I don’t really agree with the description you have given about gravitational waves. The calculation regarding the precession of Mercury is directly from the Einstein equations of GR and does not involve gravitational waves.

Gravitation waves were also predicted from the Einstein equations of GR but only observed in the last few years by LIGO and other experiment. Gravitational waves are wave disturbances of Spacetime travelling at speed c caused by extreme events such as a neutron star or black hole merger.

Richard

Richard Lewis Gravitational waves are real natural phenomena, and gravitational waves are caused by the disturbance of the gravitational field. LIGO can observe gravitational waves from far away places. How can we ignore the gravitational waves caused by the movement of the sun?

GR is a mathematical model. It gives ideas for solving the gravity problem of 1-BODY, but it can't do anything about N-BODY. GR predicts gravitational waves, but without GR, gravitational waves still exist, which is just a natural phenomenon. I think GR is very limited in the calculation of gravity, it is not perfect.

GR believes that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of gravitational waves. This is very wrong. From Newton to Laplace, they all stated that the speed of gravity is very huge. Laplace also calculated the speed of gravity, which is far away. Much faster than the speed of light. If the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light, then our solar system has long ceased to exist, which is very easy to prove.

Tony

Tony Yuan I think we need to distinguish between gravitational waves and gravitational effects. The presence of the sun curves spacetime and it is this spacetime curvature caused by the sun which causes the planets to stay in their orbit and the orbit of the planet Mercury to change over time.

You are saying that the equations of GR are difficult to use and this is true which is why the equations of Newton can be used for most space missions even though they are approximate. As far as we have observed so far the Einstein equations of GR are perfectly accurate.

Talking about the speed of gravity is a difficult thing conceptually. You could ask what would happen if the sun were instantaneously removed - we would find out about 9 minutes later corresponding to the speed of light. However, it is not possible to instantaneously remove mass and mass can only be converted into another form of energy such as radiation or gravitational waves.

Our current laws of physics do not allow any signal carrying useful information to travel at faster than the speed of light.

You say: "If the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light, then our solar system has long ceased to exist, which is very easy to prove." I would be interested to see your proof.

Richard

Richard Lewis

You say: "If the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light, then our solar system has long ceased to exist, which is very easy to prove." I would be interested to see your proof.

Preprint Gravitational Fields and Gravitational Waves

3. Calculation of the Influence of the New Gravitational Equation onEarth’s Orbit

It is proved here that if the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light, then it will only take 6600 years for the earth to fly away from the solar system.

Space-time is never curved. The distribution density and shape of gravitational waves in space are very similar to "curved". You can see Figure 6: GR space-time depression model in my paper.

Tony

Tony Yuan I have read your paper linked in the previous post and the concept which is giving me the most difficulty is the concept of the “velocity of a field”. I tend to think in terms of classical fields where you can think of the field as a three dimensional map of force vectors. So for example an electrostatic field caused by a point charge would have a radial direction. I wouldn’t regard this field as having a velocity in any sense.

This is my main difficulty with your approach.

Regards

Richard

All

The speed of gravity is zero, since gravity is constant in a specific point. In other words gravity is a locally defined concept and in that specific point it is always the same. So, we cannot see any aberration although ether particles are moving in all directions. This fact does not exclude that if our sun would stop existing we would be able to see a speed of transmission of that change equal to the speed of ether particles.

Regards from ________ John-Erik

Tony Yuan

Dear Tony,

You say: "Newtonian gravity is a force that acts at a distance. No matter how fast an objecttravels, gravity acts upon the object instantaneously."

Alas, this is not the case! We live in a world environment - an electromagnetic field. Electric and magnetic fields are the flows of this medium. Gravitational waves are longitudinal (sound) waves in a field medium. They arise during the impact (collision) of space objects. A vortex of the field exists around each material object, and the intensity of the vortex decreases with distance from the object. Therefore (Bernoulli effect) the pressure gradient of the external environment arises near the body.

