| Line 74: |
Line 74: |
| | | | |
| | And what is ''gravitational energy'' that one simply differentiate to get "gravitational force" that we know from Einsteins that it is not there at all? Here we came to the real question. The answer is interesting though very, very, simple: It is energy content of matter in | | And what is ''gravitational energy'' that one simply differentiate to get "gravitational force" that we know from Einsteins that it is not there at all? Here we came to the real question. The answer is interesting though very, very, simple: It is energy content of matter in |
| − | :<math>E=mc^2</math>. | + | |
| | + | :<math>E=mc^2</math> |
| | + | |
| | + | that was differentiated above to produce "gravitational force". |
| | + | |
| | What?! Says every physicists I told this story to. It it were so simple we would learn it already in a high school. | | What?! Says every physicists I told this story to. It it were so simple we would learn it already in a high school. |
| | | | |
| | I am a "crank" though with zero credibility among scientist and so despite I discovered those things already in 1985 they were not published before this essay (OK, they were published in RW, but supressed by university of Warsaw since I was not their student enymore and so my paper explaining gravitation and cosmological redshif and such, shouldn't be linked to from their server. So I just typed it in manually into CP server and let see how long it survives here. | | I am a "crank" though with zero credibility among scientist and so despite I discovered those things already in 1985 they were not published before this essay (OK, they were published in RW, but supressed by university of Warsaw since I was not their student enymore and so my paper explaining gravitation and cosmological redshif and such, shouldn't be linked to from their server. So I just typed it in manually into CP server and let see how long it survives here. |
| | | | |
| − | For the time being you, the readers of CP, may find it in a form of my paper [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]] or in simpler version that a high school student may repeat herself or himself [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] in a form of step by step derivation of ''cosmological redshift'' for our universe, that the Big Bang aficionados neglected to calculate before jumping to conclusion that the universe is ''"surely"'' expanding. And this way converting the majority of non believers into believers in ''creation'' of the whole universe from nothing as it was planned by John Archibald Wheeler, who believed in it too, just was ashamed to admit being a [[relativists|relativist]] himself. Though he believed that the expansion would turn out to be decelerating according to his belief in "attractive gravitational force", while the expansion turned out to be apparent only and looking like accelerating. That I managed to explain after splitting the illusion of acceleration to Taylor series and confirming the observations with accuracy to one standard deviation. | + | Let's hope that CP reders don't consider anybody who don't share their prejudice about the Big Bang hypothesis, apparently the main cosmological theory of our times, not so seriously as RW readers did, making it clear that I should find myself a better environment for debunking the Big Bang, apparently supported even by Richard Dawkins. Which I did. |
| | + | |
| | + | For the time being you, the readers of CP, may find it in a form of my paper [[Essay:Hubble redshift in Einstein's universe]] or in simpler version that a high school student may repeat herself or himself [[Essay:Demystified gravitation]] in a form of step by step derivation of ''cosmological redshift'' for our universe, that the Big Bang aficionados neglected to calculate before jumping to conclusion that the universe is ''"surely"'' expanding. And this way converting the majority of non believers into believers in ''creation'' of the whole universe from nothing as it was planned by John Archibald Wheeler, who believed in it too, just was ashamed to admit being a [[relativists|relativist]] himself. Though he believed that the expansion would turn out to be decelerating according to his belief in "attractive gravitational force", while the expansion turned out to be apparent only and looking like accelerating. That I managed to explain after splitting the illusion of acceleration to Taylor series and confirming the observations with accuracy to one standard deviation. |
| | | | |
| | ===Why cranks are sometimes right=== | | ===Why cranks are sometimes right=== |