Obi-Wan Kenobi said that strength holds the galaxy together. The same can be said about gravity. The fact is that gravity allows us to walk on the Earth, the Earth to revolve around the Sun, and the Sun to revolve around the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy. How to understand gravity? About this - in our article.

Let's say right away that you will not find here an unambiguously correct answer to the question "What is gravity." Because it just doesn't exist! Gravity is one of the most mysterious phenomena that scientists puzzle over and still cannot fully explain its nature.

There are many hypotheses and opinions. There are more than a dozen theories of gravity, alternative and classical. We will consider the most interesting, relevant and modern.

want more useful information and fresh news every day? Join us on telegram.

Gravity is a physical fundamental interaction

There are 4 fundamental interactions in physics. Thanks to them, the world is exactly the way it is. Gravity is one of these forces.

Fundamental Interactions:

• gravity;
• electromagnetism;
• strong interaction;
• weak interaction.

Gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces.

At the moment, the current theory describing gravity is GR (general relativity). It was proposed by Albert Einstein in 1915-1916.

However, we know that it is too early to talk about the ultimate truth. After all, several centuries before the advent of general relativity in physics, Newtonian theory, which was significantly expanded, dominated to describe gravity.

At the moment, it is impossible to explain and describe all issues related to gravity within the framework of general relativity.

Before Newton, it was widely believed that gravity on earth and celestial gravity were different things. It was believed that the planets move according to their own, different from earthly, ideal laws.

Newton discovered the law of universal gravitation in 1667. Of course, this law existed even during the dinosaurs and much earlier.

Ancient philosophers thought about the existence of gravity. Galileo experimentally calculated the acceleration of free fall on Earth, discovering that it is the same for bodies of any mass. Kepler studied the laws of motion celestial bodies.

Newton was able to formulate and generalize the results of observations. Here's what he got:

Two bodies are attracted to each other with a force called gravitational force or the force of gravity.

The formula for the force of attraction between bodies is:

G is the gravitational constant, m is the mass of the bodies, r is the distance between the centers of mass of the bodies.

What physical meaning gravitational constant? It is equal to the force with which bodies with masses of 1 kilogram each act on each other, being at a distance of 1 meter from each other.

According to Newton's theory, every object creates a gravitational field. The accuracy of Newton's law has been tested at distances of less than one centimeter. Of course, for small masses these forces are insignificant and can be neglected.

Newton's formula is applicable both for calculating the force of attraction of planets to the sun, and for small objects. We simply do not notice the force with which, say, the balls on the billiard table are attracted. Nevertheless, this force exists and can be calculated.

The force of attraction acts between any bodies in the universe. Its effect extends to any distance.

Newton's law of universal gravitation does not explain the nature of the force of attraction, but establishes quantitative patterns. Newton's theory does not contradict general relativity. It is quite sufficient for solving practical problems on the scale of the Earth and for calculating the motion of celestial bodies.

Gravity in General Relativity

Despite the fact that Newton's theory is quite applicable in practice, it has a number of shortcomings. The law of universal gravitation is a mathematical description, but does not give an idea of ​​the fundamental physical nature of things.

According to Newton, the force of attraction acts at any distance. And it works instantly. Considering that the fastest speed in the world is the speed of light, there is a discrepancy. How can gravity act instantaneously at any distance, when light needs not an instant, but several seconds or even years to overcome them?

Within the framework of general relativity, gravity is considered not as a force that acts on bodies, but as a curvature of space and time under the influence of mass. Thus, gravity is not a force interaction.

What is the effect of gravity? Let's try to describe it using an analogy.

Imagine space as an elastic sheet. If you put a light tennis ball on it, the surface will remain flat. But if you put a heavy weight next to the ball, it will push a hole in the surface, and the ball will begin to roll towards the large and heavy weight. This is "gravity".

By the way! For our readers there is now a 10% discount on

Discovery of gravitational waves

Gravitational waves were predicted by Albert Einstein back in 1916, but they were only discovered a hundred years later, in 2015.

What are gravitational waves? Let's draw an analogy again. If you throw a stone into calm water, circles will go on the surface of the water from the place of its fall. Gravitational waves are the same ripples, perturbations. Only not on the water, but in the world space-time.

Instead of water - space-time, and instead of stone, say, a black hole. Any accelerated movement of mass generates a gravitational wave. If the bodies are in a state of free fall, the distance between them will change when a gravitational wave passes.

Since gravity is a very weak force, the detection of gravitational waves has been associated with great technical difficulties. Modern technologies made it possible to detect a burst of gravitational waves only from supermassive sources.

A suitable event for registering a gravitational wave is the merger of black holes. Unfortunately or fortunately, this happens quite rarely. Nevertheless, scientists managed to register a wave that literally rolled through the space of the Universe.

To register gravitational waves, a detector with a diameter of 4 kilometers was built. During the passage of the wave, oscillations of mirrors on suspensions in vacuum and the interference of light reflected from them were recorded.

Gravitational waves confirmed the validity of general relativity.

Gravity and elementary particles

In the standard model, certain elementary particles are responsible for each interaction. We can say that particles are carriers of interactions.

The graviton is responsible for gravity - a hypothetical massless particle with energy. By the way, in our separate material, read more about the Higgs boson and other elementary particles that made a lot of noise.

Finally, here are some interesting facts about gravity.

10 facts about gravity

1. To overcome the force of gravity of the Earth, the body must have a speed equal to 7.91 km / s. This is the first space velocity. It is enough for the body (for example, space probe) moved in orbit around the planet.
2. To escape the Earth's gravitational field, a spacecraft must have a speed of at least 11.2 km/s. This is the second space velocity.
3. Objects with the strongest gravity are black holes. Their gravity is so strong that they even attract light (photons).
4. You will not find the force of gravity in any equation of quantum mechanics. The fact is that when you try to include gravity in the equations, they lose their relevance. This is one of the most important problems in modern physics.
5. The word gravity comes from the Latin “gravis”, which means “heavy”.
6. The more massive the object, the stronger the gravity. If a person who weighs 60 kilograms on Earth weighs on Jupiter, the scales will show 142 kilograms.
7. NASA scientists are trying to develop a gravitational beam that will allow objects to be moved contactlessly, overcoming the force of gravity.
8. Astronauts in orbit also experience gravity. More specifically, microgravity. They seem to fall endlessly along with the ship in which they are.
9. Gravity always attracts and never repels.
10. A tennis ball-sized black hole pulls objects with the same force as our planet.

Now you know the definition of gravity and you can say what formula is used to calculate the force of attraction. If the granite of science is holding you down harder than gravity, contact our student service. We will help you learn easily under the heaviest workloads!

Despite the fact that gravity is the weakest interaction between objects in the universe, its importance in physics and astronomy is enormous, since it is able to influence physical objects at any distance in space.

If you are fond of astronomy, you probably thought about the question of what is such a concept as gravity or the law of universal gravitation. Gravity is a universal fundamental interaction between all objects in the Universe.

The discovery of the law of gravity is attributed to the famous English physicist Isaac Newton. Probably, many of you know the story of an apple that fell on the head of a famous scientist. Nevertheless, if you look deep into history, you can see that the presence of gravity was thought about long before his era by philosophers and scientists of antiquity, for example, Epicurus. Nevertheless, it was Newton who first described the gravitational interaction between physical bodies within the framework of classical mechanics. His theory was developed by another famous scientist - Albert Einstein, who in his general theory of relativity more accurately described the influence of gravity in space, as well as its role in the space-time continuum.

Newton's law of gravitation says that the force gravitational attraction between two points of mass separated by distance is inversely proportional to the square of the distance and directly proportional to both masses. The force of gravity is long-range. That is, regardless of how a body with mass moves, in classical mechanics its gravitational potential will depend purely on the position of this object at a given time. The greater the mass of an object, the greater its gravitational field - the more powerful the gravitational force it has. Such cosmic objects as galaxies, stars and planets have the greatest force of attraction and, accordingly, rather strong gravitational fields.

Gravity fields

Earth's gravitational field

The gravitational field is the distance within which the gravitational interaction between objects in the Universe takes place. The greater the mass of an object, the stronger its gravitational field - the more noticeable its impact on other physical bodies within a certain space. The gravitational field of an object is potentially. The essence of the previous statement is that if we introduce the potential energy of attraction between two bodies, then it will not change after the latter move along a closed contour. From here emerges another famous law of conservation of the sum of potential and kinetic energy in a closed circuit.

In the material world, the gravitational field is of great importance. It is possessed by all material objects in the Universe that have mass. The gravitational field can influence not only matter, but also energy. It is due to the influence of gravitational fields of such large space objects, like black holes, quasars and supermassive stars, solar systems, galaxies and other astronomical clusters are formed, which are characterized by a logical structure.

The latest scientific data show that the famous effect of the expansion of the Universe is also based on the laws of gravitational interaction. In particular, the expansion of the Universe is facilitated by powerful gravitational fields, both small and its largest objects.

