Pari Spolter

The work presented in my book and in my papers is based on the most reliable recent data and accepted analysis procedure. You refuse to accept the fact that Kepler’s third law does not have any mass in it. Please read my work before criticizing it. Regardless of the trajectory, the accelerometers aboard the spaceships have shown gradual decrease moving away from the Earth until they reached the Neutral Point, and then gradual increase exerted by the Moon’s gravitational force. NASA should publish these Neutral Point distances, their coordinates, and the date and time of the day for all the nine manned Apollo lunar flights. The public has a right to have these data.

Dear D.H. There is no mention of the Neutral Point in my book GRAVITATIONAL FORCE OF THE SUN or in my article "New Concepts in Gravitation" published in http://www.physicsessays.com Volume 18, Numberm 1, pages 37-49. All the 367 references in my book are to scientific mainstream books and journals. I offered to send you a complimentary copy of my book and articles, but you did not accept it. You continue to insult me without reading my work. People usually start to insult, when they feel they have lost the rational arguments. The attachments have a separate allowable counts from the codes. P.S. The correlation coefficient is 0.9999.

Your definition of Force is a definition of Weight, and Weight is not equal to Force. I am sure you know that the three-body problem has remained unsolved. Newton complained that the theory of the moon made his head ache and kept him awake so often that he would think of it no more. Einstein claimed his equation explained the 43 seconds of arc per century of the unaccounted advance of the planet Mercury's perihelion, but never mentioned the 40.7 degrees per year advance of the perigee of the moon. General Relativity does not explain the regression of the nodes or the eccentricities of the planets either. A theory of gravitation cannot claim legitimacy, unless it can explain the puzzling motion of the moon. Please see "Moon-Earth-Sun: The oldest, best known, but least understood three-body problem" by Martin Gutzwiller in AIP CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS 334 "Few-Body Problems in Physics" Williamsburg, VA, May 1994. Please read my work, before criticizing it. Using the correct interpretation of Kepler's third law, I have explained the eccentricities of the planets and eight asteroids with a correlation coefficient of 0.99. Please see Chapter 10 of my book GRAVITATIONAL FORCE OF THE SUN and Section 5 of "New Concepts in Gravitation" in http://www.physicsessays.com Volume 18, Number 1, pages 43-45. I have quoted the distance for July 19.5 and not July 19. NASA has had 5 more lunar landings with the Apollo 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 after the Apollo 11. They must have the distances at both the Legendre Point and at the Neutral Point on all these 6 flights. Do you know if, and how, I may be able to get these data? Or maybe NASA would publish these data themselves. This would bring a satisfactory solution to solve this problem. "New Concepts in Gravitation" can be downloaded from http://www.Physicsessays.com Volume 18, Number 1, pages 37-49 for a modest price of $ 4.00. Or you can send an email or a post card to me, and I will send you a reprint. There is no charge for that. Attached is "Problems with the Gravitational Constant" published in http://www.infinite-energy.com Issue 59, 2005, page 39. Sorry I am exceeding my allowed attachments. If you give me your email, I will send it to you.

