Elsevier

Chaos, Solitons & Fractals

Volume 11, Issue 13, October 2000, Pages 2001-2016
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals

On conjugate complex time – II: equipotential effect of gravity retrodicts differential and predicts apparent anomalous rotation of the sun

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-0779(99)00092-2Get rights and content

Abstract

Equipotential effect of gravity (EEG), as opposed to radial interactions between bodies, is introduced here as the impact of a tangential potential. EEG causes frequency decrease that was observed in two specially devised and several indirect experiments. It depends on the distance that is measured along equipotential parts of trajectories and can explain an extraneous frequency decrease found in radio signals emitted by navigational positioning systems. It retrodicts the observed differential rotation of the sun without the assumed drag of the sun's photosphere as its cause, and predicts apparent anomalous rotation of the sun, for from the shifts in spectra taken from the sun's limb it should appear as if the sun rotates away faster than it does towards an observer on earth. The value predicted by it is over 10.56% excess over Einstein's value of deflection of light near the sun and agrees with the 10–15% excess estimated from the data that was obtained in numerous, quite independent experiments.

Introduction

The extraneous frequency decrease (FD) effect that affects radio signals emitted by navigational positioning systems [1], [2] (results of these experiments were briefly discussed in the accompanying paper) was also observed in a few other experiments. Two of the other experiments are especially suitable for comparisons, because one involves only the earth whereas the other is concerned with an influence of the sun. Radio signals triggered by earth-bound atomic clocks showed distance-dependent FD, but the distance was measured on the earth's surface that is along practically equipotential trajectory [3]. Also the light rays from Taurus A [4] that crossed the sun's gravitational field close to its `surface' revealed similar FD. The FD effects appeared in addition to the gravitational frequency shift (GFS) that is predicted by the general theory of relativity (GTR). Neither gravitational nor electromagnetic theories did predict such a FD effect [5], however. The unexpected FD was much larger than GFS and transverse Doppler effects combined [3]. Possible existence of a new, near surface effect of gravity was also suggested in [6]. My goal here is to show gravitational origin of the FD effect and my objective is to keep it simple.

The notion of an equipotential effect of gravity may sound like a contradiction in terms, since all we ever learned about potential, whether that of electromagnetic or gravitational field, always referred only to the radial effect that is measured along the gradient of the given field. Although Einstein realized the mathematical possibility of its existence, he disregarded the effect as too slight when measured on the earth's surface [7], [8]. He dismissed thus the tangential effect as a tiny deviation, rather than as a tangential component of a generalized vector potential (i.e., not from a theoretical standpoint). Probably he considered the tangential effect in terms of the Taylor series expansion, but he was quite correct indeed when it came to its magnitude. Even as a tiny second order effect, however, the existence of a tangential impact of gravity may change the way we understand gravity and relativity in particular.

Though tangential effect is suggested by the aforementioned experimental data, one may ask how could it be introduced without altering the former theories that just disregarded it? For by adding new potential, one could presumably change the previously obtained results which were based on the radial potential alone, unless the two potentials are separable so that the new potential does not always have to interfere with the old one. The reader can rest assured, however, for no reasoning that involved radial potentials must be changed by introduction of a nonradial one. First, the new effect applies mostly to near surface phenomena. Second, the usage of radial potential in quantum mechanics, as in the Schrödinger equation [9], for instance, requires separation of variables which is always possible [10] and quite simple when performed in spherical coordinates. The new effect does not really affect the way in which the radial potential is utilized in that equation. For purely radial phenomena nothing changes. The new effect will change only the tangential phenomena which we used to disregard anyway. Nonetheless, it will account for a few formerly unexplained experiments without forcing us to invalidate any theory.

The Laplace equation, however, from which the usual scalar radial potential was derived, seemingly also admits some solutions with not always vanishing nonradial components [11] which would correspond to some clearly equipotential effects. The notion of the tangential potential thus would not be mathematically contradictory. Though noncontradiction could imply existence in abstract mathematics, it may not necessarily be seen as such in physics. Therefore I want to demonstrate merely the theoretical possibility, rather than necessity of the tangential potential, as well as the experimental evidence that speaks in favor of its nonradial effects. In the sense the present paper is mainly a presentation of its experimental confirmation. This is the reason why this paper is purposely restricted and so tailored as to fit the familiar ground of classical physics. And to make our discussion here more concrete, a number of very simple though indicative examples shall be given. All I want to achieve here is to show that purely nonradial, equipotential effect of gravity can be derived from the law of energy conservation and the superposition principle alone.

Section snippets

Equipotential effect of gravity

In order to realize that the unanticipated FD complements the well-known effects of gravity, let me clarify the distinction between radial and nonradial (equipotential or tangential) effects of gravity. Since nearly all of the well-known gravitational effects were evidently radial for they acted along gradient of a gravitational field, such a distinction was unnecessary before. Nevertheless, when one considers the experiment with rays from Taurus A, this distinction becomes unavoidable. For the

Limits setting experiments indefinite near surfaces

The limits posted by laser ranging experiments [19] are hardly relevant to the FD which is very minuscule, near surface phenomenon, whereas the laser ranging was conducted over several months, during which no two bodies could stay so close to each other that laser beams pointed at one planet could still be affected by another body. Long range limit setting experiments [20] too are irrelevant to the FD which is a near surface effect that tends to become insignificant when applied to systems of

