Le Sage's theory of gravitation

The Le Sage Gravity is a simple mechanical explanation of gravitation, which should justify the law of gravity of Newton. It was designed by Nicolas Fatio de Duillier ( 1690) and Georges -Louis Le Sage (1748 ).

Since Fatios work was largely unknown and remained unpublished, it was Le Sage's version of the theory, which was towards the end of the 19th century in connection with the then newly developed kinetic theory of gases to the subject of awakening interest. Although some researchers continue to investigate the theory outside the mainstream, it is classified mainly due to the James Clerk Maxwell (1875 ) and Henri Poincaré (1908 ) brought forth objections as obsolete and invalid.

  • 4.1 Basic Concept
  • 4.2 Reception of the theory
  • 8.1 Matter and particles
  • 8.2 shielding
  • 8.3 speed
  • 8.4 range
  • 8.5 energy

Basic features of the theory

The basic assumption of the theory is the existence of a space that is largely filled by an isotropic radiation field, which consists of various particles ( corpuscles ) or waves there. This move with constant, very high speed in a straight line in all possible directions. Encounters a particle of a body, it transmits a pulse to it. If only one body A exists, it is subjected to a uniform pressure, so it is a result of acting in all directions shocks in a balance of power and will not move (see Figure B1).

However, if a second body B exists, this acts like an umbrella, because from the direction of B A is hit by particles less than. From the other side, the same is true vice versa A and B each shade (B2 ), and thereby a negative pressure is created on the sides facing each other. It will therefore have a seemingly attractive force that acts exactly in the direction of each other's body. The theory is therefore not based on the concept of attraction, but is counted to the class of pressure or kinetic theories of gravitation explanations.

When the collision between the body A and the particles are completely elastic, the intensity of the reflected particles would be the same as that of the flowing, so that no force would result in the A direction. The same would happen if a second body B would be present, which would act as a screen for particles that fly in the A direction. The reflected between the bodies particles would remove the shadow effect completely. Thus, in order to allow a gravitational effect between the bodies, the kinetic energy of the particles must be absorbed by the matter completely or at least partially, or they must be modified such that their momentum has decreased after the collision: Only then outweighs the momentum of the incoming particles relative to the pulse of the reflected particles from the bodies (B3).

If we imagine a body a spherical surface ( sphere ), which must be traversed by both the reflected and the flowing particles can be seen that the size of the sphere increases in proportion to the square of the distance. However, the number of the relevant particles in these growing sections remains the same and thus their density decreases. The effect of gravity behaves, according to the distance law, inversely to the square of the distance to the respective masses (B4). This analogy to optical effects such as the decrease of radiation intensity with 1 / r ², or shadowing has already been stated by Fatio and Le Sage.

From the former, as shown for the time being gives only a force whose intensity is proportional to the surface area or the volume is. However, the gravity is dependent not only on the volume on the density and thus from the crowd. Thus, to achieve this proportionality observed for the mass, it was assumed that the material mainly consists of an empty space, and is assumed to be very small, the particles can penetrate the body with ease. That is, the particles penetrate the body, interact with all components of matter, are partially shielded or absorbed and enter weakened out again. As a result of the mass is achieved proportional shadow effect of the adoption of appropriate body in penetrating at least within a certain accuracy. The result ( B5): Two bodies shade each other and the result is an analog image to B2.

Fatio

Nicolas Fatio de Duillier presented in 1690 the first version of his ideas about gravity in a letter to Christiaan Huygens. [A 1] Immediately afterwards, he read its contents at a meeting of the Royal Society in London. In the following years Fatio designed several manuscripts of his main work De la Cause de la Pesanteur. He also wrote a 1731 Worded in Latin didactic poem with the same theme. [C 1] Some fragments of these manuscripts were later acquired by Le Sage, who tried to publish, but that did not succeed. And so it continued until 1929, when Karl Bopp published a copy of a complete manuscript. [A 2] Another version of the theory was published in 1949 by Bernard Gagnebin who tried to reconstruct from fragments of Le Sage 's work. [A 3] the following description is based mainly on the Bopp edition (like on the "Problems I- IV" included) and the representation of the toe. [C 2 ]