Dear Swansot: The correct interpretation of r^3/t^2 is acceleration times the area. Please see Chapter 5 of my book Gravitational Force of the Sun and Section 1 of "New Concepts in Gravitation" published in PHYSICS ESSAYS http://www.physicsessays.com Volume 18, Number 1, pages 37-38. Roy's book Orbital Motion is copyrighted material. I believe that what I have copied falls under Fair Use. For more details please see Chapter 6 of the book. The book is availabe in the University Libraries, or you can go to a public library near you and ask the librarian to get it on an interlibrary loan program. Dear D.H. I am sorry you are refuting the correct interpretation of the Kepler's third law without looking at the considerable recent data I have presented to support it. The unit you give: mass times length/time^2 is the unit of Weight, and Weight is not equal to Force. I have defined correct units for Force, for Energy, and for Weight. The data for all the planets and two asteroids calculated using the correct interpretation of Kepler's third law is given in Table I of "New Concepts in Gravitation" published in PHYSICS ESSAYS http://www.physicsessays.com Volume 18, Number 1, page 39. In the 1960s several artificial satellites were placed in heliocentric orbits by NASA and by the former Soviet Union. Using the correct interpretation of Kepler's third law data for 12 of these artificial satellites are presented in Table II. I have also calculated data for the planets (Table III) and for the 12 artificial satellites (Table IV) using Newton's Second Law or Universal Law on page 40. Data for the planets using Kepler's third law vary from 4.1636*10^20 m/s^2 . m^2 for Uranus to 4.1646*10^20 m/s^2 . m^2 for 6 of the planets. Data for the 12 artificial satellites vary from 4.15 to 4.17*10^20 m/s^2 . m^2. The gravitational force of the sun calculated using either of Newton's equarions (the Second Law or the Universal Law) varies from 4.16*10^23 Newtons for Jupiter to only 0.31 Newton for Pioneer 5, with a different value for each of the other bodies listed in the two Tables. There is no contradiction. Kepler's third law is the law of gravitation and perturbations are correctly explained using his law. Your statement about Newton's law and about General Relativity is based on faith, not fact. The Horizontal Parallax in The American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac for the year 1969 on July 19.5 gives the Earth-Moon distance of 395,362,477.4 m equal to 245,666.85 miles. The spaceship was moving and the exact time of the day when it passed the Neutral Point is not mentioned. Time states "some 200,000 miles." There is no contradiction. Your argument sound like desperate nitpicking. Both the Infinite Energy Magazine and Physics Essays are peer reviewed journals. Physics Essays has very tough reviewing procedure. It was indexed in all the indexing engines. If they have been dropped, it is because the editors of Physics Essays have the courage to judge a manuscript on its merit, without prejudice. Science does not advance by censorship of opposing argument and suppression of contrary evidence. The editors of the mainstream journals reject without review any manuscript that does not conform to the accepted dogma. They publish insignificant data by authors from the prestigious institutions, but refuse to publish any criticism of their data. The distinguish British Physicist Louis Essen (1908-1997), the inventor of the atomic clock and a fellow of the Royal Society, the most qualified person to comment on the Hafele and Keating paper, could not get his criticism published in a mainstream journal. Please see attachment. Please also see my two rejected letters by the editors of the Science Magazine. You are saying that reliable sources, including Wernher von Braun and Frederick I Ordway III, the most autoritative persons to quote on this subject, who have actually explained in no uncertain terms what they mean by Neutral Point, did not know what they were saying and a person with just initials D.H., with no name and no address, says they were wrong and they have confused the Legendre Point with the Neutral Point. NASA has had 5 more lunar landings with the Apollo 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 after the Apollo 11. They must have the distances at both the Legendre Point and at the Neutral Point on all these 6 flights. Do you know if, and how, I may be able to get these data? Or maybe NASA would publish these data themselves. This would bring a satisfactory solution to solving this problem. Louis Essen.pdf Binary Pulsar Tests of General Relativity.pdf Science letter.pdf

Dear Snail, There is no experimental veification for your statement that Please give me a reference to support your statement. Dear D.H. (Physics Expert), Gravitational Force is equal to the product of the acceleration times the area of a circle with radius equal to the semimajor axis of revolution (F = a . A) is the correct interpretation of Kepler's third law. Kepler's third law is the law of gravitation and has been verified to very high precision. Please see the references in my book. What you call deviations from Kepler's law are due to perturbations by other bodies. In many tables using recent data, I have presented the experimental refutation of Newton's Second Law and Universal Law. What works in Celestial Mechanics is Kepler's third law. And what work in modern day engineering are the equations for Energy (not Newton's Force.) The references you have given show that NASA has used the term "gravity neutral point" for Legendre point. You have not provided any reference to state that the distace of 43,495 miles from the moon reported by the Apollo 11 astronauts was the Legendre point . On the other hand, the references cited in my previous posting on this Forum, state in no uncertain term that on July 19, 1969, at a distance of 43,495 miles from the moon, Apollo 11 passed the point where the acceleration due to the gravitational force of the earth became equal to the acceleration due to the gravitational force of the moon. The attachment is from page 371 of ORBITAL MOTION by A E Roy, Professor of Astronomy at the University of Glasgow, published by the Institute of Physics in 1988. Please note that the italic for Neutral Point is Roy's not mine. So obviously the Neutral Point is not the radius of the Moon's sphere of influence. When I was reading all these articles in the scientific journals, with most of them now available on the internet, I did not realize that the authors names and addresses printed on the papers were putting them in danger of Identity Theft. You call yourself 'Physics Expert,' so obviously people are interested in your biography. I will be happy to send you a complimentary copy of my book and the articles, if you give me your address (or any address.) My email is: orbpublishing@msn.com My address is: Orb Publishing Company 11862 Balboa Boulevard, # 182 Granada Hills, CA 91344-2753 My biography is available in CONTEMPORARY AUTHORS, Volume 163. Roy.pdf

