governmental provision of understanding the difference between left and right: obedience and punishment.

Shorter: The world societies (1800+) apparently lost their manifest.

Compare:

— Inability to realize HumanRight recognition in all cases leads to destruction.

— Because: nature IS built on the harmony THAT Governmental institutions apparently (in our times) disdain.

— IF these aces had wit, they would certainly state: This is the line. We refuse to take part in a technology that kills the foundation of what we humans have developed on; we do not support obvious madness.

• If they want war, they get war. If they want peace, they get peace.

— If we walk, we go. If not, we don’t.

• We always have a choice. Absolutely all times of the day

THE MODERN WORLD MODERN ACADEMIC JURISDICTIONAL SOCIETIES DEVELOPMENT 1800+ — a scenario of unproclaimed satanistic fascism — on DRIFT

ENDOWED WITH REASON AND CONSCIENCE

PROOF:

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.

UDHR10Dec1948, A1.

sv.: Alla människor är födda fria och lika i värdighet och rättigheter.

(Ps.82:6): " and all of you are children of the most High"

sv.: .. och alla ni är barn av det mest Högsta

THE FINAL CONNECTION

BOTH THESE CANNOT POSSIBLY HOLD CONTEMPORANEOUSLY:

Israel thus stands between God and humanity, representing each to the other.

MICROSOFT ENCARTA 99 ENCYCLOPEDIA, Judaism — Basic Doctrines and Sources

sv.: Israel står således mellan Gud och mänskligheten, representerande den ena till den andra.

This is NOT an attack on any human.

No way.

It is apparently an explicit havoc report on United Nations’ Eminent Inducements.

HUMAN RIGHT RECOGNITION AND ISRAEL AS A GEOGRAPHICAL STATE APPARENTLY HAVE NOTHING AT ALL IN COMMON. NEVER HAD, HAS NOT NOW. NEVER WILL HAVE. NEVER HAD A PHYSICAL FOOT IN THE REGION, NOT EVEN IN OUR UNIVERSE — of reason. IT IS A PURE in detail relatable SATANISTIC FASCISTIC IDEA.

BY DRIFT. ON DRIFT. NOT BY PLAN:

• It is, and it was, and it will always be

THE ONLY WAY FOR A SPECIFIC SET OF MENTAL INDUCEMENTS TO CLAIM PROVIDENCE ON FOUNDATIONS never existent in reason

— AS ALSO explained BY REASON:

— Classifying — proclaiming — a specific divinity of A-people over B-people:

• fascism. Nazism. Satanism. Dictatorship.

”We are unique in thought”. ”We”. These days:

Per Telephone. Satellite ..

Sanctioned by United Nations.

And so it is maintained.

HumanRight recognition never mentioned.

Not one word. Not a spell. Not a hint.

No media reports.

Gushing violence.

Have your say.

UnitedNations:

UNITED NATIONS :

Does it look so that

”Israel thus stands between God and humanity, representing each to the other.”

is a per definition of (A1 continued)

They are endowed with reason and conscience

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

De är utrustade med förnuft och samvete

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

HumanRight recognition never mentioned.

Not one word. Not a spell. Not a hint.

No media reports.

Gushing violence.

Does it?

UNITED NATIONS :

Is it not so — by the only reason that exists — that

”endowed with reason and conscience”

IS THE PER-REASON-DEFINITION of THAT

”Israel thus stands between God and humanity, representing each to the other”

defines

spontaneously developed unproclaimed satanistic fascism

by DRIFT. Not plan. No conspiracy. Just simple plain blind DRIFT. Free fall. Until ..

THE PHYSICAL SECTARIANISM IDEA OF AN ISRAEL AND A JEW SO EXCLUDED EXPLICITLY:

(Ps.82:6): " and all of you are children of the most High". All. None excluded. No Nation Israel.

No idea of a JEW on foot. Only in Heart. In Mind. No difference in dignity.

No A people. No B people. Just people of the most high.

HumanRight recognition 24/7 mentioned.

Word. Spell. Hint.

Media reports. Say again. 24/7.

And — UNITED NATIONS. hence so certified — that it IS true that

"for salvation is of the Jews", (John.4:22: The Properties)

ON THE HENCE CLEARLY SO PROCLAIMED INSIDE MIND SITE OF HUMANITY:

• knowledge, insight, the properties as so defined and testified.

