added a

**research item**Project

Updates

0 new

0

Recommendations

0 new

0

Followers

0 new

13

Reads

0 new

315

The rattleback (Celtic stone) is the most mysterious phenomenon in classical mechanics. It freely undergoes a complete reversal of its angular momentum without the involvement of any apparent external torque. This mystery will now be investigated at the molecular level.

University physics courses teach that centrifugal force doesn't exist, while university applied maths courses teach that centrifugal force is merely a fictitious force that arises when making observations from a rotating frame of reference. Meanwhile, Sir Isaac Newton claimed that a centrifugal force is the equal and opposite reaction to a centripetal force. We also read in the literature that the centrifugal force acting on a body relative to a centre of rotation is merely an effect of inertia, owing to the tendency for the body to move in a straight-line path, and so it draws away from the centre. This article attempts to ascertain which, if any, of these positions is correct, and why the matter is important.

When a theory of electromagnetism promotes the idea that the medium for the propagation of light waves is an elastic solid comprised of electric particles, the question is always going to be asked as to why this medium would not generate friction in the planetary orbits, such as would cause the planets to spiral into the Sun. It would be impossible for a moving body to completely avoid any physical interaction with these electric particles, and so, in order to comply with Kepler’s Laws of Planetary Motion, this interaction must be the actual cause of the inertial forces, as opposed to being the cause of any dissipative friction.

If we consider space to be dynamical, aether hydrodynamics yields four fundamental forces. These four forces are divided into two groups of two. We have the rotational (or tangential) forces, and we have the irrotational (or radial) forces.
Bernoulli, Maxwell and Tesla all believed that space/aether is rendered into tiny whirlpools. As such we need to make a further distinction between forces that arise from aether hydrodynamics on the large scale, and forces that arise through the fine-grained aether vortices on the microscopic scale.

The Faraday Paradox and the Newton’s rotating bucket experiment each concern situations involving relative motion where symmetry might be expected but isn’t observed. In the case of the Faraday paradox, a rotating magnet, when rotating about its magnetic axis, will induce no EMF on a stationary charged particle, where on the other hand, the reciprocal motion will. In the case of Newton’s rotating bucket, the bucket must be rotating relative to an inertial frame of reference in order for the water in the bucket to be forced outwards and upwards against the insides of the walls. This does not happen if the frame of reference rotates relative to a stationary bucket, and the rotation of the background stars due to the Earth’s diurnal motion certainly induces no such effect in a bucket of water.
The commonality between these two apparent paradoxes, one electromagnetic and one mechanical, will be investigated.

A rolling wheel is driven forwards by virtue of the linear momentum in the upper half of the wheel. A closer examination of the forces involved will reveal the hand of the centrifugal force. The analysis also provides a visual aid to understanding the basic principles behind Ampère's Circuital Law and time-varying electromagnetic induction.

It is generally accepted that the tidal force is due to an inverse cube law force field. However, it is wrongly believed that this inverse cube law force field is the product of differential gravity. The lunar and solar orbits are nearly circular, and as such, gravity cannot be a factor in the tides, because it will have been nullified by orbital centrifugal force. We need to look to a non-convective pressure force which squeezes the planets at the sides, such that if the planets were to be made of pure liquid, they would be shaped like an ellipsoid aligned along the direction which joins any two planetary bodies.

The centrifugal force and the Coriolis force will be described. There is a controversy over whether these forces are real or fictitious. This controversy will be examined in conjunction with its significance to electromagnetism.

James Clerk Maxwell is credited with having brought electricity, magnetism, and optical phenomena, together into one unified theory. The details of what exactly he did were however seriously distorted in twentieth century physics textbooks. Maxwell is most famous in connection with a set of equations which bear his name, but these equations have been totally removed from the physical context within which Maxwell was working, and outside of that physical context the full meaning of these equations is lost. Maxwell was working within the context of a sea of tiny aethereal vortices pressing against each other with centrifugal force. The centrifugal force bit was crucial for explaining magnetic repulsion, yet both centrifugal force and aether are stringently denied by modern physicists who nevertheless continue to hail Maxwell for the equations that he derived by using these very concepts which they deny. This irony seems to be explained at least in part because they think that the equations can be re-derived using Einstein’s special theory of relativity. Such an erroneous belief stems from the fact that one of the most important of Maxwell’s equations has been wrongly credited to Lorentz and referred to as the Lorentz force law and treated as ‘supplementary’ to Maxwell’s equations. Einstein, being ignorant of Maxwell’s original equations and the fact that they contained the Lorentz force law, hence wrongly believed that the equations contained no convective term, and so he made the erroneous conclusion that Maxwell’s equations mean that the speed of light must be frame independent in contradiction of classical principles of vector addition of velocities. This erroneous conclusion led Einstein to his special theory of relativity in 1905, and it subsequently led to the erroneous belief amongst both relativists and many anti-relativists, that Einstein’s special theory of relativity follows naturally from Maxwell’s theory, when in fact Maxwell and Einstein were not even remotely working along the same lines.