Some aspects of the theory

Fatios pyramid (Issue I)

Fatio assumed that the universe is filled with tiny particles that move indiscriminately and straight forward with very great speed in all directions. To illustrate his thoughts, he used the following picture: It is an object of C given, on which there is an infinitely small area zz. This area zz is the center of a circle. Within this circle Fatio drew the pyramid PzzQ in which some particles flow towards zz, and also pour some particles that have already been reflected by C, in the opposite direction. Fatio assumed that the average velocity and hence the momentum of the reflected particles, are smaller than that of the incoming. The result is a current that drives all the body in the direction ZZ. One hand, the velocity of the stream remains constant, on the other hand, in closer proximity to the currently density. Therefore, because of the geometric relationships is its intensity is proportional to 1 / r ² where r is the distance to zz. Because infinitely many such pyramids around C are conceivable, this proportionality applies to the entire area around C.

Reduced speed

In order to justify the claim that the particles move at reduced speed after reflection, Fatio submitted the following proposals:

  • The ordinary matter, or the particles, or both, are non-elastic.
  • The collisions are perfectly elastic, but the particles are not completely hard, which is why they vibrate after collision and lose speed.
  • Due to friction, the particles begin to rotate and also lose speed.

These passages are the most obscure parts of Fatios theory because he decides never clear what kind of collision is to be preferred. However, in the last version of the theory of 1743 he cut these passages and wrote the one hand, the particles perfect elasticity or perfect spring force, and on the other hand, the matter incomplete elasticity, so that the particles are reflected at a lower speed. The loss of speed was set extremely low by Fatio, in order not to let the force of gravity for extended periods decrease noticeably. In addition, Fatio saw with another problem faced: What happens when the particles collide with each other? Inelastic collisions would, even if no ordinary matter is present, lead to a steady decrease in the speed and therefore also weaken the force of gravity. To avoid this problem, Fatio assumed that the diameter of the particles is very small compared to their mutual distance, and therefore encounters with each other are very rare.

Compression

To refute the objection that you could develop a congestion around the body through the lower particle velocity, Fatio explained that the reflected particles are actually slower than the inflow. Therefore, the inflow of foreign particles, however, do have a greater rate, as has a greater distance from each other. Conversely, the reflected particles are slower, but this is offset by a constant total density. The compression is constant and there is no congestion. Fatio went on to say that by getting further increase in speed and elasticity of the particles, this compression can be made arbitrarily small.

Permeability of matter

To explain the proportionality to the mass, Fatio had to postulate that normal matter is equally permeable to the particles in all directions. He outlined to 3 models:

  • He believed that matter was an accumulation of small spheres, the diameter of which is negligible compared to their mutual distance. But he rejected this explanation because the balls would tend to gradually move closer together.
  • Then he assumed that balls are connected by rods and would form a crystal lattice or grid. However, he rejected this model, because association of different networks no uniform penetration would be more in the places where the balls are very close to each other, is possible.
  • Finally, he also removed the balls and let solely the bars of the grid left, where he negligible made ​​the diameter of the rods compared to their distance. So he thought he could ensure maximum permeability.

Pressure of the particles (Issue II)

1690 Fatio already accepted, that the pressure exerted by the particles on a flat surface, the sixth part of the pressure makes that would exist if all of the particles would be oriented perpendicular to the plane. Fatio provided a proof for this assertion, by calculated the pressure exerted by the particles on a certain point zz. It finally reached to the formula, wherein the density and the velocity of the particles. This solution is very similar to that known in the kinetic theory formula that was found by Daniel Bernoulli in 1738. That was the first time that the close relationship was demonstrated between the two theories, and before the latter was ever developed. However, Bernoulli's value twice as large as Fatio has been scheduled for pulse upon reflection not, but. Its result would therefore be valid only when completely inelastic collisions. Fatio used his solution not only for the explanation of gravitation, but also about the behavior of gases to explain. He designed a thermometer should measure the state of motion of the air molecules and therefore the heat. However, unlike Bernoulli identified Fatio the movement of air molecules not with the heat, but made another fluid responsible. However, it is not known whether Bernoulli was influenced by Fatio.