And THAT also THAT includes the per definition of the general ego minded blinded

general fuckups as

"Ye are of your father the Devil" (John.8:44 ¦ TheClaim).

:

UNITED NATIONS:

Gushing violence. Intrusion. Attacks on human right.

ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER — took 200 years to develop 1800+. Hi Tech IQ on-ramp.

HumanRight recognition never mentioned.

Not one word. Not a spell. Not a hint.

No media reports.

Say it. Proclaim it. Explain it. Teach it. Educate it :

— Get the fuck out of my beach.

Summing United Nations:

BOTH CANNOT POSSIBLY HOLD contemporaneously.

As long as UN does not take a stand to end the madness of its own inhuman creations, violence will only escalate.

Reason

OurHistory:

OUR ENVIRONMENT 200 years after some 1800 ..

OUR HISTORY BOOK ..

ONE OF A STILL DECREASING FEW PLACES where Nature is still seen in Sweden. 28Jul2022. It becomes increasingly difficult to find such. Only a decade back and before — practically everywhere: crazy beautiful. Just around the corner.

THE VENTILATION TAKEN BY EARTH GROUND BASED WIND POWER STATIONS

will never — ever — be retrieved through any natural process:

once taken they are gone

MODERN ACADEMY:

Please do Show the math.

Situation 2022

There is no math showing that wind power on Earth is Generated by the Sun. Say.

It is our time’s worst environmental nightmare — explicitly by mathematics and physics, relatable down to every atomic detail:

• Stealing Earth Rotational Energy — for what noble purpose: for a coming wind-safe generation? Say again. (»It was fun as long as it lasted ..»).

• But established instances deny — does not recognize — that wind power is a property of Earth’s rotation. Not of the Sun.

”Vindenergin har sitt ursprung i solen”, translated: Wind energy has its origin in sun, Swedish Energy Authority (Aug2011¦ Sw. Wikipedia Jun2022).

So: we would very much like to SEE THAT INSTANCE’S REFERENCED MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION on its claim ”origin in Sun”. But: where is it? Search for. None yet found.

• What we DO find is this: every particular Earth WIND MATHEMATICAL FORM relies on, is deduced from and explained in every detail from: rotation.

See some collected and related and deduced reference material in EARTH WIND FUNDAMENTALS (Jun2022).

IF anyone can (Show the CORRESPONDING SUN math): share. Dazzle us. Please.

Searched for. None yet found. It is a widespread misconception and misinterpretation. Please Discalim.

• Once taken — as air resistance from a free rolling van on a road — its energy is gone, heat converted;

• Wind power on Earth is in every mathematical physical atomic detail a 100% generated — by math and related physics, have your say — Earth Rotational Coriolis Effect: Basic Rotational Closed System Cyclic Centrifugal Atmospheric Vortex Physics

— as long as a solid rotation exists with an overlying floating atmosphere.

Sweden NORTH 22Jun2022

The only possibly hopeful scenario in the TIME EXTENSION of The »BikeMore» Enterprise

Our Earth is a Huge container of rotational inertial energy, and minor outtakes over shorter times have little influence — provided SHORT.

is that: That IT will have a bright but short historical entry.

• Meaning: That the activity will (must) soon end. (Am I not a very positive character ..). Meaning:

— END by reasons not yet here completely clarified or understood. Just : It better.

To Say:

• Modern Academic Enterprise is apparently killing every aspect of Nature — apparently on DRIFT. Not plan:

• There is no deliberate aim to destroy.

• But daylight exposes it so. On practically all branches.

If an open public detailed information did exist on WindFromSun, this was never written.

Test Explaining Reason:

— Instead: the population is held muzzled and imprisoned by surveilled handcuffed point plates advising the individual to have trust in the cuffing responsible instance: ”we care about your privacy”.

— So why am I constantly interrupted in my privacy (Article 12) by these instances without my explicit permission? That smells exercising fascism long way:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence .. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference .. ,

UDHR10Dec1948, A12

So: Where is world jurisdiction — other than payed bitches to these privacy — home: nature — intruders?

MODERN ACADEMY’S WORST EVER INVENTED IDEA OF MATHEMATICAL PHYSICS? Or: Disclaim this:

— unprecedented Earth biological environmental destructibility? Ignorant. Uneducated. Misapprehended ideas of physics and mathematics: Say.