The Earth does not attract the Moon. The pressure of the external environment of the field pushes the Moon towards the Earth. More details in "Cartesian Gravity Model" in my profile.

Yours

Valeriy Pakulin

Dear Valeriy Pakulin

Gravity is not a pushing force and not a pulling force either. Gravity is a small difference between a pushing force and a pulling force. This difference is caused by attenuation of ether particles inside matter.

Regards from _______________________________ John-Erik

Gravity does not work at a distance. Gravity is a local property. Gravity is constant and can therefore not cause any aberration. However if Sun should stop existing then there would be a change in gravity that could be observed.

Richard Lewis Laplace has calculated the speed of gravity, which is far greater than the speed of light. Einstein's SR imprisoned human imagination of speed. The speed of light in the universe is a very slow speed, the speed of gravity, and the speed of quantum entanglement in quantum mechanics are far greater than the speed of light. The gravitational field is directional, so the gravitational force is also directional.

Valeriy Pakulin ，I don't know how gravity comes from. Newton only tells us the relationship between gravity, mass, and distance. This paper did not analyze the principle of gravity. The paper just applied the universal gravitation and gravitational waves that exist in nature to the calculation of the planetary orbit of the sun, and the results are consistent with the observation data provided by NASA. And so far, GR has not been able to calculate the orbits of the planets in the solar system, but GR is already a "great theory", which is very ironic.

John-Erik Persson ，There is gravitational force between two objects with mass, which is like a magnetic field between two magnets. What exactly is a magnetic field? I don't know if anyone can make it clear.

The same is true for the gravitational field. Gravitation is real, so what exactly is the gravitational field?

We know that 1+1=2, so why is it equal to 2? Almost no mathematician can prove it, but this does not affect our use of 1+1=2 for mathematical calculations.

Dear Tony Yuan

We do not know what magnetic field is.

The field of gravity was explained by Fatio 300 years ago.

Regards _______ John-Erik

John-Erik Persson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Sage%27s_theory_of_gravitation

I found an introduction about Fatio, which is very interesting, but this theory has never been confirmed.

Dear Tony Yuan

...has never been confirmed...

SRT, GRT and QM have never been confirmed.

Regards _________ John-Erik

PS Thanks for the link. DS

John-Erik Persson

What do you think of my theory, I used Newtonian mechanics, gravitational waves, and wave Doppler effects.

Apart from applying my theory to the calculation of planetary orbits in the solar system, the results are basically consistent with NASA's observations. I have not verified other things.

Tony

Gravitational waves are due to the next factors: 1) 3-dimensional gravitational potential is non-stationary (depends on the time); 2) the angular velocity of rottion of the 3-space is non-stationary (depends on the time. The gravitational . these conclusions are right for the gravittionl fields of attraction. it is possible theretically to show that there exist gravitation of repulsion. For example, such gravitational diation takes a place for neutron stars and pulsars.

Larissa Borissova I think as long as the gravitational source moves, it will produce gravitational waves.The greater the speed of the gravitational source in the direction of the gravitational field, the greater the gravitational wave will be.

The movement of the sun will cause gravitational waves around the sun. Similarly, the movement of the earth will cause gravitational waves in the surrounding space.

Larissa Borissova I know that GR’s description of gravitational waves is more complicated. In a binary star system, the mutual rotation of gravitational sources will indeed cause gravitational waves of "the shape" described by GR, but in the case of a single star, as long as it is moving, There will be gravitational waves.

Preprint Gravitational Fields and Gravitational Waves

I did a detailed analysis in this paper. It is very easy to understand. I used this theory to calculate the orbits of the planets in the solar system, and I found that it was basically consistent with the results of astronomical observations.