Gravitational radiation in a binary system

Gravitational radiation or gravitational wave is a term first introduced into physics and cosmology by the famous scientist Albert Einstein. Gravitational radiation in the theory of gravity is generated by the movement of material objects with variable acceleration. During the acceleration of the object, the gravitational wave, as it were, “breaks away” from it, which leads to fluctuations in the gravitational field in the surrounding space. This is called the gravitational wave effect.

Although gravitational waves are predicted by Einstein's general theory of relativity, as well as other theories of gravity, they have never been directly detected. This is primarily due to their extreme smallness. However, there is circumstantial evidence in astronomy that can confirm this effect. Thus, the effect of a gravitational wave can be observed on the example of the approach of binary stars. Observations confirm that the rate of approach of binary stars to some extent depends on the loss of energy of these space objects, which is presumably spent on gravitational radiation. Scientists will be able to reliably confirm this hypothesis in the near future with the help of a new generation of Advanced LIGO and VIRGO telescopes.

In modern physics, there are two concepts of mechanics: classical and quantum. Quantum mechanics was derived relatively recently and is fundamentally different from classical mechanics. In quantum mechanics, objects (quanta) have no definite positions and velocities, everything here is based on probability. That is, an object can occupy a certain place in space at a certain point in time. It is impossible to reliably determine where he will move next, but only with a high degree of probability.

An interesting effect of gravity is that it can bend the space-time continuum. Einstein's theory says that in the space around a bunch of energy or any material substance, space-time is curved. Accordingly, the trajectory of particles that fall under the influence of the gravitational field of this substance changes, which makes it possible to predict the trajectory of their movement with a high degree of probability.

Theories of gravity

Today, scientists know over a dozen different theories of gravity. They are divided into classical and alternative theories. Most famous representative The first is the classical theory of gravity by Isaac Newton, which was invented by the famous British physicist back in 1666. Its essence lies in the fact that a massive body in mechanics generates a gravitational field around itself, which attracts smaller objects to itself. In turn, the latter also have a gravitational field, like any other material objects in the Universe.

The next popular theory of gravity was invented by the world famous German scientist Albert Einstein at the beginning of the 20th century. Einstein managed to more accurately describe gravity as a phenomenon, and also to explain its action not only in classical mechanics, but also in quantum world. His general theory of relativity describes the ability of such a force as gravity to influence the space-time continuum, as well as the trajectory of elementary particles in space.

Among the alternative theories of gravity, perhaps the most attention deserves the relativistic theory, which was invented by our compatriot, the famous physicist A.A. Logunov. Unlike Einstein, Logunov argued that gravity is not a geometric, but a real, fairly strong physical force field. Among the alternative theories of gravity, scalar, bimetric, quasi-linear and others are also known.

1. For people who have been in space and returned to Earth, it is quite difficult at first to get used to the force of the gravitational influence of our planet. Sometimes it takes several weeks.
2. It has been proven that the human body in a state of weightlessness can lose up to 1% of bone marrow mass per month.
3. Among the planets, Mars has the least force of attraction in the solar system, and Jupiter has the greatest.
4. The well-known salmonella bacteria, which are the cause of intestinal diseases, behave more actively in a state of weightlessness and can cause much more harm to the human body.
5. Among all known astronomical objects in the universe, black holes have the greatest gravitational force. A black hole the size of a golf ball could have the same gravitational force as our entire planet.
6. The force of gravity on Earth is not the same in all corners of our planet. For example, in the Hudson Bay region of Canada, it is lower than in other regions of the globe.

By what law are you going to hang me?
- And we hang everyone according to one law - the law of universal gravitation.

Law of gravity

The phenomenon of gravity is the law of universal gravitation. Two bodies act on each other with a force that is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them and directly proportional to the product of their masses.

Mathematically, we can express this great law by the formula

Gravity acts over vast distances in the universe. But Newton argued that all objects are mutually attracted. Is it true that any two objects attract each other? Just imagine, it is known that the Earth attracts you sitting on a chair. But have you ever thought about the fact that a computer and a mouse attract each other? Or a pencil and pen on the table? In this case, we substitute the mass of the pen, the mass of the pencil into the formula, divide by the square of the distance between them, taking into account the gravitational constant, we obtain the force of their mutual attraction. But, it will come out so small (due to the small masses of the pen and pencil) that we do not feel its presence. Another thing is when it comes to the Earth and a chair, or the Sun and the Earth. The masses are significant, which means that we can already evaluate the effect of force.

Let's think about free fall acceleration. This is the operation of the law of attraction. Under the action of a force, the body changes speed the slower, the greater the mass. As a result, all bodies fall to the Earth with the same acceleration.

What is the cause of this invisible unique power? To date, the existence of a gravitational field is known and proven. You can learn more about the nature of the gravitational field in additional material Topics.

Think about what gravity is. Where is it from? What does it represent? After all, it cannot be that the planet looks at the Sun, sees how far it is removed, calculates the inverse square of the distance in accordance with this law?

Direction of gravity

There are two bodies, let's say body A and B. Body A attracts body B. The force with which body A acts begins on body B and is directed towards body A. That is, it "takes" body B and pulls it towards itself. Body B "does" the same thing with body A.

Every body is attracted by the earth. The earth "takes" the body and pulls it towards its center. Therefore, this force will always be directed vertically downwards, and it is applied from the center of gravity of the body, it is called gravity.

The main thing to remember

Some methods of geological exploration, tide prediction and in recent times calculation of the movement of artificial satellites and interplanetary stations. Early calculation of the position of the planets.

Can we set up such an experiment ourselves, and not guess whether planets, objects are attracted?

Such a direct experience made Cavendish (Henry Cavendish (1731-1810) - English physicist and chemist) using the device shown in the figure. The idea was to hang a rod with two balls on a very thin quartz thread and then bring two large lead balls to the side of them. The attraction of the balls will twist the thread slightly - slightly, because the forces of attraction between ordinary objects are very weak. With the help of such an instrument, Cavendish was able to directly measure the force, distance and magnitude of both masses and, thus, determine gravitational constant G.

The unique discovery of the gravitational constant G, which characterizes the gravitational field in space, made it possible to determine the mass of the Earth, the Sun and other celestial bodies. Therefore, Cavendish called his experience "weighing the Earth."

Interestingly, the various laws of physics have some common features. Let's turn to the laws of electricity (Coulomb force). Electric forces are also inversely proportional to the square of the distance, but already between the charges, and the thought involuntarily arises that this pattern has a deep meaning. Until now, no one has been able to present gravity and electricity as two different manifestations of the same essence.

The force here also varies inversely with the square of the distance, but the difference in the magnitude of electric forces and gravitational forces is striking. In trying to establish the common nature of gravity and electricity, we find such a superiority of electric forces over gravitational forces that it is difficult to believe that both have the same source. How can you say that one is stronger than the other? After all, it all depends on what is the mass and what is the charge. Arguing about how strong gravity acts, you have no right to say: "Let's take a mass of such and such a size," because you choose it yourself. But if we take what Nature herself offers us (her own numbers and measures, which have nothing to do with our inches, years, our measures), then we can compare. We will take an elementary charged particle, such as, for example, an electron. Two elementary particles, two electrons, due to the electric charge repel each other with a force inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them, and due to gravity they are attracted to each other again with a force inversely proportional to the square of the distance.

Question: What is the ratio of gravitational force to electrical force? Gravitation is related to electrical repulsion as one is to a number with 42 zeros. This is deeply puzzling. Where could such a huge number come from?

People are looking for this huge factor in other natural phenomena. They go through all sorts big numbers, and if you need a large number, why not take, say, the ratio of the diameter of the universe to the diameter of a proton - surprisingly, this is also a number with 42 zeros. And they say: maybe this coefficient is equal to the ratio of the diameter of the proton to the diameter of the universe? This is an interesting thought, but as the universe gradually expands, the constant of gravity must also change. Although this hypothesis has not yet been refuted, we do not have any evidence in its favor. On the contrary, some evidence suggests that the constant of gravity did not change in this way. This huge number remains a mystery to this day.

Einstein had to modify the laws of gravity in accordance with the principles of relativity. The first of these principles says that the distance x cannot be overcome instantly, while according to Newton's theory, forces act instantly. Einstein had to change Newton's laws. These changes, refinements are very small. One of them is this: since light has energy, energy is equivalent to mass, and all masses attract, light also attracts and, therefore, passing by the Sun, must be deflected. This is how it actually happens. The force of gravity is also slightly modified in Einstein's theory. But this very slight change in the law of gravity is just enough to explain some of the apparent irregularities in Mercury's motion.

Physical phenomena in the microcosm are subject to other laws than phenomena in the world of large scales. The question arises: how does gravity manifest itself in a world of small scales? The quantum theory of gravity will answer it. But quantum theory there is no gravity yet. People have not yet been very successful in creating a theory of gravity that is fully consistent with quantum mechanical principles and with the uncertainty principle.