Sweden SOUTH 26Jul2022

Searched for, non yet found:

• A Modern Academic mathematical-physical proof THAT ”wind power on Earth is generated by the Sun”.

• Show us that math (mathematics exemplified). And we will surrender immediately.

IF the run is long, and the outtakes are high, the environmental reductions will reflect exactly that too.

WHAT BRINGS HUMANITY TO EVOLUTION?

The thing we care most in mentioning in the History of Humanity:

• Instrumentation

— non environmental Destructive Instrumentation — non-destructive construction, as the nervous system and what it apparently was aimed to be used for — the only way to prove real steel physics by observation:

• Artistry — friendship: market, trade, architecture, technology.

Aren’t we a sweet couple. (In this article We will show that .. ).

HISTORY:

OUR HISTORY — by already well known preferences

from around the beginning of our western civilization time chronology order

• A pioneering figure appears in English entitled as [St.] Paul — ”saint” Paul

— apparently in opposition to the sayings of the Jesus man;

John.14:30:

”Hereafter I will not talk much with you.: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.”.

”Nothing”. As truly as stated. 2000 year history. Not a hint. Not a word. Not a spell. Not a sound:

John.16:9: ”Of sin, because they believe not on me.”. But Paul is (very) often cited — as if a Jesus representative.

• The controversy is not on the level of religion. It is on the level of truth — or not at all.

A peculiar (Western world) observation:

• CRISTIANITY PRIESTS more by rule than exception refer PAUL sayings ”according to PAUL”, ”but PAUL says” — never a Jesus man quote. Christianity is full of these most prominent proofs. Compare the two most outstanding, short:

PAUL: Each person be submitted to the Authorities, for these are ordained by God to hold the wicked down. And if you come into conflict with The Authorities, you must be fearful, for The Authorities do not carry The Sword for nothing (The Paul Obedience Teaching).

JESUS: Go away Satan. For it is written. The Lord alone you shall fear and him alone you shall pray.

Say again. Come again. United Nations.

• The controversy is not on the level of religion. It is on the level of truth — or not at all.

This may seem as a religious engagement: it is not. It is all about HumanRight: the only existing domain of Knowledge: gravitation, electricity: life: Law with Consequences. Say.

”endowed with reason and conscience”

UNITED NATIONS 1800+

• "endowed with reason and conscience":

EARLY WESTERN WORLD AUTHORITIES

APPARENTLY (PaulTeaching) Interpreting itself as a servant of The Bible — a such instated divine instance of law and order — and as so attested, certified and ordained by the so called foremost Christian apostle Paul —

the western world's so named Christian armed established authorities adopted a general idea to be »the servants of God» by holding »the wicked» under control and bounds. And so it came about, or can be understood to have come about, with the present United Nations idea of

• serving an intelligible authority.

• The controversy is not on the level of religion. It is on the level of truth — or not at all.

This began from around the beginning of our western civilization time chronology order

— however also disclaimed at the time by the Jesus man on the wordings

• "for salvation is of the Jews", John.4:22 with the asserted and testified

• "Ye are of your father the Devil", John.8:44, with further: The Bible Claim by Jesus — not by the satanists.

A deep conflict was exposed by the time on the nature of intelligence and the origin of life, truth and its purpose.

Part of that western world 2000 year history Christian conviction included extensive persecutions of the Jesus’ man labeled satanists. Here coined »the Flesh-Jews» ("Ye are of your father the Devil", John.8:44 as opposed to the Jesus man's testified "for salvation is of the Jews", John.4:22). Which by the so adopted Christian world were held responsible for the stated crucifixion of the Jesus man, as it was reported.

On credit of this western Christian violent stand, the Jesus man’s stated satanist sect ("Ye are of your father the Devil", John.8:44 as opposed to the Jesus man's testified "for salvation is of the Jews", John.4:22), earned »a back-stabbing surging» favor for its persecution. Still continuing and even more to claim themselves as the »so persecuted by Biblical quote» Biblical selected and chosen God favored people of Israel: They name geography still: ISRAEL.