Every gravitational field can be theoretically as the field of attraction so the field of repulsion. We habite in the gravitational field of the Earth, which is the part of the gravitational field of the Sun, which is the part of the gravitational field of our galaxy Milky Way. We live in the gravittional field of Schwarzshield kind, which is generalization of Newtonian gravitational field. Why must we assume that all stars and planets in Galaxy belong only to this kind? Gravitational attraction takes a place in the Solar System and in systems of the stars of such kinds. But these stars do not product gravitational wave because theyr fields are stationary. But here are sources of GW&=? Moreover, what stars can be sources ofstationary fields of usual stars& This question can be solved by the condition that we allow hat there exist sources of gravitation of the second kind --- gravitation of repulsion. it is necessary only allow that stars and theirs planets absorb gravitational energy which is radiated by another sources, which radiate gravitation& This gravitation can be represented as gravitatin of repulsion. Nheoreetical calculations show that these sources can be neutron stars. It is possible, our Solar system absorbs gravitational energy which is radiated by neutron Kalver star, which is the nearst for us. This is a nearest neutron star from the Earth. It is possible, just it star is the source of the energy of our planet because it is the nearst from us. It is possible to calculate gravitational field of repulsion of this star. It is near from the North Pole of the World, where the axis of the Earth is. It is possible to calculate its gravitational field in frames of GR for the de Sitter space-time / We obtain in this case the gravitational energy which over cames to uther planets. Besides we obtain that gravitational energy of repulsion can be related to the 3-spaces with the reverse flow of the time (from the future to the past)< i.e. we obtain te mirror Universe wih negative masses and frequencies.

What do you think of the planetary orbit precession, especially Venus, if there is no influence of gravitational waves, the orbital precession of Venus will be negative.

It is always very difficult for a new theory to be published in SCI journals. But I still hope that this paper can be published. It will be very valuable for research.

there are nothing(s) extant in objectivity by the name of gravitational waves .....................

Reza Sanaye We can choose GR's space-time curvature (looks cool) or gravitational waves (looks as ordinary as water waves). Both theories can explain Mercury's precession.

Tony Yuan

I agree with you , Dear Tony : Both theories can ......................

I just ask for the permission to add that other theorie(s) , too , could be made (up) for "explaining" it , so to speak . . . .

Respectfully

REZA

The first attempt to calculate the speed of gravity was by Laplace, who redefines gravity as a field or liquid, and his calculated speed is at least 7 million times the speed of light.

In 1805, Pierre Laplace decided on the basis of a detailed analysis of the motion of the Moon that the actual Newtonian velocity of propagation of gravitational interaction cG must be at least 7 · 10^6 c (see [157, Chap. VII, p. 642]). Van Flandern [285] have increased this estimate to 2 · 10^10 c, since otherwise two separate bodies would be not orbiting around a common center of gravity on relatively stable orbits.

Laplace’s views are consistent with Newton’s.We know that they are great mathematicians and scientists.

But Einstein proposed SR and GR at the age of 26 and 36, respectively, and denied the conclusion that the speed of gravity is very huge. GR believes that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light. This is incredible.

There is a martial arts master named "Master Hayden" in China. In the 1980s and 1990s, he was recognized as the number one master and was touted by public opinion. But later he was proved to be a liar, maybe even he himself did not know why he became the number one Kung Fu master in China.

The power of public opinion controls the correctness of science.

Reza Sanaye I believe that GR will not be the only solution to gravity, and it will not be the only correct solution. Our scientific exploration has just begun.

Tony Yuan

Gravity is a function of position, but not of time. Constant in time means that there is no aberration. We can only see changes in light. If the Sun would no longer exist we would observe that after a delay of 500 seconds. Change is making speed observable.

Regards from ________ John-Erik

John-Erik Persson If the speed of gravity is considered to be infinite, then gravity is a function of position, just like Newton did. In fact, the speed of gravity is much greater than the speed of light. If the sun disappears, humans will immediately perceive it, because the earth will no longer maintain its original orbit, but will fly away along the tangent direction of the orbit. But because light takes 500s to arrive, when we find that the sun disappears, the earth has already left its orbit.

