Gravity and That

2 Feb 2017

After looking at (last week) the explanation for rapid bursts of x-rays and ultra violet light from the Electric Universe perspective (courtesy of Stephen Smith) we have the mainstream view for rapid bursting events - and what they are all about. Go to https://phys.org/print405155937.html

Meanwhile, at https://phys.org/print405158983.html ... we are told the Sun is becoming less active and there will be a shortage of big solar flares in the future. Scotland won't witness the aurora glow anymore. These scientists are saying we are heading towards a Maunder Minimum. If they really think that why are they still crowing about CAGW? The best advice is to ignore alarmism of all types - whether it is the idea the world is warming or is on the verge of cooling.

At https://phys.org/print405158886.html ... a down to earth approach to gravity. H Ron Harrison of City University in London (the department of mechanical engineering and aeronautics, and therefore not to be sniffed at) is hoping to simplify our understanding of gravity by going back to Newton (but embedding also Einsteins' special theory of relativity). He has published a paper in the International Journal of Space Science and Engineering (January 2017) and provides a single explanatory equation - which expresses relative acceleration between two masses as a formation of their masses, separation, and now, relative velocity. 

Harrison says this formula accounts for many of the gravitational phenomena we have observed through many years, even centuries. It offers a simpler explanation for such things as the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, the gravitational deflection of light and the Shapiro time delay, even why  you can't escape from a black hole (as well as gravitational waves etc). Force, he says, is a secondary property, going back to Hertz in the 19th century. Force is the sleeping partner  of gravitation formulae etc.