On this credit

— and the historical self created guilt advocated by the western Christianity for its 2000 year persecutions of the sect

— the western world civilization authorities

— still under the historical impression of being God’s Right Hand on Earth (under unitive decisions by consensus — still not a scientific subject)

— lay the foundation of the satanistic sect's claim of a divine

— strict physical

— right to geographical land THAT the sect itself and none of its members ever have had a foot in under the stars:

— Modern academic 1800+ intelligence sure has had a specific relationship to its most beloved intelligible pets of society:

— Very high IQ: »physical divinity». MustBuyBook.

— ”ISRAEL: Explicit Divine Atoms In Universe”. Must honour. Must not question. Must obey. United Nations.

NO ISRAEL Jews INSIDE THE INNATE HUMAN MIND AS A NATURAL PROPERTY FOR ALL TO SHARE. No way. BECAUSE THERE IS A MASTER RACE THAT MUST BE HONORED, UNITED NATIONS SAYS.

In no way aware of its actions and their consequences, United Nations (Balfour Declaration 1917+) prepared land and geography for a satanistic sect, based on the idea to stand above other born humans as specially selected by God. THAT despite the actual wording (Ps.82:6) " and all of you are children of the most High", with further attesting recognitions (UDHR1948) "All humans are born free and equal in dignity and rights":

• The United Nations so apparently turned its back on these and every other highly claimed virtue statement, apparently beginning a new era of supporting unproclaimed satanistic fascism — by DRIFT. Not by plan;

• The United Nations overthrew the human family for advocating a consensual voting decisive authority.

— exactly the unproclaimed satanistic fascistic drifting human inborn stupidity only human right recognition can abort.

• And that is the per definition of exercising oppression: not-freedom, not-justice, not-peace. No Recognition.

• Instead of a recognition as so stated (P1-8 UDHR10Dec1948, ”of the greatest importance”) United Nations — especially Europe (rewriting the original for its own continued authority: European Convention, directly breaching article 30: ”.. State, group or person any right .. any activity .. aimed at the destruction of any rights and freedoms ..) — began Deciding — failing its own vows completely: no recognition. Zero. A mental prison for humanity.

• Not realizing The Law:

— Decision — claim — outside humanRight recognition has only power to destroy. Say again.

Why is United Nations apparently endowed with such inducements of NOT understanding — however at a time very well formulating (P1 UDHR10Dec1948) — that foundation of Intelligence? What does UN aim on that UN are, so openly dismissing The Law of Consequences? Say again. United Nations. Educate us: Stupid? Ignorant? Uneducated? Say.

CHILDREN AND ANIMALS CAN HANDLE IT.

And so it began — an idea to possess Intelligence over Nature: the Brain and Nervous System Creator. Very High IQ.

• 1800+: Beginning to Invent practically everything connecting the ASSOCIATIVE word: intelligence. Mathematics and physics. The LIST. Preparing for a total destruction. 1800+.

The United Nations failed humanity. The United Nations denied its only known standard of dignity, in its own historical guilt — of trying to repent for its debt on practicing violence against the humanity-dividing satanistic inducement. Based on a DRIFT. Still highly alive inside United Nations. Still not understood to be so. But also still continuing to hold humanity imprisoned, forbidden to become what it has always been — tricked by its innate greedy satanistic DRIFT. Believing it to have better qualities than others. To stand above as more dear. To be selected as more precious.

— Get the fuck out of my beach.

United Nations: the concept as such is not even apprehended by the personnel. Ignorant. Uneducated. Say.

Low minded — not because in lack of intelligence. But APPARENTLY because in lack of inducement to take advantage of its content: related physics and mathematics: Health Care.

UNITED NATIONS INVENTED/reinstated »SATANISTIC INTELLIGENCE — by DRIFT. Not by any plan:

• The world leading Business Enterprise, locking humanity into narrow boxes of a divine state law obedience and punishment where the true nature of humanity — as so gallantly understood from the start by children, and even animals — is permanently denied, and by all means must not be addressed, mentioned or recognized.

DEFENSE — nature’s foremost inborn quality (temper) — ENTAILS NO VIOLENCE

Where is United Nations agreed foremost civilized law bill: force and violence is under no circumstances allowed, not in any kind or nature of way. Where? I don’t see any. Say.

UNINFORMED. UNEDUCATED. RECKLESS AND CARELESS. VERY POOR JUDGMENT. Paid Bitches to Microsoft&Google: 24/7 globally surveilled imprisonment. Not one word HumanRight. Not a spell. Not a sound. Not a hint. ”Restart your computer or we will do it for you”. ”Pick a time”.