Tony Yuan

Gravity in all points in the Earth circular orbit is defined by ether particles comming from all directions. The Sun only disturbs that balace by attenuating in some parts of the flow (probably by absorption).

In all points on the orbit gravity is constant and directed towards the Sun independent of where the Earth is. It is locally defined. Constant means no aberration. You must change gravity and introduce a time dependency to make aberration visible.

Regards from _______ John-Erik

John-Erik Persson This is a very interesting theory, but there are many things to do, especially what is ether has not been able to correctly explain.

Tony Yuan

I re-emphasize your precious statement :

" Our scientific exploration has just begun. "

HAS JUST BEGUN ........ .............. ...... ..................

sincerely yours

REZA

Tony Yuan

This theory is not new, but 300 years old. Fatio. The theory also implies an ether wind in negative radial direction, probably equal to the escapev elocity.

Such an ether wind can also explain the cosmological red shift from not moving celestial objects. The ether is moving instead. Without Big Bang!

With best regards from ______________ John-Erik

John-Erik Persson , This theory requires the establishment of a physical model, and then a program simulation, which can then be applied to some astronomical phenomena and obtain results consistent with observations.

Reza Sanaye We are on the road of scientific exploration.

Tony Yuan

SO , EXCUSE ME

I DONT WANNA BE IMPOLITE

but :

DO u ALREADY KNOW ITS IMPLICATIONS ?????????

Gravitational waves are generated due to the disturbance of the gravitational field, and the gravitational waves will affect the gravitational force on the object. We know that light waves have the Doppler effect, and gravitational waves also have this characteristic. https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-384421/v1.pdf

Check https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350617258_Gravitational_Fields_and_Gravitational_Waves

I am in agreement with your observation.

Tony Yuan About the article "Gravitational fields and gravitational waves"

The speed dependent formula for the gravitational force in this article is unprecise. The formula for the static case, (v=0) is:

F=d/dxO∫Edv, xO=coordinates of the massive object O which feels the force, E=energy density of the gravitational field; ∫dv denotes the volume integral over the relevant space.

E=-(grad φ)²/(8πG); φ=-∑iGMi/ri + GMO/rO; G is the gravitational constant. Mi is the mass of a body i which contributes to the gravitational potential. ri is the distance to the contributing body i. MOis the mass of the object O, rO is the distance to the object O.

In order to calculate the velocity dependent force, the Green’s function formalism must be used. If only the object O is moving, only retardation effects concerning rO must be considered.

The Green function Gret for the retardation effect in this case is given by

Gret(rO,t)=δ(t-rO/c)/4πrO.

We then get F(t)= d/dxO∫∫[-∞,t] Gret(rO-r’,t-t’)E(r’,t’)dt’)dv; r’=rO(t’), the distance to the position, where the object has been at t’. ∫[-∞,t]dt’ denotes the time integral in the limits -∞,t.

According to this formula the force on the object O depends on its past position.

But this dependency only is relevant in case of a relativistic velocity of O.

Wolfgang Konle

When the speed of the object relative to the gravitational source is 0, the Newtonian universal gravitation is obtained in this scenario. We don't need to consider the delay effect of gravity, because the speed of gravity is much greater than the speed of light. If this factor is also added, then the Doppler effect of gravity will be added.

A detailed analysis is given in my paper. I believe this world is much simpler than "physicists in the past 100 years have imagined."

Tony Yuan

Gravity is locally defind and unchanged in time. Since gravity is not changing in time (like light) you cannot see any motion. You cannot see speed in a constant object. Gravity is caused by ether particles moving in all directions. Gravity is a small difference between a pushing and a pulling force.

John-Erik

John-Erik Persson

“Gravity is a small difference between a pushing and a pulling force.” It's kind of like buoyancy, how do you connect mass and gravity? I think whether the ether model should be related to the volume or surface area of the substance is more appropriate.

Tony

Tony Yuan

No, it is not volume or surface area, since ether particles are penetrating all matter and only a very, very small part of these particles is absorbed.