I decided, to the best of my ability and ability, to focus on lighting in more detail. scientific heritage academician Nikolai Viktorovich Levashov, because I see that today his works are not yet in the demand that they should be in a society of truly free and reasonable people. people still do not understand the value and importance of his books and articles, because they don't realize the extent of the deception in which we have been living for the last couple of centuries; do not understand that the information about nature, which we consider familiar and therefore true, is 100% false; and they are deliberately imposed on us in order to hide the truth and prevent us from developing in the right direction ...

Law of gravity

Why do we need to deal with this gravity? Is there anything else we don't know about her? What are you! We already know a lot about gravity! For example, Wikipedia kindly informs us that « gravity (attraction, worldwide, gravity) (from lat. gravitas - "gravity") - a universal fundamental interaction between all material bodies. In the approximation of low speeds and weak gravitational interaction, it is described by Newton's theory of gravitation, in the general case it is described by Einstein's general theory of relativity ... " Those. simply put, this Internet chatterbox says that gravity is the interaction between all material bodies, and even more simply - mutual attraction material bodies to each other.

We owe the appearance of such an opinion to Comrade. Isaac Newton, credited with the discovery in 1687 "Law of gravity", according to which all bodies are allegedly attracted to each other in proportion to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. I am glad that Comrade. Isaac Newton is described in Pedia as a highly educated scientist, unlike Comrade. who is credited with discovering electricity…

It is interesting to look at the dimension of the "Force of Attraction" or "Force of Gravity", which follows from Com. Isaac Newton, having the following form: F=m 1 *m2 /r2

The numerator is the product of the masses of the two bodies. This gives the dimension of "kilograms squared" - kg 2. The denominator is "distance" squared, i.e. square meters - m 2. But strength is not measured in strange kg 2 / m 2, and in no less strange kg * m / s 2! It turns out to be a mismatch. To remove it, the "scientists" came up with a coefficient, the so-called. "gravitational constant" G , equal to approximately 6.67545×10 −11 m³/(kg s²). If we now multiply everything, we get the correct dimension of "Gravity" in kg * m / s 2, and this abracadabra is called in physics "newton", i.e. force in today's physics is measured in "".

Interesting: what physical meaning has a coefficient G , for something reducing the result in 600 billion times? None! "Scientists" called it "proportionality coefficient". And they brought it in for fit dimension and result under the most desired! This is the kind of science we have today ... It should be noted that, in order to confuse scientists and hide contradictions, measurement systems have changed several times in physics - the so-called. "systems of units". Here are the names of some of them, replacing each other, as the need to create the next disguises arose: MTS, MKGSS, SGS, SI ...

It would be interesting to ask Comrade. Isaac: a how did he guess that there is a natural process of attracting bodies to each other? How did he guess that the “Force of Attraction” is proportional precisely to the product of the masses of two bodies, and not to their sum or difference? How he so successfully comprehended that this Force is inversely proportional precisely to the square of the distance between the bodies, and not to the cube, doubling or fractional degree? Where at comrade appeared such inexplicable guesses 350 years ago? After all, he did not conduct any experiments in this area! And, if you believe the traditional version of history, in those days even the rulers were not yet completely even, but here such an inexplicable, simply fantastic insight! Where?

Yes out of nowhere! Tov. Isaac knew nothing of the kind, nor did he investigate anything of the kind, and did not open. Why? Because in reality the physical process " attraction tel" to each other does not exist, and, accordingly, there is no Law that would describe this process (this will be convincingly proved below)! In reality, Comrade Newton in our indistinct, just attributed the discovery of the law of "Universal gravitation", simultaneously awarding him the title of "one of the founders of classical physics"; in the same way as Comrade was attributed at one time. bene Franklin, which had 2 classes education. In “Medieval Europe”, this did not happen: there was a lot of tension not only with the sciences, but simply with life ...

But, fortunately for us, at the end of the last century, the Russian scientist Nikolai Levashov wrote several books in which he gave "alphabet and grammar" undistorted knowledge; returned to earthlings the previously destroyed scientific paradigm, with the help of which easily explained almost all the "unsolvable" mysteries of earthly nature; explained the fundamentals of the structure of the Universe; showed under what conditions on all planets on which necessary and sufficient conditions appear, Life- living matter. He explained what kind of matter can be considered alive, and what physical meaning natural process called life". Then he explained when and under what conditions "living matter" acquires Intelligence, i.e. realizes its existence - becomes intelligent. Nikolai Viktorovich Levashov conveyed to people in his books and films very much undistorted knowledge. He also explained what "gravity", where does it come from, how does it work, what is its actual physical meaning. Most of all this is written in books and. And now let's deal with the "Law of Universal Gravitation" ...

The "Law of Gravity" is a hoax!

Why do I so boldly and confidently criticize physics, the "discovery" of Comrade. Isaac Newton and the "great" "Law of Universal Gravitation" itself? Yes, because this “Law” is a fiction! Deception! Fiction! A worldwide scam to lead earthly science to a dead end! The same scam with the same goals as the notorious "Theory of Relativity" comrade. Einstein.

Proof of? If you please, here they are: very precise, strict and convincing. They were splendidly described by the author O.Kh. Derevensky in his wonderful article. Due to the fact that the article is quite voluminous, I will give here a very short version some evidence of the falsity of the "Law of Universal Gravity", and citizens who are interested in the details will read the rest for themselves.

1. In our solar system only the planets and the Moon, the Earth's satellite, have gravity. The satellites of the other planets, and there are more than six dozen of them, do not have gravity! This information is completely open, but not advertised by "scientific" people, because it is inexplicable from the point of view of their "science". Those. b about most of our objects solar system They do not have gravity - they do not attract each other! And this completely refutes the "Law of General Gravity".

2. Henry Cavendish Experience by attracting massive blanks to each other is considered irrefutable proof of the presence of attraction between bodies. However, despite its simplicity, this experience is not openly reproduced anywhere. Apparently, because it does not give the effect that some people once announced. Those. today, with the possibility of strict verification, experience does not show any attraction between bodies!

3. Conclusion artificial satellite into orbit around the asteroid. In the middle of February 2000 the Americans drove a space probe NEAR close enough to the asteroid Eros, leveled the speeds and began to wait for the capture of the probe by the gravity of Eros, i.e. when the satellite is gently attracted by the gravity of the asteroid.

But for some reason the first date didn't work out. The second and subsequent attempts to surrender to Eros had exactly the same effect: Eros did not want to attract the American probe NEAR, and without engine work, the probe did not stay near Eros . This space date ended in nothing. Those. no attraction between probe with mass 805 kg and an asteroid weighing over 6 trillion tons could not be found.

Here it is impossible not to note the inexplicable stubbornness of the Americans from NASA, because the Russian scientist Nikolai Levashov, living at that time in the USA, which he then considered a completely normal country, wrote, translated into English language and published in 1994 year of his famous book, in which he explained everything that NASA specialists needed to know in order to make their probe NEAR did not hang out as a useless piece of iron in space, but brought at least some benefit to society. But, apparently, exorbitant self-conceit played a trick on the “scientists” there.

4. Next try repeat the erotic experiment with the asteroid Japanese. They chose an asteroid called Itokawa, and sent on May 9 2003 year to him a probe called ("Falcon"). In September 2005 year, the probe approached the asteroid at a distance of 20 km.

Taking into account the experience of the “stupid Americans”, the smart Japanese equipped their probe with several engines and an autonomous short-range navigation system with laser rangefinders, so that it could approach the asteroid and move around it automatically, without the participation of ground operators. “The first number of this program was a comedy stunt with the landing of a small research robot on the surface of an asteroid. The probe descended to the calculated height and carefully dropped the robot, which was supposed to slowly and smoothly fall to the surface. But... it didn't fall. Slow and smooth he got carried away somewhere far away from the asteroid. There he went missing ... The next number of the program turned out to be, again, a comedy trick with a short landing of the probe on the surface "to take a soil sample." He came out comedy because, to ensure best work laser rangefinders, a reflective marker ball was dropped onto the surface of the asteroid. There were no engines on this ball either, and ... in short, there was no ball in the right place ... So, did the Japanese Sokol land on Itokawa, and what did he do on it if he sat down, science does not know ... "Conclusion: the Japanese miracle of Hayabusa is not was able to discover no attraction between probe ground 510 kg and an asteroid with mass 35 000 tons.

Separately, I would like to note that an exhaustive explanation of the nature of gravity by a Russian scientist Nikolai Levashov gave in his book, which he first published in 2002 year - almost a year and a half before the start of the Japanese "Falcon". And, despite this, the Japanese "scientists" followed exactly in the footsteps of their American colleagues and carefully repeated all their mistakes, including landing. Here is such an interesting continuity of "scientific thinking" ...

5. Where do hot flashes come from? A very interesting phenomenon described in the literature, to put it mildly, is not entirely correct. “... There are textbooks on physics, where it is written what should be - in accordance with the "law of universal gravitation". There are also textbooks oceanography, where it is written what they are, tides, in fact.