Infinity (Issue III)

In this section Fatio examined the concept of infinity in connection with his theory. Fatio justified many of his observations with the fact that different phenomena are infinitely smaller and larger than others and many problematic effects of the theory can be thus reduced to an unmeasurable value. For example, the diameter of the rods is smaller than the infinite distance to each other; or the velocity of the particles is infinitely greater than that of the matter; or the speed difference between the reflected and non-reflected particles is infinitely small.

Resistance of the medium (Issue IV)

This is the mathematically demanding part of Fatios theory. Here he tried to calculate the flow resistance of the particle fluxes for moving bodies. Unless the speed of the body, the velocity of the particles and the density of the propagation medium. In the case Fatio and calculated a resistance of. In the case and the resistance behaves like. Newton following which in the moving direction a very low density due to any medium demanded not observed resistance Fatio decreased density and concluded that this might be compensated for by changes in inversely proportional to the square root of density. This follows from Fatios pressure formula. After toe was Fatios attempt to minimize by means of an increase of the resistance in the direction of movement in relation to the gravitational force, successfully, because the resistance is proportional to Fatios model, but the gravitational force is proportional to.

Reception theory

Fatio was in contact with some of the most famous scientists of his time. Some of them, such as Edmond Halley, Christiaan Huygens and Isaac Newton, signed his manuscript.

Between Newton and Fatio was a close personal relationship 1690-1693, with Newton's remarks about Fatios theory are very different. On one hand, Newton wrote in 1692 in a place of his own copy of the Principia, which was copied from Fatio:

" In this type of hypotheses, there is a single through which one can explain the severity, and which has the first Hr. Fatio, a gifted mathematician devised. And in order to set it up [ the hypothesis ] can, vacuum is necessary because the thin particles must be worn by rectilinear, extremely swift and uniformly continuous movements in all directions and it [ here ] Only there feel resistance, where they at coarser particles encounter. "

On the other hand, David Gregory noted in his diary: "Mr. Mr. Newton and Halley laugh at Mr. Fatios explanation of gravity "[C 2]. This was supposedly recorded in 1691. However, the used ink and nib differs significantly from the rest of the sheet. This suggests that the entry is made ​​later. Fatio but also acknowledged that Newton rather tended to see the true cause of gravitation in the will of God. As of 1694 the relationship between the two cooled off.

Christiaan Huygens was the first to be informed about Fatios theory, but he never accepted it and worked on his own etheric vortex theory further. Fatio believed to have Huygens convinced of the contradiction of his theory, however, Huygens denied this in a letter to Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. There was also a brief correspondence between Leibniz and Fatio, especially on mathematical questions, but also about Fatios theory. Leibniz criticized this because Fatio presupposed an empty space between the particles, an assumption which was rejected by Leibniz philosophical reasons. Jakob I Bernoulli again showed great interest in Fatios theory and urged him to write down this in a complete manuscript, which was in fact done by Fatio. Bernoulli let them make a copy of which is located in the University Library of Basel, forming the basis for the Bopp - Edition.

Despite all Fatios theory remained largely unknown, with few exceptions such as Cramer and Le Sage, because he was never able to publish his work and he also came under the influence of a fanatical part of the camisards and his public reputation was thereby completely lost.

Cramer, Redeker

1731 [A 4] published by the Swiss mathematician Gabriel Cramer a dissertation at the end of the summary of a theory appears, which is identical with that of Fatio (including grid structure, light analogy and shading, etc. ), but without whose name is listed. However, it was Fatio known that Cramer had access to a copy of his manuscript, so he gave him the right to have only repeated his theory without understanding them. It was also Cramer, who drew attention to Fatios theory later Le Sage. 1736 [A 5] had Albert Franz Redeker, a German physician, also set up a very similar theory.