John-Erik

John-Erik Persson

Tony Yuan

The zero mass scenario for gravity imposes a strong constraint on the relationship between A, B (as objects) and h, namely |A - B|=h [field]. For h=2, the analogy with classical general relativity, as well as the long-range nature of the gravitational interaction, it is necessary to bypass this range by employing a gauge theoretic description in terms of a symmetric tensor, similar to (but more complicated than) the vector potential for h=1.

Tony Yuan "the speed of gravity is much greater than the speed of light"

What is the speed of gravity?

Wolfgang Konle

Gravity speed: the speed of action of the gravitational field on an object.

In 1805, Pierre Laplace decided on the basis of a detailed analysis of the motion of the Moon that the actual Newtonian velocity of propagation of gravitational interaction cG must be at least 7 · 10^6 c (see [157, Chap. VII, p. 642])

John-Erik Persson

Can you explain how the relationship between gravity and mass is established under the ether model?

Tony Yuan "Gravity speed: the speed of action of the gravitational field on an object."

What is the speed of action of the gravitational field on an object?

The gravitational field excerts a force on gravitating objects. The force is given by the derivative of the total field energy in respect to the object position. A speed does not occur in this relation.

Wolfgang Konle

Laplace has already given the answer. I don't know whether it is accurate, but the speed is huge. The speed of light can be ignored in front of it.

In 1805, Pierre Laplace decided on the basis of a detailed analysis of the motion of the Moon that the actual Newtonian velocity of propagation of gravitational interaction cG must be at least 7 · 10^6 c (see [157, Chap. VII, p. 642])

Tony Yuan "but the speed is huge"

Speed is a position change. What changes its position in the situation in which a gravitational field excerts a force on a gravitating object? The situation is absolutely static. Where is the hidden movement and what is moving?

Wolfgang Konle Don't think about things so complicated. Our world is Newtonian gravitation + gravitational waves. It is very simple. Everyone is biased by GR.

Preprint Gravitational Fields and Gravitational Waves

Tony Yuan "Everyone is biased by GR."

My remarks have nothing to do with GR. Therefor I repeat them:

Tony:"but the speed is huge"

Speed is a position change. What changes its position in the situation in which a gravitational field excerts a force on a gravitating object? The situation is absolutely static. Where is the hidden movement and what is moving?

If in your paper, you are talking about a speed, it should be possible to describe what is moving, what is changing its position within a time interval.

Wolfgang Konle

I think the definition of speed has been known from the elementary level when we started to learn mathematics. I think there is no need to expand this concept for analysis. Just like GR is still studying the curved space, it is very funny. If the space is curved, I would like to ask if there is no space in the recessed place?

Tony Yuan "I think the definition of speed has been known from the elementary level"

We both know how speed is defined. The only question is:

What is speeding if a gravitational field excerts a force on an object?

“…Speed is a position change. What changes its position in the situation in which a gravitational field excerts a force on a gravitating object? The situation is absolutely static. Where is the hidden movement and what is moving?… …..”

- that isn’t, of course, so. If some gravitational charge, i.e. gravitational mass, moves in space, the created by this charge field also moves – as that happens, say, when an electric charge moves, and so – in contrast to a static case, where that is inessential, because of that the changes in the electric field propagate in the space with limited speed, i.e. the speed of light, the interaction of the moving charge with other charges is determined by Liénard-Wichert “retarded” potentials.

Something like for sure happens with Gravity charges, and, say, basing on that the gravity field propagates with the speed of light 305 000 km/s Pail Gerber in 1898-1902 obtained the equation for the Mercury perihelion shift; this equation was derived in 1915 in the GR

Cheers

"What is speeding if a gravitational field excerts a force on an object?"

I don't understand what speeding means. I think you are asking questions that can be answered by classical Newtonian mechanics. Are you asking about acceleration? a=F/m?

Tony Yuan

...can you explain...

