Any of the seven problems with flowing space gravity theory (FSGT) discussed in this paper could threaten the validity of the theory. They are (1) the space fountain problem, (2) whether space flow is skewed by orbital motion, (3) the entrained ether problem, (4) the non-uniform density problem, (5) the ether structure problem, (6) the space flow direction reversal problem, and (7) the mutual attraction problem.
The author postulates that ordinary atomic nuclei absorb space by bursting quantum foam bubbles upon contact with their surfaces, and that dark matter (DM) expels space. The nucleus absorption postulate leads to the prediction that all atomic nuclei have similar radii = 6 ?2 femtometers, and the nuclear densities of the elements in each row of the periodic table are related by an empirical quadratic formula that is unique to that row.
The author suggests that the ether pressure inside atomic nuclei may be much lower than the external ether pressure. If true, then the excess of external over internal ether pressure may supply the force that opposes the Coulomb repulsion between protons and holds atomic nuclei together.
The author believes that space fountains have dipole magnetic fields, entrained ether globes, and radial space flow. Space drains do not necessarily have any of those things. He believes that Population I stars (including the Sun), the planets Mercury, Earth, Jupiter and active comets are space fountains, and Population II stars, planets Venus and Mars, the Moon, and dormant comets are space drains.
This paper presents a case for a comet's low-altitude flyby of Earth on August 17, 1999 with a perigee over Nairobi, Kenya that nobody observed. This flyby maneuver is inferred from two daylight observations near the Moon on August 11, 1999 (during a solar eclipse) and August 14, 1999 (my own observation of a lunar transit 10 minutes before sunset), and one nighttime observation in the glare of a bright star on April 6, 2000 by an astronomer attempting to observe an asteroid occultation of that star. This paper offers a possible, if im-probable, explanation as to how this comet could have managed to avoid being seen at night under such circumstances over that time span. This paper suggests five strategies for a comet to escape observation by comet hunters. This comet has apparently used each strategy at one time or another to escape detection.
The geocentric 2-body orbits in this paper are preliminary because they ignore the gravity of the Moon, the Sun, and the other planets. Consequently I do not use any observations before August 17, 1999 in deter-mining the orbital elements. Instead, I assume that this comet flyby event triggered the 7.6 magnitude Izmit, Turkey earthquake that occurred on August 17, 1999. My plan is to cure this deficiency (2-body orbit) in a sub-sequent paper that will use the Jet Propulsion Laboratory's Horizon Ephemeris System to perform a rigorous numerical integration of the equations of motion. The initial heliocentric state vector for that integration will be computed from the state vector at the perigee of one of the preliminary orbits specified in this paper.
This paper explores the implications of the proposition that only neutrons and unbound hydrogen atoms and molecules experience the force of gravity. If true, the reason would be because the electromagnetic and gravitational forces are mutually exclusive. Protons and electrons would have zero gravitational mass. If this is true, then G'M'1 = (lambda2/lambda1)GM1, where lambda = (A − Z)/A is the ratio of inertial neutron mass to atomic or molecular mass, G'M' indicates the new neutron-gravity-theory value for the legacy constant GM, and the indices 1 and 2 refer to the primary and secondary orbital bodies, respectively. This suggests that the Earth may have a value for ? that is similar to that of aluminum because artificial satellites made of aluminum orbit the Earth as expected. If this proposition is true, it means that if an aluminum spacecraft orbits the Earth in a circular orbit having a period of 90 minutes at an altitude of 282 km, then a pure ice body that is released from the spacecraft would have a perigee altitude of 282 km, an apogee altitude of 2912 km, and a period of 127.33 minutes. Likewise, a pure lead body that is released by the spacecraft would have a perigee altitude of −1378 km, an apogee altitude of 282 km, and a period of 68.25 minutes.
The evidence in support of this proposition is that ice particles ejected downward by the Space Shuttle in a water dump curve forward as they move relative to the Shuttle. Legacy gravity theory predicts a straight-line trajectory, not a curved one. This proposition can be confirmed or refuted by releasing a tethered lead ball from the inverted Space Shuttle's open cargo bay. If it remains motionless relative to the Shuttle, then this proposition would be refuted. If it exerts a downward pull on the tether corresponding to an acceleration of 1.5 m/s2, then this proposition would be confirmed. No such pull would occur inside the cabin where the gravity field is zero.
This proposition cannot be confirmed or refuted by repeating the Cavendish torsion balance gravity experiment with the lead balls replaced with ice balls having equivalent inertial masses because we must assume that both theories must yield the same acceleration of gravity. Orbits of lead and ice will be different because the centrifugal force is based on inertial mass, which is unchanged, while the centripetal force is based on gravitational mass, which is different.