If the law of universal gravitation operates here, and ocean water is attracted, including to the Sun and the Moon, then the "physical" and "oceanographic" patterns of the tides must coincide. So do they match or not? It turns out that to say that they do not match is to say nothing. Because the "physical" and "oceanographic" pictures have no relationship at all nothing in common... The actual picture of tidal phenomena is so different from the theoretical one - both qualitatively and quantitatively - that on the basis of such a theory, tides can be predicted impossible. Yes, no one is trying to do it. Not crazy after all. They do this: for each port or other point of interest, the ocean level dynamics is modeled by the sum of oscillations with amplitudes and phases that are found purely empirically. And then they extrapolate this sum of fluctuations forward - so you get the pre-calculations. The captains of the ships are happy - well, okay! .. ”This all means that our earthly tides are also do not obey"Law of universal gravitation".

What is gravity really

The true nature of gravity for the first time in recent history clearly described by Academician Nikolai Levashov in a fundamental scientific work. In order for the reader to better understand what has been written regarding gravity, I will give a little preliminary explanation.

The space around us is not empty. It is all completely filled with many different matters, which Academician N.V. Levashov named "first matter". Previously, scientists called all this riot of matter "ether" and even received convincing evidence of its existence (the famous experiments of Dayton Miller, described in the article by Nikolai Levashov "Theory of the Universe and Objective Reality"). Modern "scientists" have gone much further and now they "ether" called "dark matter". Enormous progress! Some matters in the "ether" interact with each other to one degree or another, some do not. And some primary matter begin to interact with each other, getting into the changed external conditions in certain curvatures of space (heterogeneities).

Curvature of space appears as a result of various explosions, including "supernova explosions". « When a supernova explodes, fluctuations in the dimensionality of space occur, similar to the waves that appear on the surface of water after a stone is thrown. The masses of matter ejected during the explosion fill these inhomogeneities in the dimensionality of the space around the star. From these masses of matter, planets ( and ) begin to form ... "

Those. planets are not formed from space debris, as modern “scientists” for some reason claim, but are synthesized from the matter of stars and other primary matters that begin to interact with each other in suitable inhomogeneities of space and form the so-called. "hybrid matter". It is from these “hybrid matters” that the planets and everything else in our space are formed. our planet, just like the rest of the planets, is not just a "piece of stone", but a very complex system consisting of several spheres nested one into another (see). The densest sphere is called the "physically dense level" - this is what we see, the so-called. physical world. Second the density of the sphere is slightly bigger size- this is the so-called. "ethereal material level" of the planet. Third sphere - "astral material level". 4th the sphere is the "first mental level" of the planet. Fifth the sphere is the "second mental level" of the planet. And sixth the sphere is the "third mental level" of the planet.

Our planet should only be considered as the totality of these six spheres– six material levels of the planet nested one into another. Only in this case it is possible to get a complete picture of the structure and properties of the planet and the processes occurring in nature. The fact that we are not yet able to observe the processes taking place outside the physically dense sphere of our planet does not indicate that “there is nothing there”, but only that at present our sense organs are not adapted by nature for these purposes. And one more thing: our Universe, our planet Earth and everything else in our Universe is formed from seven various types of primary matter merged into six hybrid materials. And it is neither divine nor unique. This is just a qualitative structure of our Universe, due to the properties of the heterogeneity in which it was formed.

Let's continue: the planets are formed by the merger of the corresponding primary matter in the areas of space inhomogeneities that have properties and qualities suitable for this. But in these, as in all other regions of space, a huge number of primal matter(free forms of matter) of various types, not interacting or very weakly interacting with hybrid matters. Getting into the area of ​​heterogeneity, many of these primary matters are affected by this heterogeneity and rush to its center, in accordance with the gradient (difference) of space. And, if a planet has already formed in the center of this heterogeneity, then the primary matter, moving towards the center of heterogeneity (and the center of the planet), creates directional flow, which creates the so-called. gravitational field. And, accordingly, under gravity you and I need to understand the impact of the directed flow of primary matter on everything that is in its path. That is, to put it simply, gravity is pressure material objects to the surface of the planet by the flow of primary matter.

Is not it, reality is very different from the fictitious law of "mutual attraction", which supposedly exists everywhere for no clear reason. Reality is much more interesting, much more complex and much simpler at the same time. Therefore, the physics of real natural processes is much easier to understand than fictional ones. And the use of real knowledge leads to real discoveries and the effective use of these discoveries, and not to sucked from the finger.

antigravity

As an example of today's scientific profanity one can briefly analyze the "scientists" explanation of the fact that "rays of light are bent near large masses", and therefore we can see that it is closed to us by stars and planets.

Indeed, we can observe objects in the Cosmos that are hidden from us by other objects, but this phenomenon has nothing to do with the masses of objects, because the “universal” phenomenon does not exist, i.e. no stars, no planets NOT attract no rays to themselves and do not bend their trajectory! Why then are they "curved"? There is a very simple and convincing answer to this question: rays are not bent! They just do not spread in a straight line, as we are accustomed to understand, and in accordance with form of space. If we consider a beam passing near a large cosmic body, then we must keep in mind that the beam goes around this body, because it is forced to follow the curvature of space, as if along a road of the corresponding shape. And there is simply no other way for the beam. The beam cannot help but go around this body, because the space in this area has such a curved shape ... Small to what has been said.

Now, returning to antigravity, it becomes clear why Mankind can not manage to catch this nasty "anti-gravity" or achieve at least something of what the clever functionaries of the dream factory show us on TV. We are specifically forced for more than a hundred years, internal combustion engines or jet engines have been used almost everywhere, although they are very far from perfect both in terms of the principle of operation, and in design, and in terms of efficiency. We are specifically forced mine using various generators of cyclopean sizes, and then transmit this energy through wires, where b about most of it is scattered in space! We are specifically forced live the life of unreasonable beings, therefore we have no reason to be surprised that we do not succeed in anything sensible either in science, or in technology, or in economics, or in medicine, or in organization decent life society.

I will now give you a few examples of the creation and use of antigravity (aka levitation) in our lives. But these ways of achieving anti-gravity are most likely discovered by chance. And in order to consciously create a really useful device that implements antigravity, you need to know the real nature of the phenomenon of gravity, explore it, analyze and understand all its essence! Only then can something sensible, effective and really useful to society be created.

The most common anti-gravity device we have is balloon and many of its variations. If it is filled with warm air or a gas lighter than atmospheric gas mixture, then the ball will tend to fly up, and not fall down. This effect has been known to people for a very long time, but still does not have a complete explanation- one that would no longer give rise to new questions.

A short search on YouTube led to the discovery a large number videos that showcase real examples antigravity. I will list some of them here so that you can be sure that antigravity ( levitation) really exists, but ... so far none of the "scientists" has explained it, apparently, pride does not allow ...

Gravity is one of the most mysterious physical phenomena. No other phenomenon has been spoken about, written, dissertations defended, academic titles and Nobel Prizes like gravity.

Any ideas are historically conditioned. Time changes the tasks facing society, and this forces, as a rule, to change ideas about certain phenomena. The phenomenon of gravity is no exception. The understanding of gravity between the builders of the Egyptian pyramids and those of travelers in outer space cannot but differ.

2. Newtonian understanding of gravity

In Newtonian gravitational theory, gravity is in fact entirely associated with the force of gravity or the force of weight. According to Newton, the essence of gravity is that a force is applied to the body - gravity (in terms of the Earth, it is usually called the force of weight). The source of this power - another or other bodies. There is, in fact, no gravitational field. Gravity is a direct interaction between bodies. This interaction is determined by Newton's Law of Universal Gravity. There is no special gravitational space. The gravitational field is conditional and serves only for the convenience of calculations, there is no physics behind this concept.

In terrestrial conditions, for example, when calculating static structural loads, this is a convenient and visual representation.

3. Gravitational phenomena in the modern world

The modern world has gone far beyond the range of phenomena in which Newtonian gravitational ideas were formed. Already at the beginning of the last century, Albert Einstein drew attention to the fact that even the phenomenon in an ordinary elevator does not agree well with Newton's ideas. This, as well as a relativistic fad, led him to a new understanding of gravity, reflected in the so-called general theory relativity.

It is now generally accepted that general relativity is the gravitational theory of cosmological scales and relativistic motions. But on the scale of the macro- and mesoworld, i.e. in the field of terrestrial, planetary (celestial) mechanics and astronautics, general relativity does not make sense to use and this theory cannot give anything new. And if it does, then only corrections in some very high approximations. Therefore, we will focus on a more detailed consideration of Newtonian gravitational concepts.

One of the main phenomena that has been at the center of consideration of mechanics in recent decades has been the phenomenon of weightlessness. Of course, the phenomenon of weightlessness has occurred before. But it was short-lived and was not realized as some kind of special mechanical phenomenon. A stone falls from the Leaning Tower of Pisa, well, it falls. What weightlessness is here. But the development of astronautics brought the phenomenon of weightlessness to the fore, and its high significance was realized. Weightlessness is gradually entering the category of production and technological factors.

But turning to Newtonian mechanical concepts, we suddenly find that this concept does not actually exist in Newtonian mechanics. According to Newtonian concepts, gravity is related to gravity. But suddenly it turned out that this was not so at all. Let's show it.

