The nature of GRAVITY has been questioned many times in the past but, over the last few centuries, Newton's description of gravitation has sufficed for nearly all practical applications, despite having some limitations, and Relativy Theory includes Newton's formulation as a limiting case.
QUESTIONING GRAVITY is an attempt to show that it is possible to find a satisfactory answer both in terms of mathematical formulae and dynamics and so demonstrate a physical cause for Gravity that can elucidate many phenomena that are otherwise inexplicable. Gravity can be deduced logically as arising from the impact of Cosmic Radiation particles that permeate Space. Thus, instead of bodies being attracted to the surface of the Earth, for example, by an unknown force or 'attraction' that we all know as Gravity, they are literally pushed towards the Earth by the pressure of the cosmic particles.
The author demonstrates how this mechanism can be invoked to describe many different terrestrial manifestations of Gravity and indicates how the application of the principle will affect atomic physics and astronomy. Certain natural phenomena that have come to be seen as proofs of Relativity Theory because they cannot be derived from Newtonian Gravitation, are shown to be a necessary outcome of applying the author's hypothesis.
There have been times in the history of Science when an entirely different approach to a particular aspect of Physics, at a fundamental level, has proved necessary for significant further progress to take place. For example, the Copernican Theory and, more recently, Quantum Mechanics. This statement may seem to ignore the contributions of Newton and Relativity Theory but these can be seen as having formed barriers rather than aids to further theoretical advance insofar as they appeared to have said the last word on their subject matter for a long period. The current state of physical theory, particularly in the most fundamental concepts, has prompted more than one thinker to express the need for a major reappraisal. It is this that my text seeks to provide, identifying the present-day error as being located in the accepted, scientific approach to Gravity.
When Copernicus wrote De Revolutionibus, his contemporaries may well have thought his heliocentric presentation to be comparatively irrelevant even if it were correct, except for its implications with regard to certain religious beliefs. The Copernican hypothesis, with its circular planetary orbits, gave no improvement in the prediction of the future movements of celestial bodies compared with the geocentric configuration. Beyond that, the physical determination of the true centre of revolution of the Solar System may not have seemed very important even to astronomers. In any case, no simple method was known of conclusively proving the new supposition at that time, despite the arguments advanced by its author.
With the wisdom of hindsight, it is appreciated today that the change of approach from the Earth-centred system to a Sun-centred one was essential to the future of Dynamics. As long as the pre-Copernican ideas persisted, the achievements of Kepler, Galileo, Newton and others would have been largely precluded. The complexities of the geocentric system, ingenious though they were, represented an insuperable barrier to any real progress.
Since the time of Copernicus, much has been learned of the mathematical structure of gravitation, particularly in respect of the orbital behaviour of bodies in Space but opinion seems to be divided today on whether Man remains ignorant of the underlying physical mechanism of which Gravity is the familiar manifestation, or whether there is NO physical mechanism in the ordinary sense, the phenomenon being entirely a matter of geometrical configuration in relation to Space and Time. Recent attempts to extrapolate from what is reliably known scientifically, mainly on the basis of mathematical logic, have led to a variety of hypotheses that have had little success. The accumulation of new observational data on an immense scale has been very successful in itself but the processing of the results to furnish valid theoretical explanations seems largely to have led to the admission that much of what has emerged remains only speculation on which there is no general agreement.
In asserting that a further Copernican-style revolution in scientific ideas is overdue, one is still faced with resistance similar to that experienced by Copernicus and Galileo. After all, much scientific progress has been made in the past without the benefit of my ideas which offer no immediate improvement over accepted theory in predicting most gravitational trajectories. Nevertheless, in considering such ideas as those in this book, we should be better able than the savants of Copernicus' era to understand that useful progress in Science could well depend on adopting such a fundamentally different approach. It is contended that the hypothesis that follows could be what is needed to re-open a way to a major advance in Science.
Anticipating some discussion given later, it should be said that, despite the Euclidean-style demonstration in the following notes of the part played by galactic cosmic radiation in generating atmospheric pressure and other gravitational phenomena, it is not claimed that incontrovertible proof of my entire hypothesis is being given; any more than it can be said that Copernicus discovered the whole truth behind his speculations. What my text seeks to demonstrate is not only that gravitational effects could be generated by cosmic radiation despite its apparent unlikelihood but that the adoption of my approach would open doors to the sensible solution of scientific problems where current dogma offers only a blank wall or seeming fantasy. The solutions that propose may be incorrect but I hope that my efforts will point the way to other investigators. This is the principal reason for my discussing the subject in so much detail.
With so many different aspects of Gravity to discuss, it was difficult to decide on an order of presentation that should be most effective in developing a compelling argument. Starting with the existing situation, where knowledge of Gravity is confined to its mathematical formulation, some of that mathematics is used to elicit a clue to what is presented in the rest of the text as the reality behind the Geometry. That reality is traced from the gravitational situation at the Earth's surface and in the Solar system, by way of the atom to the Universe at large. On the way, phenomena that are commonly invoked as proofs of Relativity Theory are shown to be necessary consequences of applying my hypothesis. What really matters in the end though, as much today as centuries ago, is to have the temerity to assert an unorthodox view despite the consequences. For all the supposed open-mindedness of Science today there are many who will be deliberately deaf to my arguments.
It may be helpful to conclude this Introduction with a summary of my main theme. This is that an analysis of the fundamental equation of gravitation shows that the speed of light forms an integral part of that equation, as a natural constant. The expectation that an entity moving at, or very near to, the speed, c, is a major factor in generating gravitational acceleration and consequently its pressure, is a revival of an idea that was expressed by Newton in effect, although he described the entity as an aether. It is shown that the only feasible candidate for this purpose is the so-called galactic cosmic radiation and that this is not such an unreasonable proposal as it may seem to be at first glance. Some time is spent in providing evidence that the suggestion is not only a possibility but rather a logical necessity, if only by leaving little room for any alternative. An attempt is made to anticipate and answer the many objections that are likely to be made to my thesis and this is followed by an account of the changes in atomic theory and cosmology that could result from my ideas - without disregarding observational constraints - in order to demonstrate the potential of the revised approach that my book offers. The contents terminate with a series of Appendices dealing with miscellaneous but significant aspects of my subject.
Questioning Gravity (C) 1989 by Arthur Wilkinson
223 pages, hardback, 5.75 x 8.75-inches. ISBN1-85421-072-6
£10 plus postage (UK £1 Europe £3.00; USA £4.50;
World £5.00)
Payment on UK Pounds Sterling only and drawn on a UK bank.
Cheques payable to:
Mr Arthur Wilkinson
51 Calgary Drive
Lower Wick
Worcester WR2 4DW
United Kingdom
(Sorry, no email, phone or fax).
Designed by Knowledge Computing on behalf of Arthur Wilkinson