If you agree with Einstein on gravity?

Question

then why would 2 stars orbiting each other not gain energy? If gravity traveled at the speed of light (sol) they would gain energy because of the delay in the sol. Draw a picture if you don't see it. This violates the law of conservation of energy. What is your answer? Newton calculated the orbits of all the planet using instantaneous gravity, and so far none have been lost.

But Einstein says gravity travels at the speed of light. You agree with Newton and so do I. But you need to prove it as I did, or a famous physicist did many years ago.

Frink, you are jumping trough a lot of hoops to make gravity instantaneous. And (curvature around the Sun is constant and doesn't require any "transmission" of force. Changes in that curvature travel at c.) of course cannot possibly explain a binary star system. If gravity is instantaneous it becomes very simple. Anyone that challenges Einstein physics is thrown out as a heretic so there can be no reasoning or arguments. Curvature of space is much worse at explaining gravity than a force is. And aberration of starlight make no sense with SR, perfect sense with the aether.

A sad 100 years of physics.
http://www.ldolphin.org/vanFlandern/gravityspeed.html

Gravitomagnetism is an unproven theory. Its funny how some will use nonsense to prove their untenable position. The simple eloquent answer is that gravity is instantaneous.

April 20, 2004: NASA's Gravity Probe B spacecraft left Earth today in search of a force of nature, long suspected but never proven: gravitomagnetism.

Answer 1

In terms of forces, the effects of gravity travel at the speed of light, but planets are attracted to the instantaneous position of the Sun, not its former position due to the effects of gravitomagnetism. So in a stable low energy orbital system, GR gravity behaves as if the force was instantaneous, but it is not.

We hardly ever talk about gravitomagnetism because force is not the typical interpretation of GR. The typical interpretation of GR is curvature, and the curvature around the Sun is constant and doesn't require any "transmission" of force. Changes in that curvature travel at c.

None of this matters to you, of course, because you have it all figured out already, no study required apparently.

Answer 2

If you look deeper into the system, I am sure you will find that net energy gain or loss equals zero. If you only look superficially at the kinetic energy of the stars through spacetime, their respective velocities may be increasing as their orbits decrease around each other, but their rotations are also affected causing other changes in other aspects of their kinetic energy. Plus, the closer two orbiting bodies get to each other, the less their potential energy is relative to each other compensating for the increase in their kinetic energy. etc etc
Bottom line, if you look at only a couple aspects of any system, you can find what appear to be things which violate the law of conservation of energy. Whereas, if you look at the full, complete system, the law is not violated.
And, even newton himself admitted he came up with equations and formulae that could be used to describe the effects of gravity on objects, but he never wanted to attempt to explain what gravity was or how it worked or manifested itself in spacetime. That's what Einstein tackled giving credit and thanks to Newton.
Something comes to mind I once saw or read about when Newton's equations were applied to the observed perturbations in the orbit of Mercury, they suggested another planet orbiting between Mercury and the sun comes to mind. Only when Einstein realised gravity, like everything else, being limited to c and not instantaneous, and applied his equations from his General Theory did the calculated result coincide with observed data.

Answer 3

Gravity IS instantaneous and two stars orbiting each other are not accelerating relative to one another therefore exhibit perfect conservation of energy. Forget the picture, do the math. The equation for the force of gravity does not include time.

And tiger is an idiot too. It's aerodynamics that said bees couldn't fly and that math problem was fixed years ago. It's the LAW of gravity.

Answer 4

There are diasagreements corncerning Gravity mechanisms.
One basic Model of the mechanism of Gravitation between mass structure is the Ricardo Carezani relativity model out lined in His 'Theory of Autodynamics' .
This mechanism of gravity is base on the basic particle of the Universe as being the instrument of gravity.

If stars are Gaining Energy ,it simply means that they are gaining and increasing in mass and volume.

Some stars like the Sun Lose mass in the form of radiation. If it gains more mass than it loses,than the Sun's Mass is in continual increase.

Einstein in His special theory of Relativity indicates that at Certain velocity values any moving mass structure spontaneously increases depending on the velocity that the mass is moving.
Hence there must be some correlation Between Ricardo Carezani Theory of Relativity and Einstein's Relativity Theories.

Answer 5

You=retard

Gravity doesn't travel at the speed of light. Also they wouldn't gain energy just by orbiting, pick up a correct text book

Answer 6

Well according to the laws of gravity, bees should not be able to fly, but they do. There's a prime example of why gravity is more of a general rule than a law.

Answer 7

you just dont understand the whole thing... im sure its really complicated, but it is proven