Yes

John-Erik

If GR thinks that the speed of the gravitational field is c, then GR will lose its qualification as a gravitational theory. The speed of the gravitational field is much greater than the speed of light c. From Newton to Laplace, these world's top scientists and mathematics have clearly illustrated this point.

Tony Yuan

The force of gravity is locally defined and constant. Constancy means we cannot see any speed and the force is not moving. No aberration

John-Erik

"I don't understand what speeding means."

OK:

"What is moving if a gravitational field excerts a force on an object?"

Wolfgang Konle ,When an object is subjected to a force, it will naturally produce acceleration , and the object will have a change in its state of motion, and because the action of the force is mutual, the state of motion of the source of gravitation will also change. For example, our sun is not fixed, it also rotates around the center of mass of the solar system, and there are changes in speed and position in the three directions of x, y, and z. I calculated these data accurately, which is basically consistent with the observational data published by NASA.

Tony

Below is part of the data I calculated, the position (x, y, z) and speed (vx, vy, vz) of the sun every day.

1 X =-1.258731E+006 Y =5.583448E+005 Z =2.485312E+004

1 VX= -6.758924E-003 VY= -1.435848E-002 VZ= 2.728714E-004

2 X =-1.259314E+006 Y =5.571039E+005 Z =2.487667E+004

2 VX= -6.737468E-003 VY= -1.436591E-002 VZ= 2.723916E-004

3 X =-1.259895E+006 Y =5.558624E+005 Z =2.490019E+004

3 VX= -6.716022E-003 VY= -1.437325E-002 VZ= 2.719102E-004

4 X =-1.260474E+006 Y =5.546202E+005 Z =2.492366E+004

4 VX= -6.694590E-003 VY= -1.438049E-002 VZ= 2.714275E-004

5 X =-1.261052E+006 Y =5.533774E+005 Z =2.494709E+004

5 VX= -6.673175E-003 VY= -1.438765E-002 VZ= 2.709438E-004

6 X =-1.261627E+006 Y =5.521340E+005 Z =2.497048E+004

6 VX= -6.651777E-003 VY= -1.439472E-002 VZ= 2.704593E-004

7 X =-1.262201E+006 Y =5.508900E+005 Z =2.499382E+004

7 VX= -6.630400E-003 VY= -1.440170E-002 VZ= 2.699742E-004

8 X =-1.262773E+006 Y =5.496454E+005 Z =2.501713E+004

8 VX= -6.609046E-003 VY= -1.440860E-002 VZ= 2.694887E-004

9 X =-1.263343E+006 Y =5.484002E+005 Z =2.504039E+004

9 VX= -6.587717E-003 VY= -1.441540E-002 VZ= 2.690029E-004

10 X =-1.263911E+006 Y =5.471544E+005 Z =2.506361E+004

10 VX= -6.566415E-003 VY= -1.442212E-002 VZ= 2.685170E-004

Tony Yuan "When an object is subjected to a force, it will naturally produce acceleration"

If you are standing on a bathroom scales, the gravitational field of earth exerts a force and you and the scales measures this force. But there is no acceleration involved.

The force can be measured and therefor exists independent from any motion in a static situation.

Ok, the earth, our sun and our galaxy are moving, but we are also moving. Therefor standing on a scales is only an issue between us and earth. This shows us, that the gravitational force does not depend on any movement.

Preprint Gravitational Fields and Gravitational Waves

There is no space-time curvature, it is just the spatial density distribution of gravitational waves. Newtonian gravity plus the influence of gravitational waves can perfectly calculate the orbit of each planet. Hope that space-time curvature, time flows backwards, and time slows down. Hope those interesting physical concept only exists in Hollywood.

Today, a professor asked me how to prove that there is a linear relationship between gravity and speed. I added this part of the proof. Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions and questions. Thanks! Preprint Gravitational Fields and Gravitational Waves

Tony

Dear Tony Yuan

Equation (1) in your preprint is only valid with a gravitational field which propagates modifications with an infinite velocity.