Let's imagine a skydiver on a plane before throwing into the sky. He stands in front of a doorway and is in a gravitational field, he is affected by the force of weight. This is what Newton thinks. But now he takes a step outside the door. It is clear that the gravitational field has not changed. And the strength of the weight also could not change. But the skydiver went into a weightless state, and lost his weight, gravity suddenly disappeared. But after all, the gravitational field did not disappear, it remained the same as it was. Therefore, it is obvious that the weight inside the aircraft was not related to gravity.

It is sometimes said that the force of weight did not disappear at all, but a (fictitious) force of inertia appeared, which balanced the force of gravity, since the skydiver began to move faster. That is why the skydiver himself does not feel any force of weight.

That's right, in the reference system, for example, of a panel of judges placed on the ground, the skydiver is moving rapidly. But let's imagine that a photojournalist jumps out together with the skydiver, who films the flight and the actions of the skydiver. And in relation to this photographer, a skydiver can move up, down, can stand still. And where, then, is the notorious force of inertia associated with the accelerated movement of a parachutist? How can the real force, which supposedly is the force of gravity, be balanced by the fictitious force of inertia associated with acceleration, if acceleration can have a very different character depending on the observer, or even be absent? If we accept that the terrestrial judicial reference system is more “correct” than that of a photojournalist, then it is necessary to prove that judicial cameras, judicial watches or rangefinders are better than those of a photojournalist.

Since it is impossible to prove this, we have to admit that the forces of inertia are a fiction, and, therefore, the forces of gravity, the forces of weight and, in general, all gravitational forces, are fiction, they simply do not exist .. And the skydiver in free falling moves exactly free, i.e. without the influence of any forces on it (we neglect the influence of the atmosphere).

Then what happened to the skydiver when he took his step over the side of the plane? And he is not at all loaded itself as a mysterious fictitious force of inertia, balancing the force of gravity. No, on the contrary, he got rid of the only real force that acted on him. This force came from the support, from the floor of the aircraft. And when he freed himself from it, taking a step outside the plane, he became weightless, became free no forces are acting on it.

Thus, there are no gravitational forces. There are forces acting on a person, on a stone on the ground, on an astronaut during the active part of the flight from the side of the support. If the support is removed, the person or stone will become free, weightless. But the forces that act from the side of support on a person or a stone are not gravitational. These are ordinary elastic forces that are electrical or, more generally, electromagnetic in nature. And the human body (soles) or stone, in turn, have elasticity, and there will be a reaction force directed from the soles or stone to the support. And this force also has an electromagnetic nature. Where are the gravitational forces? We don't see them. They are not here.

Here is the central, main, fundamental statement that follows from the cosmic experience of mankind: no gravitational forces. Let's write it down in the biggest letters and start on this foundation to create new mechanics, the mechanics of the space age.

4. The nature of gravity in the light of the experience and ideas of astronautics

But if there are no gravitational forces, there is no gravity, then there is no gravity? No, it's not. Gravity exists, of course.

But its nature is completely different. It is not a force interaction between bodies at all. There is no force interaction between the Sun and the Earth, between the Earth and the Moon, between the Earth and the spacecraft, between the Earth and the stone on its surface.

Gravity is a property. This property consists in changing the nature of the space around the gravitating body. Every body is surrounded by a certain halo, a halo of altered space. The body carries this halo like a halo around the head of a saint or the atmosphere, ionosphere, magnetosphere around the Earth. And this halo cannot break away from the body in “independent swimming”. It is bound forever to the body and moves with it.

Here we can immediately compare the property of this halo with the properties of the electromagnetic field. Electromagnetism has two charges, positive and negative. Suppose we have an electrically neutral atom or molecule. Then there is no electric field, no electromagnetic halo. But suddenly a positively or negatively charged particle flew out of it. It has become an ion, an electrically charged body, and a corresponding halo should appear around it. - electric field. It was not, but now it should be. And here the question arises: with what speed will this field arising from nonexistence propagate in space. It is clear that the field in the whole space cannot be established instantly. It will spread away from the atom, going further and further. We see that the electromagnetic field is short-range, it can, in principle, be separated from the sources of the field, it has a certain propagation velocity. And this is due exclusively to the existence of two types electric charges. More precisely, with a change in the dipole moment, for which there is no conservation law. The electromagnetic field has related propagation speed associated with the movement of field sources, charged bodies, for example, during the movement of an electric charge or a magnet, and autonomous propagation speed, not related to the movement of material bodies, which is a universal constant - the speed of light.

In contrast to electromagnetism, gravity is associated with sources of the same sign. This gravitational source, gravitational charge is called mass. It is always positive and there is a conservation law for it... Moreover, even for the mass dipole moment there is a conservation law - this is, in fact, the law of conservation of the center of mass. Therefore, a gravitational field cannot arise from anywhere. Due to the movement of masses, it can somehow be deformed, and the farther the point of observation of the gravitational field is from these masses, the more time is required for the effect of a change in the field to be detected. And at a sufficient distance from a limited system of masses, it can generally be considered as a single undivided point mass, internal movements at a sufficient distance cannot change the point character of this field. And at an even greater distance, the gravitational field disappears altogether, and we will not be able to detect it by any means. Let formally we can calculate the magnitude of the Earth's gravitational field in another galaxy. But it is obvious that this is a purely theoretical artifact. This directly implies the absence of the notorious gravitational waves, i.e. detached from the sources of gravitational fields. Gravitational fields without sources do not exist. It is in electromagnetism that the emitted electromagnetic wave loses all connection with the source and is a “sourceless” electromagnetic field. And this is the fundamental difference between the electromagnetic field. It can operate at any distance. So in our optical and radio telescopes, electromagnetic fields are received and act on receivers, the source of which lies in an unimaginable distance, millions and billions of light years away. Electromagnetic field - it is a field with an unlimited range, in contrast to a spatially limited gravitational field.

We also note that the existence of gravitational waves makes the Galilean principle and the very existence of inertial frames of reference doubtful, and this already leads to catastrophic consequences for the entire theoretical mechanics.

5. Gravitational properties of space

Let's define the concept free body. We will call a free body a body to which no forces are applied. Under the forces, we remind and we will remind many times more, we understand only the influence of the electromagnetic nature. Nuclear and other micro-nano-femto-forces are hardly worth considering. And the bodies on which forces act (elastic forces, reactive forces and other forces of an electromagnetic nature) will be called not free.

Let's define the concept inertial reference systems. An inertial frame of reference is a frame of reference in which free bodies move uniformly and rectilinearly or are at rest. Other reference systems will be called non-inertial. Note that if we have an inertial frame of reference, then we can introduce any number of various non-inertial frames of reference, for example, rotating, oscillating, etc.

Let us now define the concept Galilean space. Galilean is the space in which one can introduce an inertial frame of reference. It is not possible to introduce an inertial frame of reference in every space. If it is impossible to introduce an inertial frame of reference in space, then we will call such a space non-Galilean.

And now we are ready to formulate the gravitational property. The gravitational property is that in the vicinity of the body there is a non-Galilean region. In this region it is impossible to introduce such a frame of reference that in it free bodies move uniformly and rectilinearly or are at rest.

The motions of free bodies will be called natural movements. Where there is no gravity, there is natural movement may appear straight and uniform. And gravity leads to the fact that natural movements can not appear uniform and straight. In gravitational space, natural motions are much more complex. These can be movements along circles, ellipses, parabolas, hyperbolas and even more complex and intricate trajectories. The most complex trajectories of interplanetary spacecraft in free flight clearly testify to this. Why is it so - we don’t know, we don’t build hypotheses, but we accept it as a reality given to us ..

So, now we can answer all the above questions in the light of precisely cosmic experience.

1. Why is an astronaut in a state of weightlessness on an orbiting spacecraft? Answer: not because, in some miraculous way, the gravitational forces are balanced with the mythical inertial ones. And for the simple reason that he is free, he is not affected by no strength.

2. Why, if it is free, does it move not in a straight line, but in a circle? Answer: because it is located in the gravitational field, in the non-Galilean region of the Earth, in which the motion of free bodies is more complex, including may be circular.

3. Why does the Earth move in a circle? Answer: The Earth is a free body. No forces act on her. But it is in the non-Galilean region (in the gravitational field) of the Sun. And free movement The earth is a natural movement - circle movement.

4. What forces act on a stone on the surface of the Earth? One of the natural movements of a stone in the vicinity of the Earth is an accelerated fall to its center. But the surface of the Earth prevents this natural movement by applying to the stone a force directed upwards opposite to the direction of the stone's natural movement. This force is not gravitational, but the usual force of elasticity, i.e. electromagnetic nature. Naturally, according to Newton's third law, the stone acts on its support with the same force, but downwards. If suddenly the support disappears or loses its hardness, then the stone will begin to naturally move down to the center of the Earth.