— Get the fuck out of my beach.

Give examples;

• Criminality and injustice develops only in societies where HumanRight is NOT recognized.

— There are no exceptions. Not one. IF you find one: please share.

CONCLUSION and final summing:

IT describes part of a havoc report :

.. there was a BIG hole over there .. and over there an even bigger one .. but that was nothing compared with over there .. behind that corner ..

Reason

S: As still of 30Nov2022

6Jan2023 —— Firefox Reads Symbol — unless this is a dream ..

UNLESS THERE ARE NO MORE PLANNED BACKSTABBING FIREFOX ISSUES OR INTERVENING ALPHABETIC HOLOCAUSTS:

FIREFOX: You are most welcome to UniverseHistory — we need you — as long as this now may persist (we know this backstabbing fawning, wheedling, oily unreliable HumanRight contempt pissing population’s most beloved inducements from earlier, thank you very much, by experience being more careful now these days — in reminding on a first HumanRight recognition ”the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world”, for sorting out the gold from the ashes directly from square 1: gravitation, electricity. LIFE. Technology — and market — WITH her. Not against her): hopefully for ever.

PREVIOUS FIREFOX ISSUES — mentioned in several earlier UH-documents

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

In the listing of ALL WEBSITES in UH (UniverseHistory), all the first (Aug2008+) documents produced using MicrosoftWORD2000 Symbol font for scientific denotations are marked with an S.

Web readers unable to read the Symbol font will make these documents practically worthless as scientific documents.

The reason for having SYMBOL in the first early productions: Microsoft’s very useful convenient DIRECT TRANSFER type

• at the same time learning their Greek letter spouses (pi, rho, lambda ..).

Writing traditional scientific literature expressions in mathematics and physics:

• Fast, direct and — believed to be — reliable for the global set called humanity:

• scientific traditional FINEST BOOK PRINT GRAPHICS lettering in mathematics and physics.

It all disappeared with the Unicode standard, having a ”CrapSYMBOL”

— for Each font. No unitive Traditional (some 2000 years) Scientific standard anymore.

These are apparently our real steel High IQ Cultural aces: trading gold for ash.

Say again: Masters of destruction. It is such a joy to have these as collaborators. Max PayGrade. Jepp. Humanity enjoys in a state of ecstasy.

— »NATURE BUILDS BEAUTIFUL BRAIN OF ATOMS DURING A ROUGH 3Gy». Then (1800+): IS IT THE brain that begins destructing the foundation from where it all came. Or is it just a bad DRIFT — a fuckup in full pace — from having missed the technological on-ramp. Please share.

— Of course MOZILLA FIREFOX has no part in developing a most popular global learning ideal for bad environmental habits.

When the sad and sorry property in Firefox was discovered (after several years of production where a ”firefox” was not even visible), we tried to use the Unicode standard — or where it is apparently crappy — incorporating a small png-image picture with the more unitive, clear and graphical original excellent Symbol traditional standard (to include even Firefox because of its CLEAR FONT presentation without dimming: the new Microsoft Invention at the time).

As yet (30Nov2022): The web reader preserving Symbol as well as the best CLEAR FONT original in ALL the UH-productions — also with preserved TAB indents (but removed horizontal lines) — is: Safari.

CalCard: 22Dec2022

CALCULUS REFERENCES TO THE TABLES

CALCULUS CARDS (Sw. Kalkylkort SpreadSheet) are based on the Swedish version of OpenOffice Spread sheet documents.

It was generally integrated in this UNIVERSE HISTORY production as a math results exact reference in the original Swedish text editions.

— Here, it (the cell programming commands) is in conflict with the English version — and there is not much to do about that. Except possibly to have two or several language versions on the same computer — automatically transferring the one to the other — but today’s programmers are not best known for handling that type of conversions: Compare Microsoft (after the Bill Gates era) on earlier spread sheet versions with the later Excel and OpenOffice in MICROSOFT’S PROGRAM DESTRUCTING EXAMPLES. (The mod operator was frankly removed, replaced by some cryptic with no mathematical explanation: Excel&OpenOffice with associated alike cannot present results from elementary deduced atomic mass equations compilation).