I wish you would first read my book and the article "New Concepts in Gravitation" before criticizing it. In many tables using recent data I have provided evidence that Newton's Second Law and Universal Law are incorrect. I have defined consistent units for Force, for Energy, and for Weight. The Weight of a body is the product of its mass and the acceleration: W = ma. Weight is not equal to Force. Newton himself arrived at the inverse square of the distance by the sole consideration of the orbital speed of the moon, the acceleration due to gravity at the surface of the earth, and the respective distances of the moon and of an object falling near the earth's surface from the center of gravity. Newton did not estimate the masses of the earth and the moon to deduce the reciprocal square of the distance from the center of attraction. Please see the references and quotes in Chapter one of my book. F = a . A is the correct interpretation of Kepler's third law. Kepler's third law has been verified to very high precision, it is not an approximate law. Please see references in my book. I think that you are confusing the Neutral Point with the L1 Point. The references cited in my previous posting makes this clear. Please sign your full name and addresss so we know who we are comminicating with.

Kepler's third law does not have any mass in it, and has been verified to very high precision. In the 1960s several artificial satellites were placed in heliocentric orbits by NASA and by the former Soviet Union. We know their exact Mass in kg. Please see Tables III and IV of the paper "New Concepts in Gravitation" in PHYSICS ESSAYS volume 18, Number 1, pages 37-49 for experimental refutation of Newton's second law and Universl Law. There are more Tables on Earth's artificial satellites in my book. You have my name and address and John Lear's name and address on this Forum. So we are not hiding and are not afraid to stand behind our statements.

"At a point 43,495 miles from the moon, lunar gravity exerted a force equal to the gravity of the earth, then some 200,000 miles distant." This is quoted from the article "the Moon-A Giant for Mankind," published in Time Magazine, July 25, 1969, page 14. "At a distance of 43,495 miles from the Moon, Apollo 11 passed the so-called 'neutral' point, beyond which the Lunar gravitational field dominated that of Earth." This is quoted from page 238 of the book History of Rocketry & Space Travel by Wernher von Braun and Frederick I. Ordway III, published by Crowell Company, New York in 1969. These are quoted on pages 45 and 46 of the Brian book mentioned above by John Lear. There is no more authoritative person than Wernher von Braun to quote on this subject. On the other hand, the D.H. (Physics expert) does not give any reference, from any public or any scientific source, to support his own contention that the distance of 43,495 miles from the Moon is the L1 point and not the Neutral Point. F = a . A or gravitational force is equal to the product of the acceleration times the area of a circle with radius equal to the semimajor axis of revolution is the correct interpretation of Kepler's third law. Kepler's laws were based on observation. Newton's inclusion of the term product of the masses (m1m2) in his Universal Law was arbitrary and as shown in my book GRAVITATIONAL FORCE OF THE SUN and in the article "New Concepts in Gravitation," published in PHYSICS ESSAYS volume 18, Number 1, pages 37-49, is incorrect. Please also see "Problems with the Gravitationa Constant," published in INFINITE ENERGY, Issue 59, 2005, page 39. Science should be a search for truth based on observations and experimental data. It should not be indoctrination in dogma based on faith. P.S. Please sign your full name and address, so we know who we are communicating with.

The distance of 43,495 miles from the Moon reported by the Apollo 11 astronauts is the Neutral Point where lunar gravity exerted a force equal to the gravity of the earth, then some 200,000 miles distant. IT IS NOT THE L1 POINT. This is quoted from July 25, 1969 issue of Time Magazine and from page 238 of the History of Rocketry & Space Travel by Wernher von Braun and Frederick I. Ordway III.