Franz Maria Ulrich Theodor Hoch Aepinus, (1724-1802), suggested that the attractive forces between two uncharged bodies might be very slightly greater than the repulsive forces, and that this difference might be the cause of gravitation.

The Coriolis force is a consequence of Newton's first law of motion and it can be observed in a radial force field as a transverse deflection of the radial component of the motion by an amount required to conserve angular momentum. It is a physical reality most commonly associated with atmospheric cyclones, but it can also be observed deflecting the effect of gravity on a comet or causing a pivoted gyroscope to defy gravity. In a paper which he wrote in 1835 in connection with water wheels, French scientist Gaspard-Gustave Coriolis referred to its mathematical formula 2mv×ω as the "compound centrifugal force". This is an interesting choice of name which suggests that it is the sum of two centrifugal forces, yet without giving any indication as to how this might be. The physical origins of the Coriolis force will now be traced to differential centrifugal pressure in the dense background sea of tiny aethereal vortices which serves as the medium for the propagation of light.

The aether (or electricity) is a fluid-like substance that is the stuff of all matter and space, and it flows constantly between positive and negative particles, with particles being merely aether sources and aether sinks. Space is densely packed with aether sinks (electrons) and aether sources (positrons). These electrons and posi-trons are paired into tiny dipoles. Within each dipole, the electron and the positron will undergo a mutual circular orbit. In the steady state, these tiny dipolar aether vortices will align with their neighbours according to two superimposed principles. Their rotation axes will mutually align and trace out solenoidal lines around a magnetic dipole. The resulting electron-positron double helix that winds its way around each such line is what causes the electrostatic tension that makes it into a 'magnetic line of force'. When large scale aether flow, constituting either an externally applied gravitational field or an electric current (electric field), is superimposed, the tiny vortices will become linearly polarized. This will result in a 'couple force' acting on the tiny vortices which will cause them to precess such that their precessional axes will be aligned with the externally applied field lines. Centrifugal pressure therefore acts at right angles to both magnetic and electric lines of force. In the dynamic state the alignment of the dipoles is undergoing change and the tiny dipoles will be angularly accelerating , either in magnitude or direction (precession). This realignment will be accompanied by a net vortex flow of pressurized aether that passes between neighbouring dipoles. This net flow of momentum is electromagnetic radiation and it has a wave-like nature, in that the flow will constantly be emerging from positrons and sinking into electrons. The average speed of this flow is what determines the speed of light.

The straight line inertial path will be examined from the perspective that it is caused by pressure equilibrium in a sea of tiny aethereal whirlpools that are pressing against each other with centrifugal force while striving to dilate. This is opposite to the traditional perspective whereby centrifugal force is considered to be a consequence of the tendency of a body to move in uniform straight line motion in the absence of any Newtonian forces.

When analyzing pendulum motion, textbooks avoid invoking centrifugal force. All upward acting forces are accounted for by the tension in the rod. This tension must however be greater in magnitude than gravity in order for a net upward force to be possible. The role of centrifugal force in both the simple pendulum and the conical pendulum will therefore be reexamined , and a connection with magnetic repulsion will be suggested.

It will be argued that if Pythagoras’s Theorem can hold outside of three dimensions, then the only possibility might be in the special case of seven dimensions, but that even this would be highly doubtful.

The modern teaching is that centrifugal force only exists as a fictitious force in a rotating frame of reference, and that the only force acting in an inertial frame of reference when a body undergoes circular motion is an inward acting centripetal force. On the contrary however, it is here proposed that a rotating frame of reference, rather than creating a fictitious centrifugal force, actually masks the existence of a very real inertial centripetal force that has gone unrecognized in the literature. When the books are correctly balanced, it will be demonstrated that centrifugal force is a real force, closely related to kinetic energy, and observable in any frame of reference.

The radial lines of force that are associated with both electrostatic and gravitational fields indicate the presence of fluid-like sinks and sources in matter, whether or not we know where these lead to. This article will examine how two sinks can be either mutually attractive or mutually repulsive depending on the rate of flow.

The radial lines of force that are associated with both electrostatic and gravitational fields indicate the presence of fluid-like sinks and sources in matter, whether or not we know where these lead to. This article will examine how two sinks can be either mutually attractive or mutually repulsive depending on the rate of flow.

The purpose of presenting this standard derivation, largely copied from applied maths notes taken at Queen's University, Belfast, in 1979, is to show that centrifugal force is as real as gravity, and that no rotating frame of reference is necessary in order to observe it.

This article follows on from the double helix theory of the magnetic field. A closer look will be taken at the relationship between electromagnetic radiation on the one hand and a magnetic field on the other.

This article takes a closer look at the bonding and stability mechanisms within the electron-positron dipole sea and how these result in the double helix theory of the magnetic field. The physical connection between the inertial forces and magnetic repulsion will be further investigated.

A sea level object that is moving horizontally at a speed greater than 8km/sec is already in orbit and it will rise upwards due to centrifugal force. Two such objects tethered together while moving in opposite directions should therefore spiral upwards like a helicopter. It will be proposed that the atom is a dipole, and that it is the fundamental helicopter.