Note that usually the force directed from the stone to the support - gravity - considered an active force, and the force from the support to the stone - reaction force. In our view, the concepts of active force and reaction force are reversed. The force from the support to the body became active, the reaction force - force from the body to the support. This is more in line with mechanical logic. The active force is the force that can be controlled, and the passive force is the reaction force. - it is a force that arises in response, automatically. We can easily control the support force. The support can be removed, it can be made harder, softer, etc. And the force from the stone to the support arises automatically. For example, when a stone lies in the palm of your hand, then it is the support that we can manipulate - hold a stone, toss it, etc. And the actions of the stone on the palm will be secondary, reciprocal. The active role is played by the palm, not by the stone.

6. Local Galileanness of non-Galilean space

The gravitational field has a unique property that sharply distinguishes it from the electromagnetic one. The most surprising thing is that this property theoretically has not yet been mastered by modern theoretical mechanics, although in practice it is used, especially in astronautics, very widely.

If there is an electromagnetic field, then it exists, and it cannot be eliminated by any transformations of reference systems. Its components, electric or magnetic, can transform into each other, but in the region of space filled with an electromagnetic field, it is present at any point and in any frame of reference, for any observer. He has an invariant.

But we have something completely different in the gravitational field. It turns out that the gravitational field, i.e. the region of non-Galilean space is simultaneously locally Galilean at every point. In other words, it is possible to exclude the gravitational field at any of its points and even the whole neighborhood. This follows from the main law of gravity: in the neighborhood of any free body there is a Galilean region. This area can be large, global, if the free body is in Galilean space, or local, limited, if the body itself is in non-Galilean, gravitational space.

Thus, we come to the most important property of the gravitational field: the gravitational field is not absolute, but relative. At any point of the gravitational field, one can introduce such a frame of reference, in the vicinity of which it does not exist.

Until now, this most important, central moment of gravity has not been formulated in mechanical theory. But in practice it is used very widely. For example, although the Earth is located in the non-Galilean region of the Sun, but since it is a free body, there is a Galilean region in its immediate vicinity, in which the influence of the Sun can be neglected. And if the Earth has its own gravitational field, then in this neighborhood it is superimposed not on the field of the Sun, but on the Galilean gravity-free space, and we can calculate all movements in this neighborhood as if the Earth is in itself in the Galilean space, and the Sun does not exist at all. The Moon is in the non-Galilean region of the Sun and the Earth, but in the vicinity of the Moon we can only take into account the field of the Moon. The spacecraft in orbit is in the non-Galilean region of the Sun, Earth and Moon. But with its free orbital motion inside the station itself, we can consider the space as Galilean (the own gravitational field of the station mass is negligibly small) and we can introduce an inertial frame of reference in it, in which the Galilean principle is satisfied. Moreover, this applies not only to the internal space of the station, but also to its immediate outer neighborhood. This makes it possible to use the mechanics of inertial reference systems when docking with another ship at close distances and not even take into account the very existence of the Earth and its gravitational field. This greatly simplifies the calculations of motions and controls. At the same time, as one moves away from the station, the non-Galilean characteristics of the surrounding space become more and more significant, due to only its local Galilean character. Therefore, when docking at "distant frontiers", one must take into account the gravitational field of the Earth, but one can ignore the field of the Sun and the Moon. Unfortunately, the existing mechanics does not provide tools for taking into account the Earth's gravitational field in the spacecraft's frame of reference, and the calculators have to switch to earth system counting, which, of course, is not convenient.

So we see how important practical significance has the principle of local Galilean non-Galilean space. And a mechanical theory in which this principle does not take place cannot be considered suitable for use in astronautics. But in Newtonian mechanics, this principle does not exist. In this mechanics, the gravitational field is considered only globally, as a rule, in a single dedicated "Copernican" frame of reference - reference system of the center of mass. We called this frame of reference Copernican, since the honor of discovering the "main", distinguished frames of reference, by right, belongs to Copernicus. But astronautics requires a departure from the Copernican paradigm, and such a departure occurs constantly in space navigation calculations. The use of local reference systems is the rejection of the paradigm of Copernican globalism in the description of gravitational fields. That is why the new mechanics can be called non-Newtonian and non-Copernican or, perhaps more correctly, neo-optolemaic.

Again, we note that in mechanics associated with mechanical phenomena on the surface of the Earth, the Newtonian approach is quite convenient and effective, which shows all the development of mechanics over the centuries. But in astronautics, this approach causes great difficulties, which we discussed above. And the new approach maximally reveals the logic of mechanical processes in space, opens up opportunities for more simple solution known tasks and formulations of new ones.

7. Weight as a fundamental concept of mechanics

We have shown that in many problems of mechanics, in particular, in problems of celestial mechanics, forces disappear. After all, celestial mechanics considers, for the most part, free celestial bodies, i.e. bodies to which no force is applied.

As is known, in Newtonian mechanics the concept of force is a fundamental, basic concept. In mechanics, it is not even defined, but is taken from other sciences, for example, physics. Just as the concept of distance is not defined in mechanics, it is fundamental for it and is taken from geometry.

It is clear that it is desirable to use the most important and widely used characteristics as fundamental concepts in the axiomatic construction of a theory. But the paradox is that in different large-scale areas of the mechanical world, different characteristics become such.

For example, Newtonian mechanics is best suited for describing the phenomena of macromechanics, i.e. mechanical phenomena on a scale comparable to the size of a human. And here force is an extremely important concept and its use as a fundamental concept is fully justified. Indeed, we clearly see the strength of a horse pulling a wagon with firewood by the tension of the veins, we see the tension force of the bow, we can easily imagine the force on the carrier of a steam engine. Finally, by the tension of our muscles and intense breathing, we see the strength of the weight of the log we are lifting.

But already in the field of the microworld, forces become poorly conceivable. And other mechanical characteristics, such as energy and action, come to the fore. And accordingly, new mechanical models, theories, known under the general name of "analytical dynamics", arise. These are the mechanics of Lagrange, Hamilton, Poincarey, etc. In fact, these are different "languages" of mechanics, in which it is convenient to describe your class and, above all, the scale level of mechanical phenomena. Although they are basically equivalent, i.e. give the same solutions to the same problem, but in each language there is a class of problems that is most clearly and simply solved in it. Moreover, the extension of mechanics to the microworld, to the quantum domain, turned out to be possible precisely in these new “energetic” languages, for example, in the Hamiltonian language, and for Newton's language, an extension to the quantum domain was never constructed. This already shows the importance of creating new mechanical languages. Without constructing a whole class of such languages ​​at the turn of 19 - 20 centuries, it would probably be impossible to create the mechanics of microparticles, and without this, the creation of all technology using them - electronics, nuclear energy, etc. This is the meaning of the "languages ​​of mechanics". Newtonian language served as the basis for the industrial revolution of the 18th century and the creation of mechanical machines and mechanisms. Non-Newtonian, energy languages ​​of mechanics served as the basis for the creation in the twentieth century of the theory of micromechanical processes, which theory became the basis for the creation of all electronics, nuclear physics, laser technology and other areas of technology in the twentieth century.

Astronautics, which appeared in the middle of the twentieth century, still uses the mechanical language of Newton, which was developed for other scales of mechanical phenomena. For astronautics, it is not suitable. The absence in this language of such a central concept as weightlessness, and even more so “gravity”, the widespread use of such ugly and unacceptable words in science as “overload” (and what is “load”?) with even more terrible phrases like “negative overload”, "underload", etc. speaks for itself. Cosmonautics and, in general, the area of ​​the mega-world needs its own, more adequate language. And it is obvious that the use of the concept of "force" as a fundamental concept of this language can no longer take place. A new fundamental mechanical concept is needed, on the basis of which a new language of mechanics should be built, more adequate to the tasks of describing astronautics and the mega world.

In order to find this new fundamental concept, let us turn to astronautics. In astronautics, "weightlessness" is a central concept.

We can all easily determine the presence of weightlessness from a television picture. But what is it from the point of view of mechanical science? Here are just some of the definitions of weightlessness from the most authoritative sources.

Weightlessness- a state when the force of interaction of the body with the support (the apparent weight of the body), arising in connection with the gravitational attraction or in connection with the acceleration of the body, disappears. Sometimes you can hear another name for this effect - microgravity. ( Wikipedia).

The definition is simply incomprehensible. What is the "force of interaction in connection with acceleration"? There is no such concept in mechanics. What is "apparent weight"? And it is hardly acceptable to confuse microgravity with weightlessness. These are different concepts.

weightlessness called the state in which the gravitational forces acting on the body do not cause mutual pressure of its parts on each other ( Astronomical Dictionary on the website of the Space Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences).

In general, it is not clear why the “mutual pressures” inside the body suddenly disappear in space or in a skydiver in a jump? What, his heart pressure disappears or the valve no longer presses on its saddle. Or does the internal pressure in the liquid disappear, which forms spherical drops in weightlessness? And how to determine whether these mutual pressures are associated with gravitational forces or not? And does it correspond to the TV picture with spaceship? Even the most illiterate person will immediately say that weightlessness - this is something completely different, and even more so the astronauts themselves.

Weightlessness, - the state of bodies outside the forces of attraction (Russian orthographic dictionary Russian Academy Sciences).