An exact calculation with a finite propagation velocity requires using the Green function algorithm.

Wolfgang Konle

The universal gravitational constant in Newtonian gravitation is the data measured when the relative velocity of the object relative to the gravitational source is 0, so Equation (1) does not require the precondition that you said "with an infinite velocity.".

Tony

I have already proved the linear relationship between gravity and velocity.

Tony Yuan "When T is infinitesimal close to 0"

This condition is equivalent to an infinite speed for the propagation of disturbances in the gravitational field.

Wolfgang Konle The universal gravitational constant in Newtonian gravitation is the data measured when the relative velocity of the object relative to the gravitational source is 0, so Equation (1) does not require the precondition that you said "with an infinite velocity.".

Tony Yuan "...the relative velocity of the object relative to the gravitational source is 0..."

Sorry, but the discussion in your paper is about the influence of a non-zero relative velocity. The condition "When T is infinitesimal close to 0" only makes sense in such a non-static scenario.

Fact is, that a non-static scenario requires the application of the Green's function algorithm. This only can be suspended if the propagation speed of disturbances is infinite.

Wolfgang Konle

" This only can be suspended if the propagation speed of disturbances is infinite. "

SEEMS "he" deems it infinite

Until now, GR scholars have been unable to use GR to calculate the orbital data of the planets in the solar system. Don’t you think that being a GR scholar is a shame? Please don't tell me that you will use Newtonian mechanics to calculate the orbit data, and then use GR to correct it, that's really a kind of irony.

GR will definitely become history. If a time is to be set, I hope it will be this year.

Reza Sanaye

Disturbencies in gravity propagate with speed c, but no aberration is produced as long gravity is constant and defined locally.

John-Erik Persson

Could you , please , explain more liberally ?

That single line line just doesn't make your standpoint clear enough to me .........

Many thanks

REZA

Reza Sanaye

Gravity is a function of space but not of time. In a specific point there in no change and therefore, we cannot see any aberratuion. I t is always directed towards the sun. If you could eliminate the Sun I could see it after 500 minutes.

There is a very interesting thing today. The speed of gravitational waves that I have been emphasizing is equal to the speed of light, and the speed of the gravitational field is much greater than the speed of light. But a professor who I always thought knew my thesis best, wrote to me and told me: I'm denying that the speed of gravitational waves is equal to the speed of light. This really surprised me.

Tony Yuan

Let us assume the gravitational field is a medium with a pressure p and a density ρ. We identify p as energy density E and ρ as mass density E/c².

According to wave theory, the propagation velocity of disturbances in this medium is v=√(p/ρ)=c.

Wolfgang Konle The speed of gravitational waves is equal to the speed of light. There is no doubt about this.

Tony Yuan

However, what is a speed of a field?

Tony Yuan

Gravity is constant in time and defined in each point to always be directed towards the source (the Sun). Gravity can therefore not produce any aberration. You need changes (waves) to see any aberration.

Wolfgang Konle There is an example in my paper: kite. I will paste this paragraph here：

We may consider the following analogy: we use a rope to pull a kite. When we shakeit hard, the rope will fluctuate and pass to the kite at a certain wave speed, however,when we loosen the rope, the kite instantly loses control. It is inappropriate to use thewave speed of the rope to represent the speed of the force of the rope on the kite.

The speed of the gravitational field is the speed of gravity. The gravity of the sun on the earth is like the relationship between us and a kite. And the line in our hand is like a gravitational field.

Tony

Tony Yuan

The idea of an absolutely rigid body is old. If you pull or push on one side, the other side of this wondrous material instantly follows. But unfortunately such a material does not exist. In any existing solid state material tensions of any kind propagate with the velocity of sound. This of course includes tensions in ropes.

If there already is a tension, releasing this tension propagates with the same velocity.

This velocity of sound is by far smaller than the velocity of light.

