1
New Theories / What is non-space and can an absolute Vacuum exist?
« on: 29/10/2009 12:45:29 »
There is a review of Goodfellow's paper "Can Gravity be Induced".
First I invite you to read Goodfellow's paper and "review". He proposes an Perpetuum Mobile as a source of the Sun's energy! First the matter falls into the Sun’s empty interior after that all solar plasma jumps back and the process repeats; This closed cycle is a source of the Sun’s energy: it is the violation of energy conservation laws. Goodfellow’s “solar model” do not use any kind of fuel as source of the Sun’s energy; In his imagination the energy appears from “nothing” in the closed GRAVAC cycle.
This "paper" is a free fantasy only; I don't found any logical reasoning in Goodfellow's writhings. It is a collection of propositions that appears from “nothing”, therefore it is not a physical paper. According to Goodfellow's fantasies, the Sun's nuclear fusion and pressure are able to separate protons in one camp and electrons in other camp! Author wrote: "It is significant that electrons and protons can organize into separate camps, because like particles of the same charge repel one another".
Such processes are forbidden by conservation laws, the Pauli exclusion principle ets. Electrons and protons are fermions, therefore the Pauli principle forbids to electrons and protons to "organize into separate camps", electrons with electrons, and protons with protons. Physicists never observed experimentally "that electrons and protons can organize into separate camps". And all his paper contains such fantasies only.
I have found that the author is not able even to copy correctly a sentence from textbook. For example he quotes Gamov’s book, page 138: “The electromagnetic potential of a given quantity of mass in a plasma state is 1 X 10 to the 40th times stronger(1) than its gravitational potential.” While Gamov wrote in the same page 138: - the ratio of the two forces is 10^40. You see, Goodfellow is not able even to copy correctly a sentence from a textbook. It is physically incorrect and erroneous to compare the potentials (of a given quantity of mass) of gravitation and electromagnetism, we must compare the ratio of two forces. (Especially because plasma is electrically neutral.)
My theory is totally different concerning Goodfellow’s theory. There is coincidence for words “absolute vacuum” only. However, my notion of “absolute vacuum” has different properties concerning Goodfellow’s notion. I develop the Descartes notion of “absolute vacuum”. Therefore I have nothing to do with Goodfellow’s proofs of authorship. Besides Goodfellow’s paper is not a physical paper; he must show his “proofs of authorship” to science fiction writers which use his “absolute vacuum” inside of stars. However, even science fiction writers don’t needs in Goodfellow’s "theory" because the ideas about "Empty Sun" and "Flow Space gravitation" were proposed by Huygens, Riemann and Newton about 400 years ago.
About Goodfellow’s proofs: criminals are able to prepare the false passports, documents, notarial records and even money. Criminals can prepare a lot of the high quality false sealed letters during some days and 500$. Then we will, in front of a paper expert, a Russian translator, two witnesses and a notary, open all these letters. I can prove mathematically that it is a deceive; therefore I do not believe it.
First I invite you to read Goodfellow's paper and "review". He proposes an Perpetuum Mobile as a source of the Sun's energy! First the matter falls into the Sun’s empty interior after that all solar plasma jumps back and the process repeats; This closed cycle is a source of the Sun’s energy: it is the violation of energy conservation laws. Goodfellow’s “solar model” do not use any kind of fuel as source of the Sun’s energy; In his imagination the energy appears from “nothing” in the closed GRAVAC cycle.
This "paper" is a free fantasy only; I don't found any logical reasoning in Goodfellow's writhings. It is a collection of propositions that appears from “nothing”, therefore it is not a physical paper. According to Goodfellow's fantasies, the Sun's nuclear fusion and pressure are able to separate protons in one camp and electrons in other camp! Author wrote: "It is significant that electrons and protons can organize into separate camps, because like particles of the same charge repel one another".
Such processes are forbidden by conservation laws, the Pauli exclusion principle ets. Electrons and protons are fermions, therefore the Pauli principle forbids to electrons and protons to "organize into separate camps", electrons with electrons, and protons with protons. Physicists never observed experimentally "that electrons and protons can organize into separate camps". And all his paper contains such fantasies only.
I have found that the author is not able even to copy correctly a sentence from textbook. For example he quotes Gamov’s book, page 138: “The electromagnetic potential of a given quantity of mass in a plasma state is 1 X 10 to the 40th times stronger(1) than its gravitational potential.” While Gamov wrote in the same page 138: - the ratio of the two forces is 10^40. You see, Goodfellow is not able even to copy correctly a sentence from a textbook. It is physically incorrect and erroneous to compare the potentials (of a given quantity of mass) of gravitation and electromagnetism, we must compare the ratio of two forces. (Especially because plasma is electrically neutral.)
My theory is totally different concerning Goodfellow’s theory. There is coincidence for words “absolute vacuum” only. However, my notion of “absolute vacuum” has different properties concerning Goodfellow’s notion. I develop the Descartes notion of “absolute vacuum”. Therefore I have nothing to do with Goodfellow’s proofs of authorship. Besides Goodfellow’s paper is not a physical paper; he must show his “proofs of authorship” to science fiction writers which use his “absolute vacuum” inside of stars. However, even science fiction writers don’t needs in Goodfellow’s "theory" because the ideas about "Empty Sun" and "Flow Space gravitation" were proposed by Huygens, Riemann and Newton about 400 years ago.
About Goodfellow’s proofs: criminals are able to prepare the false passports, documents, notarial records and even money. Criminals can prepare a lot of the high quality false sealed letters during some days and 500$. Then we will, in front of a paper expert, a Russian translator, two witnesses and a notary, open all these letters. I can prove mathematically that it is a deceive; therefore I do not believe it.