The definition can only cause a smile. But the creators of the dictionary- linguists - they didn’t come up with it themselves, but, for sure, they used the advice of specialists from the Academy of Sciences.

weightlessness bridge- the state of a material body in which the external forces acting on it or the movement it makes do not cause mutual pressures of particles on each other ( Great Soviet Encyclopedia).

Compare as one-order “forces” and “movements performed” - it is something beyond the mechanics. Note also that in all definitions there is the term "state", although in mechanics there is no concept of "state".

Thus, the central concept of astronautics - not weightiness - in modern mechanics does not have any correct description at all. The feeling is that for the theoretical mechanicion "terra incognito", bursting into the realm of real mechanical practice, but for which there is no place in theory. That's why they compose who is into what much.

But if there is "weightlessness", then there must be "gravity", the absence of which creates "non-gravity". Such is the requirement of scientific logic, the laws of constructing the languages ​​of science.

And to build a new language, we postulate the existence of a new concept of mechanics - concepts " mechanical state of a mechanical object". This concept does not exist in Newtonian mechanics. This is a new conceptual concept for a new language. And correspondingly " weightiness" there is characteristic of the mechanical state of the body. And weightlessness is a special, particular case of a weighty state, a weighty state with no weightiness.

It remains to characterize the concept of weightiness. We accept that in the new language of mechanics weight is fundamental, indeterminate in the language itself, a concept that replaces the fundamental concept of force in Newtonian language. Weight is a vector applied to the body itself and moving along with the body.

We cannot define the concept of weight in the language itself, but we can give a description of devices that measure this value. We will call these weight meters " weight meters". It turns out that weight meters are widely used in technology and, above all, in astronautics. Only they have a strange name " accelerometers”, i.e. acceleration meters. It is clear that a weight on a spring cannot measure any acceleration (Academician Ishlinsky therefore proposed the name “newtonometers” for these devices, which is better, but not quite). It measures not the kinematic characteristic - after all, the latter value is relative and depends on the reference system and the observer, namely, the characteristic of the mechanical state of the object. There is another name for weight meters - this name " gravimeters”, which is used in gravimetry. It is, in any case, better than the accelerometer. At the same time, we note that a person (and other animals) has a sense organ - sixth sense organ - which consists of a whole set of weight meters. This sense organ - vestibular apparatus - located in the human inner ear. Physiological weight meters themselves have some medical name, but they do not have a mechanical one, because mechanical theorists did not have the courage to call these internal physiological weight meters accelerometers, it would be too much hurt your ears.

And the connection of neo-optolemaic mechanics with Newtonian mechanics is carried out through the concept strength. But now force is already a secondary, derivative concept. Strength is a vector quantity proportional to the product of the weight modulus and body mass and anticollinear to the weight vector.

Here m- weight, W- weight Vector, F- force vector. Again, we recall that the forces are only electromagnetic, there are no gravitational forces. Since the support force directed upwards is applied to the stone, the weight of bodies on Earth is directed downwards.

From this it is immediately clear that from the point of view of Newtonian mechanics, gravity is a specific force, i.e. force per unit mass, however, oriented in the opposite direction with respect to the force vector.

And, finally, not just a definition of force, but a meaningful axiom of mechanics consists in Newton's third law: the reaction force is equal to the active force, but directed in the opposite direction.

The relationship between motion and mechanical state in the inertial frame of reference in the new mechanics is given modified by Newton's second law (axiom): acceleration is proportional to gravity, but its direction is inverse to the gravity vector.

w is the acceleration of the body in the inertial frame of reference, W- its heftiness. We obtain the fundamental law of mechanics in a very simple form. This equation does not include any internal, immanent characteristics of the body. It is very important. All bodies move in the same way, if they are in the same mechanical state, from some speck of dust to the shell of the battleship's main caliber.

At one time, Galileo, throwing stones from the Leaning Tower of Pisa, came to the conclusion that all bodies fall in the same way. New law Mechanics expands this statement to this: All bodies move in the same way if they are in the same mechanical state.

In SI, the unit of weight is N/kg. This unit in gravimetry is usually called Galileo, abbreviated Ch. Gravity on the surface of the Earth 9.81 Gl, on the surface of the Moon - 1.62 Gl, in a rocket at the launch site of the order of 40 Gl, at a combat turn in a fighter up to 80 Gl, a Topol-M ballistic missile on takeoff up to 120 Gl, the weight of a cannon projectile during acceleration in the bore can be up to 100 kgl., microgravity weight in orbital station is about 1 nG (nanoGalileo). We see to what extent the weightiness with which practice is dealing varies.

8. Weight

New mechanics initiates the creation of a new mechanical discipline - weights. This is the science of mechanical condition. It will find its application in various applied sciences and technologies. These are space, aviation and marine medicine, biophysics, veterinary medicine, strength sciences, sports medicine, mechanics of sports disciplines, mechanics and design of machines, apparatus and park attractions, etc. And first of all, it will give all these sciences and techniques a single scientific terminology instead of some strange “overloads”, “underloads”, etc. In the new mechanics, the weight is called upon to take the same place as statics in Newtonian mechanics.

So, we have defined the basic concepts of the new mechanical language. If a mechanical object is considered as elementary, indivisible, then it is characterized by a single weight vector, as well as a single force. If we have a composite mechanical object called a body, then we have a weight distribution on the body. This distribution can be flat, i.e. all parts of the body have the same weight. But it can also be difficult if the body performs its own movements, for example, rotations or is in a non-Galilean space.

9. Description of the gravitational field

So, the gravitational field is a region of non-Galilean space. How to describe this space?

Newtonian mechanics has gravitational forces. Therefore, gravity is described by the strength of the field, i.e. distribution of specific gravitational forces, forces applied to a unit mass.

But in the new mechanics there are no gravitational forces, and gravity is just a property of space. Therefore, the Newtonian approach is not suitable.

In Einstein's gravitational approach, gravity is a property that curves space. This curvature leads to the fact that the coordinate grid (geodesic lines), which in general relativity consists of lines of light movement, becomes curved. The curvature of this space determines the gravitational field. But neither in the field of astronautics, nor in celestial mechanics, and even in stellar and galactic mechanics, this description is practically inapplicable. The curvature of light trajectories is too negligible on these scales and the practical gravitational fields for general relativity are too small. Using general relativity in the field of practically used gravitational phenomena is the same as using a meter tape measure to measure atomic distances. In contrast, the Newtonian approach leads to adequate gravitational characteristics on the scale of astronautics or celestial mechanics.

So, we come to the conclusion: the Newtonian approach gives a good description of practically significant gravitational fields, but it is based on gravitational forces that we do not have, the Einsteinian approach is based on changing the properties of space, but it is effective only in the field of superstrong gravitational fields, not in astronautics , which are practically not encountered in celestial mechanics. He may have a place in cosmology, but not in the field of describing flights to near-earth orbits or inside the solar system. And it is required to create a description of the gravitational field that is dimensionally adequate to Newtonian, but at the same time to base this description on a change in the properties of space, as in the Einsteinian approach.

And it turns out it can be done. For this, it is only necessary to use the fundamental value of the new mechanics - weight.

In Galilean space it is possible to create an inertial frame of reference in which free bodies move uniformly and rectilinearly or are at rest. Hence it follows that in the Galilean space it is possible to create an environment of resting and weightless bodies. But this medium can just be a frame of reference. It is only necessary to mark these resting weightless bodies in a certain way, assign coordinates to them, and use them to describe the movements of bodies.

In non-Galilean space, free bodies cannot be motionless relative to each other. Any ensemble of free bodies will begin to spread. And if we want the bodies in the gravitational field to be motionless relative to each other, they must somehow be fastened to each other, i.e. apply force to them. And, again, they are not gravitational, but ordinary, electrical or magnetic nature.

But if we apply forces to the bodies, then they already cease to be free and become weighty. And in this motionless environment there is a weight distribution. We can use this weight distribution as a field characteristic of the gravitational field. Thus, it is the gravity field in a stationary medium that can become a characteristic of the gravitational field. We can also call this distribution of weights gravitational field strength.

It is easy to see that we have come numerically to the same Newtonian gravitational field, to the specific force, only now it has been reinterpreted: not the specific force of gravity, but the specific force of non-gravitational forces, i.e. weight, became the intensity of the gravitational field. But the values ​​of the gravitational field strengths in both theories completely coincide.

It would seem that we have come to the same point, and there is no difference in the actual description of gravitational fields. But not really. The fact is that the gravitational force is absolute, the absolute forces acting between gravitating bodies according to the law of universal gravitation. Because the gravitational fields are unique and absolute. They require a unique and distinguished frame of reference, i.e. Copernican frame of reference. But in the new mechanics, this is the distribution of weights in a rigid virtual environment. And such virtual environments can be introduced in space as many as you like. There are no a priori selected environments. You can choose different bodies as initial bodies, to which you can “attach” other bodies in order to create a coordinate environment. From the absolute gravitational field, we come to a multivariant, relative gravitational field. So we have come to an even greater general relativity of gravity, it turns out to be "even more relative" than Einstein imagined.