— Excuse me: Most of today’s computer programs (operating systems) seems more or less like a ”dolls house theater” — compared to known examples of a more related (and faster) programming technique (»around some Windows 95 .. PRESENT SPEED ON WINDOWS 10»): direct CPU mnemonics type Borland’s TURBO Pascal (with direct classic assembler properties): excluded by Microsoft. MICROSOFT (2016+) — most known for killing — banning — a first (before 2016) free and a highly developing computer culture — as shown by examples.

• Internet COULD HAVE BEEN something extraordinary — with the FREE not surveilled citizens of humanity — not Microsoft (2016+) — as the driving innovators. MICROSOFT (2016+) just TOOK it all — forcing individuals to OBEY, not supporting them to develop. Classic Fascistic Satanistic Dictatorship History — ”restart your computer or we will do it for you”. Not one word HumanRight. Not a single spell. Not a sound. Where is world jurisdiction — other than payed bitches to Microsoft Enterprise? Compare:

IF YOU CARE FOR MY PRIVACY, HOW COME YOU INTERRUPT ME WITHOUT MY PERMISSION? Tagged Cattle Enterprise.

— Only one cosmic instance does that — do disclaim if you can:

• the one cogitating itself standing above all the others. Impudence has established: established intrusion.

SolenT2022.ods

kalkylkorten nedan DIREKT FRÅN DEN HÄR WEBBLÄSAREN SolenT2022.ods — se öppningsmanual om ej redan bekant — eller kopiera URL:en nedan till valfri webbläsare (vilket som fungerar — förutsatt att SVENSKA VERSIONEN av gratisprogramvaran OPEN OFFICE finns installerad på datorn)

http://www.universumshistoria.se/AaKort/SolenT2022.ods

Tabell1: Table1 — ALL Sun’s 4 EQUATIONS with Tgamma Twien and Tplanck results for a given distance from Sun.

Table1 A28 — compiled Constants

Table1 A51 — Light's Gravitational Deflection ¦ The Solar Eclipses

Tabell2: Table2 — Perihelion precessions A4 ¦ A18 ¦ Ligth’s Gravitational Dependency (LGD) A54 ¦ LightTime A60 ¦ GPSexample A63

General Solar system planetary data connecting all results in perihelion precessions mathematics in this production.

Table2 A80 — Comparing the first basic atomic masses/weights between different sources ¦ TheNeutronSquareBreakThrough

Tabell3: Table3 — Planet data perihelion precessions A1 ¦ Gtest A16 ¦

Complementary (Compiled) results to Table2 — and some (personal) miscellaneous testing drafts.

Tabell4: Table4 — MULTIPLEcBLOCKS specified on different places in this document

Tabell5: Table5 — Compiled K-cell calculated data 25Jan2025 — for further

KcellAnalys2022a.ods:

CalCard

KcellAnalys2022a.ods

kalkylkorten nedan DIREKT FRÅN DEN HÄR WEBBLÄSAREN KcellAnalys2022a.ods — se öppningsmanual om ej redan bekant — eller kopiera URL:en nedan till valfri webbläsare (vilket som fungerar — förutsatt att SVENSKA VERSIONEN av gratisprogramvaran OPEN OFFICE finns installerad på datorn)

http://www.universumshistoria.se/AaKort/KcellAnalys2022a.ods

Tabell1: Table1 A1 .. — Solar Mass Losses ¦ BETA constant ¦ The Electric Constant ε₀ epsilon-0¦

Table1 A31 — e u h TEST Testing other candidates ¦

Tabell2: Table2 A1 .. — [‡]Continued 2018 IAU-tests : Iterative Constant Test

Table2 A68 — Boltzmann’s Constant on average summation

Table2 A106 — Wien Constant on iteration

Sun energy, Hydrogen atom’s energy circle, Proton radius’ moment equation ..

Tabell3: Table3 A1 — The Electric Constant, ε₀ with 12 significands precise value table on different basic elementary connections

CalCard

content:

innehåll: SÖK på denna sida Ctrl+F

DELPHI4Test2011

ämnesrubriker

innehåll

DELPHI4Test2014 — PaintBrushWin3.1 HOW IT BEGAN ..