Gravity is caused by space flowing into or out of space bodies. Space flows from this universe through pinholes inside neutrons into the anti-universe, and space flows out of the anti-universe through pinholes inside antineutrons (dark matter) into this universe. The ordinary universe expands because antineutrons are about six times more numerous than neutrons so that space expulsion exceeds space absorption. Time runs backwards in the anti-universe, and there is no such thing as universal time. Every space body has its own historical time line that is local to itself and gets reset at each nexus when its space flow reverses direction from inward to outward or vice-versa. Cepheid variable stars apparently expand and contract in cycles of a few days because they are reversing their space flow directions at that rate. Every comet, moon, planet, star, and galaxy has a concentric antimatter version of itself that experiences time backward, growing younger while its ordinary companion grows older. Space flow directions reverse in a space body from outward to inward or vice-versa when the relative abundance between neutrons and antineutrons reverses, and the majority becomes the minority and vice-versa. The toggling of matter into antimatter and vice versa occurs to conserve angular momentum when a space flow direction reversal occurs. One implication of bi-directional local time is that time travel is at least conceivable. All a time traveler needs to do is toggle his neutrons.
If Nemesis, a hypothetical brown dwarf star, periodically passes through the inner solar system, it should have perturbed the orbits of the planets substantially, especially near times of perihelion passage. Yet almost no such perturbations have been detected. This can be explained if Nemesis is really comprised of two stars with complementary orbits such that their perturbing accelerations tend to cancel at the Sun. If these orbits are also inclined by 90?, the planet orbit changes could have been minimal even if acceleration cancellation was not perfect. This would be especially true for planets that were all on the opposite side of the Sun from Nemesis during the passage. With this in mind, a search was made for significant planet alignments. On July 5, 2079 Mercury, Earth, Mars+180?, and Jupiter will align at a mean polar longitude of 102.161??0.206?. Nemesis A is expected to arrive 180? away at a perihelion longitude of 282.161??0.206? and a perihelion distance of 3.971 AU, the Kirkwood 3/2 resonance with Jupiter at that time. On July 13, 2079 Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune+180? will align at a mean polar longitude of 299.155??0.008?. Nemesis B is expected to arrive at that perihelion longitude and at a perihelion distance of 67.25 AU, outside the Kuiper Belt. The mass of Nemesis A has been estimated to be 2.545 Jupiter masses, and the mass of Nemesis B has been estimated to be 0.4325 solar mass. The ternary system of Sun, Nemesis A, and Nemesis B are apparently maverick members of a globular cluster of cold dark stars, and they orbit its center with a period of about 26,200 years and an eccentricity of about 0.009. The ecliptic longitude of the center of this cluster is about 258?, but the latitude has not been determined. This paper suggests that this orbit, not the presumed lunisolar torque, is the cause of the precession of the equinoxes as suggested by Walter Cruttenden. It also suggests that cold dark globular clusters, not recognized by conventional astronomers, have been misidentified as cosmic voids. In fact, there is a huge cosmic void located at that longitude and having a latitude of about +24?.
Cosmic lenses obtain their refracting properties from the hypothesis that the speed of light is a slightly slower constant inside the lens than outside. The title of this paper expresses its original goal, but that goal was not achieved in this paper because the target galaxies chosen for the analysis are too near to the Milky Way Galaxy (MWG). The MWG's lens cannot project local group galaxy images if they are inside its focal distance. Instead, a model for a spherical cosmic lens is presented that is constrained by the observed distances to the galaxies M31 and NGC 5128. These galaxies were chosen because the angular orientations of M31 are almost exactly equal to those of the inverted mirror image of NGC 5128, and that fits my claim that NGC 5128 is the negative-time projection of M31's dark- matter halo. Another observation in support of this claim is that these two galaxy images are nearly 180? apart in the sky. The model initially converged to the following solution using Microsoft Excel's Solver: lens radius R = 280.94 pc, index of refraction n = 1.00044563, and the distance to the unseen real object responsible for projecting both images, xo1 = 0.34475 Mpc. But closer examination revealed that this was not a unique solution. The ambiguity should be resolved as other conjugate galaxy pairs are included in the analysis.
Anderson et al. say: ?We have reported an anomalous, constant acceleration of Pioneer 10 and 11, a = (8.74 ?1.33)E-8 cm/s2, directed towards the Sun, at distances ~20 - 70 AU.? This anomaly can be reproduced by a multi-layer, onion-like, spherical cosmic lens centered on the Sun with an inner radius of 20 AU. If the effect stops at around 70 AU then the lens has eight layers, and the outer radius of the lens is 68.58 AU, and the effective refraction index through the eight layers is 1.000587235. If the effect extends beyond 70 AU, then there are more than eight layers. The innermost layer has a thickness of 3.33 AU and a refraction index of 1.000067963, and the eighth layer has a thickness of 9.79 AU and a refraction index of 1.000155628. The ratios between the volumes of adjacent lens layers is a constant, and that constant is within 0.2% of 41/3. In order to make the volume ratios exactly equal to 41/3, the anomaly error bars need to change from ?1.3300 to ?1.3357. The anomalous acceleration towards the Sun is just the calculated ?observed? acceleration minus the Newtonian acceleration. The Newtonian acceleration is simply a = GM/R2, where GM is the heliocentric gravitation constant, and R is the radial distance from the Sun to the spacecraft. The calculated ?observed? acceleration is just the Newtonian acceleration times the effective index of refraction at the spacecraft's location. The effective index of refraction is the product of the individual layer refraction indexes that are interior to the spacecraft's location.