Time rate on nonrotating equipotential surfaces

Let us consider now nonrotating [37] or slowly rotating equipotential surface, on which one can distinguish a zenithal potential in addition to the horizontal potential H(q). The nonrotating surface means one for which the dynamic relativistic effects are so small that we can neglect them, just for simplicity of our reasonings here. Let zenithal potential Z varies with a (zenithal) angle p and let a constant l, whose value should be determined from experiments, plays in Z the role of the

Excess over Einstein's value of deflection of light

By assuming next the principle of (local) constancy of the speed of light on any nonrotating equipotential surface that surrounds uniformly shaped massive body, we can get from Eq. (8b) static change of distance interval (or length change rate) on the equipotential surface around the body that produces the potential U:L=L0+∫T00U(r,q,p)dt/c,where L0 denotes the ideal length interval that corresponds to the ideal time rate T0. Since the length interval L changes in the gravitational field not

Apparent anomalous and differential rotation of sun

The tiny FD effect could be magnified immensely by enormous masses and huge volumes of large stars. The light that comes from distant galaxies may be affected by tangential potential of the stars it passes by. Some galaxies seen by the Hubble Space Telescope, for instance, have such large redshifts that if these redshifts really indicate their true distances, then these galaxies could not possibly be visible [47], [48]. This suggests that something contributes to their redshifts, since we are

Conclusions

The analysis of rays from a distant star crossing the gravitational field of a third massive body near its surface suggests that there should exist, quite unexpected by classical theories, equipotential effect of gravity that causes the rays' frequency to decrease. From the energy conservation law in conjunction with the superposition principle of independent effects on frequency, new formulas have been derived for nonrotating surfaces that surround the sources (masses) of the proxy

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to Professor Hans-Jürgen Treder for pointing out the connection between the extraneous frequency decrease effect and solenoidal effect of gravity.

References (68)

  • Z. Shen et al.

    Superluminal source candidates 0208–512 and 2243–123

    Chin Astron Astrophys

    (1998)
  • G.M.R. Winkler

    Path delay, its variations, and some implications for the field use of precise frequency standards

    Proc IEEE

    (1972)
  • Horiai K. Accuracy of time comparison derived from reception of Loran-C and global positioning system time signals....
  • D. Sadeh et al.

    The effect of mass on frequency

    Science

    (1968)
  • D. Sadeh et al.

    Search for a frequent shift of the 21-centimeter line from Taurus A near occultation by sun

    Science

    (1968)
  • G Szekeres

    Effect of gravitation on frequency

    Nature

    (1968)
  • P. Merat

    Observed deflection of light by the sun as a function of solar distance

    Astron Astrophys

    (1974)
  • Einstein A. The Foundation of the general theory of relativity. In: Lorentz HA, Einstein A, Minkowski H, Weyl H,...
  • H.A. Lorentz et al.

    The principle of relativity

    (1923)
  • Bohm D. Quantum theory. New York: Dover,...
  • Margenau H, Murphy GM. The mathematics of physics and chemistry. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand, 1968. p....
  • Gellert W, Kästner H, Neuber S, editors. Lexikon der mathematik. VEB Bibliographisches Institut: Leipzig, 1977. p....
  • Beiser A. Concepts of modern physics. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973. p....
  • Misner CW, Thorne KS, Wheeler JA. Gravitation. New York: Freeman, 1973. p....
  • Laplace PS. Proof of the theorem, that the attraction force of a heavenly body could be so large, that light could not...
  • G. Marx

    Is the amount of matter additive?

    Eur J Phys

    (1991)
  • Molk J, Langevin P, Perrin J, editors. Encyclopedie des sciences mathématiques pures at appliques, vol. 5. Paris, 1916....
  • Hawking SW, Ellis GFR. The large scale structure of space–time. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. p....
  • Weast RC, editor. Handbook of chemistry and physics, 51st ed. Cleveland, OH: The Chemical Rubber Co., 1970. p....
  • Reasenberg RD et al. Viking relativity experiment: verification of signal retardation by solar gravity. Astroph J...
  • T. Damour et al.

    On the orbital period change of the binary pulsar PSR 1813 + 16

    Astroph J

    (1991)
  • R.F.C. Vessot et al.

    A test of the equivalence principle using a space-borne clock

    Grg

    (1979)
  • Vessot RFC et al. Test relativistic gravitation with a space-borne hydrogen maser. Phys Rev Lett...
  • Anderson JD et al. Tests of general relativity using astrometric and radio metric observations of the planets. Acta...
  • T.P. Krisher et al.

    Test of the gravitational redshift effect at saturn

    Phys Rev Lett

    (1990)
  • Pitt VH, editor. The penguin dictionary of physics. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1982. p....
  • Logunov A, Mestvirishvili M. The relativistic theory of gravitation. Moscow: Mir Publishers, 1989. p. 8, 11ff, 15, 17,...
  • Logunov A. Lectures in relativity and gravitation. A Modern Look. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1990. p. 207,...
  • A.A. Vlasov et al.

    Einstein's formula for gravitational radiation is not a consequence of the general theory of relativity

    Theor Math Phys

    (1982)
  • E. Fabri

    Paradoxes of gravitational redshift

    Eur J Phys

    (1994)
  • Chen YT, Cook A. Gravitational experiments in the laboratory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. p....
  • Anderson JD et al. Experimental test of general relativity using time-delay data from mariner 6 and mariner 7....
  • Shapiro II et al. The viking relativity experiment. J Geophys Res...
  • Shapiro II et al. Concept for a wide-area differential GPS navigation system. NASA Tech Briefs 1997. p....
  • Cited by (9)

    • On the universe's missing mass

      2005, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals
    • On the intrinsic gravitational repulsion

      2004, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text