Föregående:

DELPHI4Test2011.htm — huvuddokument — HJÄLPDOKUMENT FÖR DELPHI4Test2011

DELPHI4Test2011ref.htm — kompletterande

DELPHI4Test2011HELP.htm — särskild beskrivning

TheFinalConnection

Dmax

The Contracted Construct

All Natural Constants

DisClaim

CheopsRectangleMATH,

Light’s Gravitational Dependency

Deduction

Hubble1929

ExperimentalConfirmations

PlanckEquivalents

Introduction

MULTIPLEcPROOF

MULTIPLEc

MACcRef

TheTEXPLAN

TheSolarEclipses

ThePlanckWay

TheEinsteinError

ProvingTheEclipses

Gpotential

Suns4

LightAndGravitation

Results

AminorTermConflict

crREF

Nature2022

DivergenceConvergence

SolarCycle

StarBASE

ThePerihelionPrecessions

ExplainingCoriolisPrecession

ThePoint

CausalNewton

IncreasingTemperaturePressure

SaturatedLightField

TheExplanation

rPdMATH

TwienAffection — The OzoneProvider

CoriolisResolution

AgainInConclusion

ConcludingAllKeplerMath

PrecessionEnergy

ArguePoints

POINT

THEv/cRelation

Newtons3inShort

PotentialBarrier

ExplainingTheDynamics

FirstLIGHT

UnderstadingActionReaction

KeplerMomentumBasics

GeDith

APPLICATIONS

ThePrecessiveSTATEargument

PerihelionPrecessionRotationalCenter

CENTbyLightTime

CaseClosed

StefanBoltzmannDetails

TheCircleArgument

DynamicsExplanation

ButLOOK

Explanation

SuperPositionPrinciple

Basic

TwoArguments

Sections1234

TheEddingtonForm

TheWikipediaEinsteinForm

BasicEPSmath

TheEddingtonArgument

RelativisticMass

Testified

LocalGdominance

ThermoElGraDis

REGULARc

Number5

TheComplete

TheExperiment

Experiment

AllKeplerMath

PhysicsFirst

PhysicsFirstMATH

STATE

GripDeep

THEcrFACTORS

PressureMinMax

TheGeneralREF

ByQuality

TheNeutronSquareBreakThrough

BasicMathRanks

TheMath

FormallyKeplerMath

CalCardRef

TheRESULT

CalculatingKeplerAnomalistic

DecisiveParam

AnomalisticPeriod

Compressed

IAUtestDETAILS — the BETA parameters

TheENDresult

Examination

RelatedMath

TheGtest

TheElectricConstant

TestingOtherCandidates

IterativeConstantTest

RedShiftIssues

TheGPSexample

DeducedConnections

VEERING

PE

TWI — TransverseWavelengthIndepencence

SRTN — SendingReceivingTransverseNormalization

TheMisconception

TheAbsoluteMETRIC

APPENDIX

TheStarAnvil

TheIAUtest

ConstantPRECISION

SpaceElectricalResistance

HowIsTemperatureGENERATED

Rex

CentralEnergyMachine

HowTEMP

ComptonEffect

ModernDegenerationPressure

PULSARS

CalCard

— spread sheets in Swedish edition of OpenOffice only

Reason

UnitedNations

OurHistory

HISTORY

S

content

referenser

[HOP]. HANDBOOK OF PHYSICS, E. U. Condon, McGraw-Hill 1967 ¦ Compare (minor) differences with CODATA (1995-2008)

Atomviktstabellen i HOP allmän referens i denna presentation, Table 2.1 s9–65—9–86.

m_n = 1,0086652u ...................... neutronmassan i atomära massenheter (u) [HOP Table 2.1 s9–65]

m_e = 0,000548598u .................. elektronmassan i atomära massenheter (u) [HOP Table 10.3 s7–155 för m_e , Table 1.4 s7–27 för u]

u = 1,66043 t27 KG .............. atomära massenheten [HOP Table 1.4 s7–27, 1967]

u = 1,66033 t27 KG .............. atomära massenheten [ENCARTA 99 Molecular Weight]

u = 1,66041 t27 KG ............... atomära massenheten [FOCUS MATERIEN 1975 s124sp1mn]

u = 1,66053886 t27 KG ........ atomära massenheten [teknisk kalkylator, lista med konstanter SHARP EL-506W (2005)]

u = 1,6605402 t27 KG .......... atomära massenheten [@INTERNET (2007) sv. Wikipedia]

u = 1,660538782 t27 KG ...... atomära massenheten [från www.sizes.com],

CODATA rekommendation från 2006 med toleransen ±0,000 000 083 t27 KG (Committe on Data for Science and Technology)]

c₀ = 2,99792458 T8 M/S ........ ljushastigheten i vakuum [ENCARTA 99 Light, Velocity, (uppmättes i början på 1970-talet)]

h = 6,62559 t34 JS ................. Plancks konstant [HOP s7–155]

[BA]. BONNIERS ASTRONOMI 1978

— Det internationella standardverket om universum sammanställt vid universitetet i Cambridge, The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Astronomy, London 1977.