But this relativity is by no means a theoretical trick for some kind of “general covariance”. It is practical and extremely important for astronautics. For example, we can take the center of the Earth as the initial body and construct a gravitational field in a frame of reference with a fixed center of the Earth. An astronaut in orbit can take his ship as the initial body and build a frame of reference with itself as a fixed reference point and with the appropriate distribution of weights in this medium, which will be the gravitational field. it cosmonautocentric the gravitational field will differ significantly from the geocentric one. Of course, it is also necessary to discover the laws of transition from one gravitational field to another, and create an appropriate mathematical apparatus. But this is a technical matter. And in a number of cases it will be more convenient for an astronaut to consider the motion of bodies in a cosmonaut-centric frame of reference. And the lunaraut at the lunar station - in the selenocentric frame of reference, the earthly astronomer - in the geocentric (Ptolemaic), and for schoolchildren and students to visualize the structure of the solar system, it will be useful to use the heliocentric system. Thus, neo-Optolemaic mechanics does not reject Copernican, but only puts it on a par with other reference systems, including Ptolemaic. And the question of which system is correct, the question for which so much blood was shed and people went to the stake, turned out to be a question not of religion or ideology, but of pure pragmatism. - which system is more profitable in a particular task, this one should be used. The new mechanics unites Ptolemy and Copernicus, Giordano Bruno and his executioners.

At the same time, we immediately note that all the reference systems listed above are associated with free bodies, therefore they are all locally Galilean, i.e. at the beginning of these systems there is no gravitational field, and the field strength is zero. But the use of certain schemes and facts without their theoretical substantiation often leads to errors and other unfavorable results. That's why theoretical background space practice is important.

10. Movement of bodies in a gravitational field

And now we can write down the equation of motion of free bodies in a gravitational field. This equation is written very simply: acceleration w free (weightless) body is equal to the intensity of the gravitational field V:

What is the free fall acceleration in the Earth's field? It is numerically equal to the intensity of the gravitational field on the surface of the Earth and is directed in the same direction. We know the gravity on the surface of the Earth, W=9.81 Ch. But this weightiness is at the same time the intensity of the gravitational field on the surface of the Earth, V = 9.81 Ch. Hence, the free fall acceleration is numerically equal to the field strength, but, of course, it has other units of measurement - w \u003d 9.81 m / s 2.

And, finally, the generalized law of motion of a weighty body in a gravitational field will be: the acceleration of a weighty body in a gravitational field is equal to the field strength minus its weightiness, i.e.

We have obtained a generalization of Newton's Second Law. He explains all the facts perfectly. If the body is stationary, the acceleration is zero, then in the gravitational field the weight is equal to the field strength and vice versa, the gravitational field strength is equal to the weight of stationary bodies. If there is no gravitational field, then the acceleration is equal to the weight of the body with the opposite sign. And if there is a gravitational field, and the body is free, then its acceleration is directed along the field strength and is numerically equal to it. Very simple and visual interpretation of movements and states.

We note again that no proper, internal characteristics (for example, mass) of the body are included in this equation. The importance of this for navigational calculations in astronautics and in general in mechanics can hardly be overestimated. This is an even greater extension of Galileo's principle: all bodies in the same gravitational field and in the same mechanical state move in the same way.

11. Harmonic reference systems

But we immediately note that this equation was obtained not for an arbitrary reference frame, but only for special, so-called harmonic reference frames. Harmonic frame of reference is a frame of reference that is inertial at infinity. Inertial frames of reference are, of course, also harmonic. But non-inertial frames of reference in Galilean space are already inharmonious. There are no inertial frames in the non-Galilean space, but there are frames of reference that are inertial outside the non-Galilean region, i.e. at infinity. These are the harmonic reference systems. If gravity is “removed”, then they turn into inertial frames of reference. For example, the reference frame associated with the Earth, oriented to distant stars, is not inertial due to the presence of the Earth's field, but it is harmonious. Therefore, the problem of constructing an inertial reference system on the Earth is formulated not quite correctly. This is the problem of constructing a harmonic reference system. It is very important even in everyday life, for example, for cellular and space communications and space navigation systems. It can be solved either by distant stars, or through the use of internal stabilizing devices, such as gyroscopes. This is also the most important and constant task of astronautics.

The laws of motion in non-harmonic, in fact, rotating frames of reference become more complicated, but we will not dwell on this, since our task is not to build an entire new mechanics, but only to demonstrate its necessity and formulate those basic concepts and laws that distinguish it from the current Newtonian Copernican mechanics. And we emphasize again. The current mechanics is not rejected, it is good and true for the range of phenomena either outside the gravitational field or in a constant gravitational field, i.e. in mechanics on the Earth's surface. But in cosmonautics, where there is a most complex combination of changing gravitational fields and various movements, where the object of movement is not dead stones and cosmic bodies, but a thinking being, man, it is unsatisfactory.

12. Equations of the gravitational field

And now we can write down the equations of the gravitational (weight-bridge) field. This equation has a form identical to the field equation in Newtonian mechanics:

Here r is the density of matter.

At first glance, this is the usual Newtonian gravitational field equation. But there are subtleties here. They are the following:

1. The field equation in Newtonian mechanics is written in the center of mass system, i.e. in the Copernican frame of reference. In our mechanics, this equation is true for any harmonic frame of reference. Those. it is true both for the system of the Sun, and in the frame of reference of the Earth and in the frame of reference of an orbiting or interplanetary spacecraft.

2. It is known from mathematics that in order to solve this equation, it is necessary to set either boundary or initial conditions. The electromagnetic field requires setting boundary conditions. But the gravitational field requires setting the initial ones. Border conditions - zero conditions at infinity for the harmonic reference system are satisfied automatically. And the initial conditions, i.e. field strength at the origin of the reference system, i.e. the weight of the initial body of the frame of reference must be given. And if the origin of the frame of reference is associated with a free body, then this frame of reference is locally inertial and the initial value of the field is zero. V (0)=0.

3. From mathematics it is also known that to determine the vector field, the assignment of one divergence. not enough. It is also necessary to set the rotor of the field. If we accept that the gravitational field is potential, then this means that the rotor of the field zero and then the system of equations of the gravitational field in the harmonic reference system will be written in the form:

Thus, this system of field equations describes the gravitational field (weight field) in a harmonic reference system. For non-harmonic reference systems, the distribution of the weight field will be different, but we will not expand on this yet.

13.Extension of Newton's gravitational theory of gravity

Is there an extension of the gravitational theory? Do we mean the standard way of extending by adding some new members? Yes. To do this, enter right side the second equation is a nonzero term. Since the equation is axial-vector, it is also necessary to introduce some axial-vector characteristic of the medium on the right. Is there such a thing? Yes, this is the density of intrinsic torque (spin) s. And taking into account the dimensions, we can write this system of equations of the gravitational field in a harmonic reference system in the form:

Here a- some dimensionless constant that has yet to be determined from observations.

What does adding this member mean? This means that in the vicinity of the rotating body there is an additional vortex component of the gravitational field. The vortex field of a single rotating body is similar to the magnetic field of a single magnetic dipole. It falls off very quickly, by the cube of the radius. And therefore it can influence the movement only in the immediate vicinity.

In the immediate vicinity of the Sun is the planet Mercury. The inconsistency of its movement with Newtonian laws has long been noted. And if it is believed that this is reflected in Einstein's gravitational theory, then why can't it be reflected in the modernized, neo-Newtonian theory of gravity? Another possible effect is related to the effect of this field on the gyroscope in the form of a change in its axis of rotation. And this effect, apparently, has already been detected in an experiment on the American satellite GP-B (gravitational probe - B), launched in April 2004.

Other manifestations of this field are also possible. When calculating the curvature of light when it passes near the disk of the Sun according to the Newtonian theory (according to this theory, all mechanical objects move in the same way, the movement is determined only by the initial conditions), the value turns out to be different from the observed one. It is quite possible to assume that this is due precisely to the influence of the vortex field of the Sun. The vortex field will have a particularly strong influence on the motion of gaseous and plasma matter in the upper shell of the Sun. It is quite possible that this will give new approaches to the physics of the Sun and the solar atmosphere and its activity. In general, rotation is one of the most important astrophysical factors. And the introduction of the vortex component of the gravitational field can greatly change our ideas about the structure of the megaworld. Figuratively speaking, if the potential component of the gravitational field ensures the stability of the universe, then the vortex one gives it dynamics. But we observe amazing dynamism in space, the mega world and even on Earth.

14.Conclusion

The past (and present) Newtonian-Copernican mechanics does not meet the requirements that modern astronautics puts before the mechanical theory. It does not provide an adequate theoretical description of cosmic experience, and often simply contradicts it. Only a new non-Newtonian and non-Copernican mechanics will make it possible to open up new horizons for astronautics and, even more widely, for mechanics and its practical applications. This mechanics is based on a new understanding of gravity, gravity without gravitational forces, but possibly with a vortex component.