Essay Abstract

This essay is all about the validation of ω^2 r ( v^2/r) as a real mathematical as well the physical form that corresponds to both radial centripetal acceleration, ω^2 rr ̃ and real tangential acceleration,ω^2 rθ ̃ in circular motion within the uniform magnitude of tangential velocity verifying the centrifugal acceleration/force but varying in both magnitude and direction.

Author Bio

Mr. Bishal Banjara is an Independent Researcher, researching in the foundational aspects of whole Physics. And the author of the book entitled as 'Unique Perceptions on Physics: Commentaries with Solutions Papers on Physics', a different perceptive angled vision on Physics. Also,he is the author of different research papers published in www.ijser.org website contradicting GR with real observable fact, predicting the cause for elliptical motion of planets, notifying the defect in two-body reduction and so on.

Download Essay PDF File

Hi,Branko!

I, at first supposed like you but as Coriolis force is effective for the body which lies just above the rotating mass (say earth) without the contact touch (it is well illustrated in my book (see ref.2, chapter 2)) but my equation search a real applied force that would acts against gravity and gives the tangential acceleration.....Thank you for your best comment(which I was hoping may probably asked),thank you so much!!!!

what this means is, if you applied a force to a mass to move it (in any direction), the real force you applied in against gravity is not seen or no direct visualization rather you will see only the consequence that these forces produced as a resultant.....so, every kind of moving body is not directly linked to the direct effect of force ( as how Newtonian F=ma law treats) but as a consequence...

    4 days later

    Dear Bishal Banjara,

    I merely wish to point out that "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

    Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

    The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

    This means that all of the physicists who have ever lived have been completely wrong about the singular real visible physical condition of the real Universe.

    Joe Fisher, Realist

    Joe Fisher, Realist

      Nice essay Banajara,

      Your ideas and thinking are excellent and matching with mine.... For example in your Bio you said "he is the author of different research papers published in www.ijser.org website contradicting GR with real observable fact, predicting the cause for elliptical motion of planets, notifying the defect in two-body reduction and so on."

      ............................... Dynamic Universe Model is a singularity free n-body problem solution.

      Your words in the essay... "If I ask you, "Whether you believe in 'centrifugal force'?", if you are actually Mathematician, most probably you say, "No". But if you are real Physicist, you must or should not answer no, because you have experienced it so, you have to and could imagine it discarding whether or not, it has real and sensible mathematical relation

      ........................ when there are multiple n-bodies the simple centrifugal force will not work. Probably Dynamic Universe Model is the only solution available now......"

      For your information Dynamic Universe model is totally based on experimental results. Here in Dynamic Universe Model Space is Space and time is time in cosmology level or in any level. In the classical general relativity, space and time are convertible in to each other.

      Many papers and books on Dynamic Universe Model were published by the author on unsolved problems of present day Physics, for example 'Absolute Rest frame of reference is not necessary' (1994) , 'Multiple bending of light ray can create many images for one Galaxy: in our dynamic universe', About "SITA" simulations, 'Missing mass in Galaxy is NOT required', "New mathematics tensors without Differential and Integral equations", "Information, Reality and Relics of Cosmic Microwave Background", "Dynamic Universe Model explains the Discrepancies of Very-Long-Baseline Interferometry Observations.", in 2015 'Explaining Formation of Astronomical Jets Using Dynamic Universe Model, 'Explaining Pioneer anomaly', 'Explaining Near luminal velocities in Astronomical jets', 'Observation of super luminal neutrinos', 'Process of quenching in Galaxies due to formation of hole at the center of Galaxy, as its central densemass dries up', "Dynamic Universe Model Predicts the Trajectory of New Horizons Satellite Going to Pluto" etc., are some more papers from the Dynamic Universe model. Four Books also were published. Book1 shows Dynamic Universe Model is singularity free and body to collision free, Book 2, and Book 3 are explanation of equations of Dynamic Universe model. Book 4 deals about prediction and finding of Blue shifted Galaxies in the universe.

      With axioms like... No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); No singularities; No collisions between bodies; No Blackholes; No warm holes; No Bigbang; No repulsion between distant Galaxies; Non-empty Universe; No imaginary or negative time axis; No imaginary X, Y, Z axes; No differential and Integral Equations mathematically; No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to General Relativity on any condition; No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models; No many mini Bigbangs; No Missing Mass; No Dark matter; No Dark energy; No Bigbang generated CMB detected; No Multi-verses etc.

      Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true, like Blue shifted Galaxies and no dark matter. Dynamic Universe Model gave many results otherwise difficult to explain

      Have a look at my essay on Dynamic Universe Model and its blog also where all my books and papers are available for free downloading...

      http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/

      Best wishes to your essay.

      For your blessings please................

      =snp. gupta

      Dear snp,

      "when there are multiple n-bodies the simple centrifugal force will not work. Probably Dynamic Universe Model is the only solution available now......"-I think you need to know a bit more background in the history of physics...you know if there was no Newton's second law, the General relativity would not be theorized...so, like the second law, my formulation is like this but exists in against of it....a real need in physics to pillar-up new foundation...so,to say like yours is quite inadequate as it is not exact form of whole unification but it will guide the path to follow...and In my essay, i have not mentioned such words, do I?.....more, you don't understood or you didn't generalized my essay, the centrifugal force is just 'a grain in the whole bucket' from where one could extract different forms of force dealing with mass nature...for more detail you need to see chappter 2 of reference 2..

      best regards from Nepal

      8 days later

      Dear Bishal Banjara,

      Your idea makes something interesting.

      "the real liveliness of any interacting systems could be stimulated within the Relational mechanics only such that the isolated system is really not a functional one, as how the theme is comforted by this whole essay." This phrase is interesting.

      I invite you to read my essay "A SPACE-TIME AS A PERFECT FLUID SINK FLOW" at the site of essay contest of FQXi, when you have a free time.

      Ch.Bayarsaikhan

      4 days later

      Dear Bishal Banjara,

      Your question is right that

      Besides going to ask, "What is matter made up of?,

      What are the constituents inside of space and time?,

      What is there inside the atom or at universe and how it works?.... etc."

      If I say that centripetal force is kind of inertial force, would you agree with it?

      And also, is there any difference between gravitational centripetal force and the centripetal force exerting on an electron that moves on a stable orbit around an atomic nucleus?

      I just want to share ideas with you.

      Ch.Bayarsaikhan

      dear Bayarsaikhan Bayarsaikhan Choisuren,

      thank you for your comment. please dont mind but i don't believe that centripetal force is inertial force...to be real inertial force, it must be based on a=(v-u)/t tendency so, the kind of inertial force view for centripetal force from the way that Etvos did is absolutely wrong...and so far your question about this in atomic scale is also not sensible in two ways, one is that I already mentioned above and next is that the electron's circulating motion is because of charge effect, not because of mass effect. one thing we can assume is the analogy in between them but not equality, i mean mass and charge are two different entities. The analogy pattern in between them is exactly same but not their origination.

      Bishal,

      I think your identification of centrifugal force as a mitigator of the gravitational potential is perfectly reasonable. I have great sympathy for those who find things beyond current doctrine, which may be of great import, but are criticised and ignored by those with less analytical capability and imagination. Indeed I'm in precisely the same position with a classical derivation of the predictions of QM. The mechanism is self explanatory and self evident, but as it's not part of current doctrine people will run a mile rather than seriously address and analyse it! I've similarly seen no falsification of your hypothesis.

      My essay starts by explaining why, which I suggest is the present limited state of mans intellectual evolution, and how it might be overcome, by 'self directed evolution' (thinking analytically not just 'intuitively').

      I recently mentioned Daniel Schechtman in a post. He discovered 'quasicrystals', dismissed, ignored, laughed at, lost his job and suffered for 40 years! Then finally someone else found them, and he now has a Noble Prize! He says be 'right' then be like a Rottweiler; bite on and don't let go!

      Your essay and case is rather too short and incomplete but it's score is still way too low, so mine will boost it. Well done and keep it up.

      I hope you'll also read, like and score mine well. (I've now received 11 '1' scores from trolls who are either cheats or fear advancement!)

      Were you aware galaxy rotational velocities 'step' at virial radii? This must give traceable differenced in centrifugal force. A while ago I also concluded the Yukawa potential looked a better description than others including MOND. Have you studied it?

      Keep going, and Very best of luck

      Peter

      PS; If you do get to read mine do also see the video as 3D dynamic evolution is far better shown in motion.

      Hello Bishal,

      I like your direct attack on the link between mathematical forms and physical forms. Yes, mindless mathematical laws can be goofy!

      You may find my recent work (reminiscent of MOND) to be of interest: http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/1188/1163

      Thanks for your excellent essay. It is underappreciated and I rate it highly.

      Don Limuti