[FM 2]. FOCUS MATERIEN 1975 [FM 1: FocusTekniken] — Fysikens, kemins och astronomins historia ¦ Allt från atomen till universum — fysik, kemi, jordvetenskap och astronomi

FOCUS UPPSLAGSBÖCKER STOCKHOLM

[BKL]. BONNIERS KONVERSATIONS LEXIKON, 12 band A(1922)-Ö(1928) med SUPPLEMENT A-Ö(1929) — STOCKHOLM ¦ ALBERT BONNIERS FÖRLAG

t för 10^–, T för 10⁺, förenklade exponentbeteckningar

MAC, här ofta använd förkortning för Modern ACademy — etablerad vetenskap sedan början av 1800-talet

often used abbreviation here in UH for Modern ACademy 1800+

TNED — Related PHYSICS And MATHEMATICS — Se särskild djupbeskrivning av innebörden i begreppet relaterad framställning.

(Toroid Nuclear Electromechanical Dynamics), eller Toroidnukleära Elektromekaniska Dynamiken är den dynamiskt ekvivalenta resultatbeskrivning som följer av härledningarna i Planckringen h=m_nc₀r_n, analogt Atomkärnans Härledning. Beskrivningen enligt TNED är relaterad, vilket innebär: alla, samtliga, detaljer gör anspråk på att vara fullständigt logiskt förklarbara och begripliga, eller så inte alls. Med TNED förstås (således) också

RELATERAD FYSIK OCH MATEMATIK. Se även uppkomsten av termen TNED i Atomkärnans Härledning.

SHORT ENGLISH — TNED in general is not found @INTERNET except under this domain

(Universe[s]History, introduced @INTERNET 2008VII3).

TNED or Toroid Nuclear Electromechanical Dynamics is the dynamically equivalent resulting description following the deductions in THE PLANCK RING, analogous AtomNucleus’ Deduction. The description according to TNED is related, meaning: all, each, details claim to be fully logically explainable and understandable, or not at all. With TNED is (hence) also understood RELATED PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS. See also the emergence of the term TNED in AtomNucleus’ Deduction.

Senast uppdaterade version: 2023-10-27.

*END.

Stavningskontrollerat 2011-06-08 ¦ 2022-11-06 ¦ 22-31Dec2022.

rester

*

DELPHI4Test2014MANUAL ·

√ τ π ħ ε UNICODE — ofta använda tecken i matematiskt-tekniskt-naturvetenskapliga beskrivningar

σ ρ ν ν π τ γ λ η ≠ √ ħ ω → ∞ ≡

Ω Φ Ψ Σ Π Ξ Λ Θ Δ

α β γ δ ε λ θ κ π ρ τ φ ϕ σ ω ϖ ∏ √ ∑ ∂ ∆ ∫ ≤ ≈ ≥ ˂ ˃ ˂ ˃ ← ↑ → ∞ ↓

ϑ ζ ξ

Pilsymboler, direkt via tangentbordet: Alt+24 ↑; Alt+25 ↓; Alt+26 →; Alt+27 ←; Alt+22 ▬

Alt+23 ↨ — även Alt+18 ↕; Alt+29 ↔

DELPHI4Test2011.htm

Senast uppdaterade version: 27 oktober 2023 | 16:15:12 | 2023-10-27. [GMT+1]^Solar[GMT+2]^Industry

Vidareutvecklat Från DELPHI 4 Test 2011 — DELPHI4Test2011ref.htm#AnvändningSupportInstallation

T2014Reg — HUVUDDELEN AV VERKTYGEN MAN BEHÖVER FÖR AVANCERAD DATORANVÄNDNING I TEXT OCH BILD ¦ Jan2022

*