Wolfgang Konle OK, But a mechanical wave is generated on this rope, and this wave will be transmitted to the kite slowly, so can this slow speed represent the tension transmission speed of the rope? Obviously not. The same is true for gravitational waves, which cannot represent the speed of gravity.

Dear Tony, do you really think there is an analogy between the rope connection to a kite and gravitational fields?

Wolfgang Konle Some analogies can be made and don't think they are exactly the same. But it can be compared.

Tony Yuan

i am a certified psychoanalyst

what is your intentionality in "procreating'' a cult ??????

Reza Sanaye I am trying to get physics back on the right path. Just like the work done by Copernicus, I can feel all kinds of pressure from the world, but I will continue my efforts. The door of science needs to be reopened.

Tony Yuan

Yes, Copernicus was great. When you study position of planets you must regard your own position. Heliocentric. That means also that when you study motion of light you must regard your own motion. That means that observer's motion in relation to Sun explains stellar aberration since the telescope moves in the frame of our planetary system. Heliocentric. So, aberration is caused inside the telescope and not in the atmosphere. Geocentric.

With best regards from _____________ John-Erik

John-Erik Persson Let's take Mercury as an example. 90% of Mercury's precession comes from the precession of the coordinate system. It may be the telescope you are talking about.

Tony Yuan

The same aberration is found in VLBI. A Sagnac effect. That abberation is eliminated by calculating in the frame of Sun instead of in Earth frame. That means going from geocentric to heliocentric view.

John-Erik Persson But we must note that 10% of the precession comes from the sun, the gravitational influence of other planets on Mercury. Among them, 43" per century comes from the influence of the sun's gravitational waves.

I do not lack supporters, but at present this theory is only being developed by myself. It was predicted many years ago that I would make a great contribution to science. At that time, I had not engaged in any gravity research. I'm just a communications research and development engineer. Later, because of the new crown epidemic, I had nothing to do at home, so I started the research on gravity. In fact, there were some discussions at the beginning, but then I wrote this paper and verified it. I don't know if the person who predicted me (she is a famous wizard here) said this thing, I think there will be no other things, haha, is it very interesting?

Of course, I wrote and verified this paper with the rigor of an engineer. This is the source of my confidence. (If I succeed, I think the wizard will become even more famous for this prophecy) :)

Dear Tony Yuan Thank you for your honesty. It shows that you are a well minded person.

However, providing a new valuable contribution to a physical issue like gravitation requires a well-founded knowledge about physics. An argument like “speed of the field” does not belong to this category.

With your paper you have proven considerable skill in algebra and application of algebra in physical issues. But some of your basic assumptions are in contradiction to commonly accepted physical facts. Therefor your paper has no chance to be accepted by the physics community as far as such a community exists.

Wolfgang Konle I can forward a letter from a senior researcher on gravity at the Academy of Sciences. I am now surrounded by several physics professors from several different countries in the world.

Gravity and gravitational waves are real natural phenomena, I just combine these physical phenomena together. I use the knowledge of classical physics.

Tony Yuan

The "speed of gravitational interaction" is a correct term which should be used instead of "speed of the gravitational field".

If you can proof that the speed of the gravitational interaction differs from the propagation speed of gravitational waves, this would be sensational. But only assuming such a difference and even assuming a multiple of the light speed for this speed, is ridiculous.

Wolfgang Konle Good advice.

My paper has proved that the "speed of gravitational interaction" is much faster than the speed of light. You can see "3.4 estimation of escape time"

Preprint Gravitational Fields and Gravitational Waves

Tony Yuan

Sorry to repeat my arguments. Four days ago, I had told you that your equation (1) which is the base of your deductions is wrong. Considering movements requires the Green's function algorithm, to take into account retardation effects.

Your alleged proof has been deduced from your wrong equation (1).

Wolfgang Konle equation (1) is correct. If you can't understand equation (1), it's somewhat surprising to me. It's the most basic calculus.