The situation where two orbits sit side by side occurs inside atomic and molecular matter, but is never observed on the astronomical scale. It will now be investigated whether or not two orbits in the same plane could repel each other with centrifugal force.

On the astronomical scale, the potential energy in a closed orbit is due to the gravitational force of attraction. These are uncompressed orbits. The gravitational force is opposed by a centrifugal force acting internally from within the system. This article will now consider the nature of the potential energy in a system of multiple orbits that are pressing against each other with centrifugal force while striving to dilate. Centrifugal potential energy will be shown to lie at the root of the famous equation E = mc².

Galileo’s “Principle of Relativity” omits any consideration of an absolute frame of reference with respect to which motion is measured. Kinetic energy would appear to be a relative quantity whose magnitude depends on the chosen frame of reference, or in the case of its centrifugal force derivative, depends on which polar origin is chosen. The magnitude of any physical interaction involving two bodies is only ever dependent on their relative velocity, and there seems to be no way of exposing the existence of any special frame of reference with respect to which linear kinetic energy is an absolute physical quantity. The fact of centrifugal force however does indicate that such a frame of reference must exist, and that this frame appears to be embedded in a medium that is in a state of zero rotation relative to the fixed background stars. Rotation relative to the fixed background stars induces centrifugal force, which suggests that kinetic energy is indeed an absolute physical quantity that is induced by the interaction of a moving body with a physical medium which pervades all of space.
In this article it will be proposed that the physical medium for the propagation of light is also the cause of kinetic energy and centrifugal force, and we will be reminded that Maxwell’s equations are formulated specifically with this medium as the standard of rest. Important questions relating to the motion of this luminiferous medium relative to the planets and the stars will then be discussed.

The counter intuitive behaviour of the Newton’s Cradle is not, as is generally believed, adequately explained in the literature. In particular, two important issues are overlooked. One of these is that the elasticity of the balls arises due to the fact that the balls are made of hard material that doesn’t easily deform during the collisions, when in fact we might have expected the hard material to have actually reduced the elasticity. This therefore rules out linear elasticity and Hooke’s law as being the principle action, and so it is proposed that the energy waves that transfer the kinetic energy through the row of balls are based on fine-grained rotational elasticity, similar in nature to that which arises in electromagnetic radiation.
The other overlooked issue is that the kinetic energy waves that move through the metal balls immediately after a collision, move either to the right or to the left of the point of impact, or in both directions, but since energy transfer inside the balls has an absolute motion relative to the balls themselves, then whether the energy within the balls moves to the right, or to the left, or in both directions, must depend on the absolute motion of the balls. The direction of the energy transfer within the balls cannot depend on an arbitrary choice of rest frame. It therefore remains to determine the physical basis for absolute motion and kinetic energy. Only then, in terms of absolute motion, can the Newton’s cradle be correctly analysed.

We often hear it said that centrifugal force is not a real force and that it is only the effects of inertia resulting from a body undergoing its uniform straight line path, as per Newton’s first law of motion. These effects of inertia however are very real and this suggests that the inertial path itself must have an underlying physical cause. This cause will now be ascribed to a background elasticity that is rooted in electrostatics. The electric dipole, with its inverse cube law field, will be proposed as the primary physical cause of centrifugal force, while the inertial path and the Mach Principle will be seen to result from the compound effect of a dense multitude of superimposed dipole fields filling all of space.

Wikipedia is the on-line encyclopaedia that anybody can edit. The content changes on a continual basis. One of the rules is that editors must not insert original research. The contents must reflect what is stated in reliable sources.
In the case of the centrifugal force article however, reliable sources don’t always agree, and over the years, the inability of editors at that article to consider the totality of existing knowledge on the subject has led to never ending discussions and edit wars. An example of the confusion that surrounds this topic can be found at this web link, http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/37968/centrifugal-force-and-polar-coordinates

The purpose of presenting this standard derivation, largely copied from applied maths notes taken at Queen’s University, Belfast, in 1979, is to show that centrifugal force is as real as gravity, and that no rotating frame of reference is necessary in order to observe it.

Wikipedia is the on-line encyclopaedia that anybody can edit. The content changes on a daily basis. One of the rules for editing is that editors must not insert original research. The contents must reflect exactly what is stated in reliable sources.
Reliable sources present Coriolis force as an artefact of making observations from a rotating frame of reference. When stationary objects are viewed from a rotating frame of reference, it’s true that the effects are unequivocally fictitious. However, in situations where an entire system is rotating, the Coriolis force can be very real, and this fact tends to cause confusion. It will be argued that in the former case scenarios there is no Coriolis force present at all, real or fictitious, while in the latter case scenarios the Coriolis force is due to Newton’s laws of motion, and that it already exists independently of the rotating frame of reference.

The purpose of presenting this standard derivation, largely copied from applied maths notes taken at Queen's University, Belfast, in 1979, is to show that centrifugal force is as real as gravity, and that no rotating frame of reference is necessary in order to observe it.