Classical Physics


Non-Conservativeness of Natural Orbital Systems

Authors: Slobodan Nedic

The Newtonian mechanic and contemporary physics model the non-circular orbital systems on all scales as essentially conservative, closed-path zero-work systems and circumvent the obvious contradictions (rotor-free ‘field’ of ‘force’, in spite of its inverse proportionality to squared time-varying distance) by exploiting both energy and momentum conservation, along specific initial conditions, to be arriving at technically more or less satisfactory solutions, but leaving many of unexplained puzzles. In sharp difference to it, in recently developed thermo-gravitational oscillator approach movement of a body in planetary orbital systems is modeled in such a way that it results as consequence of two counteracting mechanisms represented by respective central forces, that is gravitational and anti-gravitational accelerations, in that the actual orbital trajectory comes out through direct application of the Least Action Principle taken as minimization of work (to be) done or, equivalently, a closed-path integral of increments (or time-rate of change) of kinetic energy. Based on the insights gained, a critique of the conventional methodology and practices reveals shortcomings that can be the cause of the numerous difficulties the modern physics has been facing: anomalies (as gravitational and Pioneer 10/11), three or more bodies problem, postulations in modern cosmology of dark matter and dark energy, the quite problematic foundation of quantum mechanics, etc. Furthermore, for their overcoming, indispensability of the Aether as an energy-substrate for all physical phenomena is gaining a very strong support, and based on recent developments in Aetherodynamics the Descartes' Vortex Physics may become largely reaffirmed in the near future.

Comments: 12 Pages.

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2016-11-15 12:16:02

Unique-IP document downloads: 31 times

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus