0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Your equation predicts the same orbital velocity for the Sun (or sufficiently Sun-like star), regardless of where it happens to be in the Milky Way.
Let's see, 75% of the astrophysicists in the English-speaking universities have found no fault with the math, but you think it is wrong.....Hmmmm.
spherical dilation pit
Exactly. It varies by the mass (time dilation) of the body rather than the distance.
I have my own domains and websites and track my own stats relative to my mailings to different groups. So go stuff it. I don't put up with AH's who call me a liar. Look what a damn fool you have made of yourself so far today. Nasty minded, vicious, Idiot
Then your model doesn't match the data. Didn't you see the chart I linked?
you can still just learn real physics and further your understanding of the universe that way.
anyone who implies "light years" is a measure of time plainly doesn't understand cosmology
It does match the data.
Didn't you see the chart in my paper?
Your model is explained by a dark matter halo that doesn't exist.
You said that the orbital speeds in your model don't change with distance,
Has any such observation been made? The fact that you are using different equations for stars and planets is also suspect. Why can't one equation work for them all?
Why can't one equation work for them all?
A potential problem with that would be finding an accurate distribution of mass within the Milky Way.
For anyone who happens to know, can orbital velocity in a galactic disk be calculated purely from the mass within the galactic orbit of the star?