The precession of the equinoxes was discovered in the second century BC by Hipparchus, and it was described as a slow revolution of the whole field of stars about the ecliptic poles. This could be explained if the Sun orbited some unseen object. The modern explanation was given by Newton as being the slow rotation of the Earth?s polar axis about the ecliptic poles caused by gravitational forces from the Sun and Moon on the non-uniform mass distribution in the oblate Earth. In the first model, the Earth?s celestial equator is fixed in space, and the celestial sphere appears to rotate. In the modern model, the celestial sphere is fixed, and the celestial equator rotates. These two models are indistinguishable by astronomical observations. This paper computes a range of possible solar orbits, depending only on the assumed mass of the unseen attractor, that were obtained by minimizing the squared error in the ecliptic longitude of Regulus as measured by Hipparchus circa 128 BC, Ptolemy in 138 AD, 11 observations by Arabic astronomers in the period of A.D. 830-975, the modern longitude of Regulus, and the modern precession rate. An intriguing possibility is that many transneptunian objects and long-period comets may orbit the same attractor that the Sun orbits. Pluto could have been captured by the Sun, if it had been deflected by Neptune. The goal of this line of research is to see if there is a particular attractor mass that will cause Pluto to have been captured by the Sun.
Miller's paper, "The Ether-Drift Experiment ... ", was criticized by Shankland in 1955. Shankland's criticism is flawed, and I attempt to refute it. I also explain Miller's cosmic model and his data reduction methods. I discovered two minor arithmetic errors in Miller's Figure 8. Shankland found no errors.
There is no question that the effect observed by Miller is real because two independent sets of observations, (1) the fringe displacement amplitudes and (2) the azimuth of the maximum effect for each tum of the interferometer, produce two independent solutions to the position of the ether wind apex. Those two independent solutions are within ?3? of the mean solution in each of four epochs (February 8, April 1, August 1, and September 15). The observed apexes are within ?1.9? of the calculated apexes.
The only weaknesses in Miller's paper are that the following effects are unexplained: (1) the reduced velocity effect, (2) the displaced azimuth effect, (3) the secular negative fringe displacement in proportion to time, and (4) Miller's apex is about 850 away from the hot pole of the cosmic microwave background radiation anisotropy dipole, as observed by the COBE satellite. I offer some speculative explanations for each of these effects.
The apparent conflict between Miller's 1933 absolute solar motion of 208 km S?I toward the I.MC and the CMB anisotropy dipole velocity of 370 km S?1 towards Leo, some 85n away in direction, is resolved. A cosmic ether wind velocity field as a function of direction is computed from first principles which reproduces both velocities. The aberration of light is very small because the speed of light is very fast. Ether wind speeds are much slower, so the aberration of ether rays is much greater. Miller found the annual aberration of the 208 km S?1 interstellar wind to be about 86, compared to 20g for light. Interplanetary and planetary ether winds are even slower, being on the order of the escape velocity from the Sun or the planet. respectively. Much work remains to be done. The Newtonian escape velocity at the surface of the Sun is 618 km S?I, and that is much greater than the maximum available ether wind speed of 370 km 51, yet ether escapes the Sun. This implies that there may be discrete spherical shells surrounding each star. The density of the ether and the speed of light within a given shell are constant, but in each successive shell moving outward from the star, the density of the ether may be greater and the speed of light and the ether wind may be lower than within the interior shell. If true, then light rays would experience refraction at each interface, and the image of the Sun and every star and every cluster of stars may be reduced as it would be from viewing it through a negative lens. Thus, greater interstellar distances may be an optical illusion.
Using an ethereal equivalence principle which I invented for this purpose, I discovered that D. C. Miller's 1933 ether wind velocity of208 km 5-1 from near the LMC can be accurately modeled if he Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) dipole [Fixsen el. al. 1996], is rotated by about 36 c about an axis roughly parallel to Uranus's polar axis. If Miller's observation and my analysis are correct, then the CMB dipole must have rotated that much in 67 years, yielding a mean rotation rate of about 32 arc-minutes per year. This rotation axis and a declining rotation rate are arguably, but not conclusively, supported by measurements ofthe CMB dipole in 1982 [Lubin and Villela, 1986], Such a rapid dipole rotation with angular deceleration would make sense only if the CMB is evidence of an expanding and rotating bubble of ether. Van Flandern's exploded planet hypothesis immediately comes to mind as a possible candidate for the cause of this phenomenon. If confirmed from subsequent observations, this CMB dipole rotation would falsify the big-bang theory.