Le Sage

The first elaboration of the theory, Essai sur l' origine des forces mortes, 1748 sent by Le Sage at the Academy of Sciences in Paris, rejected and never published. [C 1] in 1749, after working out his own thoughts, he was taught by his teachers Cramer about the existence of the theory Fatios and in 1751 he learned of Redeker theory. 1756 was the first time in a journal the thoughts Le Sage published [A 6] and in 1758 he sent with Essai de Méchanique Chemistry more a more detailed version of his theory to a contest of the Academy of Sciences. In this work he tried both the nature of gravitation as well as the chemical affinities to explain. [A 7] He won the award together with a competitor and thereby secured the attention of prominent contemporaries such as Leonhard Euler. A significantly expanded version of this essay was printed in 1761 in a limited number. Resources accessible to the wider public work, Lucrece Neutonien, was not published until 1784. [A 8] The most detailed compilation of the theory, Mécanique Physique of Georges- Louis Le Sage, was published posthumously in 1818 by Pierre Prévost. [A 9]

Basic concept

Le Sage discussed the theory in great detail, but he said it added nothing fundamentally new and although he was Fatios in possession of some papers, he did not reach the level of which often noisy toe. [C 2 ]

  • Le Sage called his gravity particles ultramundane corpuscle, because he believed that these come from far outside of known space. The distribution of these currents is extremely isotropic and the laws of propagation correspond to those of light.
  • He argued that in fully elastic matter -particle collisions no gravitational force would arise. So he suggested that the particles and the constituents of matter are absolutely hard, which in his opinion a complicated shape of the shock effect implies, namely completely inelastic perpendicular to the surface normal matter, and perfectly elastic tangential to the surface. He further stated that the reflected particles would therefore have on average only 2/3 the speed of before. To avoid inelastic collisions between the particles, he participated in as Fatio that their diameter is much smaller than their mutual distance.
  • The resistance of the particle currents is proportional to uv ( where v is the velocity of the particles and u is the body ), but gravity is proportional to v ². It follows that the ratio resistance / gravity can be made arbitrarily small by increasing v. He accepted for some time, the particles would move with c ( = speed of light ), but it increased the value later significantly to 105 · C.
  • To obtain the proportionality to the mass, he designed as Fatio a hypothesis in matter has a cage or lattice structure, the lattice atoms themselves only have a diameter 107 times smaller than their mutual distance. The lattice atoms themselves are also permeable, with their staffs about 1020 times as long as broad. Thus, the particles could penetrate virtually unhindered.
  • Le Sage tried to Abschattungsmechanismus to use also for the explanation of chemical effects by postulating the existence of many different ultramundaner of particles of different size (B9 ).

Reception theory

Le Sage's ideas were not very well received in his time, except by some of his learned friends like Pierre Prévost, Charles Bonnet, Jean -André Deluc and Simon Lhuilier. This mentioned and described Le Sage's theory in their books and articles, which were used by their contemporaries as secondary sources - mainly because of the lack of published papers by Le Sage itself

Leonhard Euler noticed in 1761 for a moment that Le Sage's model was far better than the statements made by other authors, and here all objections are resolved. Later, however, he said that the light analogy no meaning for him was because he believed in the wave nature of light. After further discussion, he rejected the model from general and wrote 1765 Le Sage:

" The sens encore une -grande repugnance pure cos corpuscules ultra mondains, et toujours mieux d' J'aimerais avouer mon ignorance sur la cause de la gravite, que de recourir a of Hypothèses étranges. "

"You must excuse me if I have a great dislike for your ultramundanen corpuscle, and I always will prefer to confess my ignorance of the cause of gravity, as to such strange hypotheses fall back. "

Daniel Bernoulli was done in 1767 by the similarity between Le Sage's model and his own thoughts on the kinetic theory of gases. However, Bernoulli himself was of the opinion that his own theory of gases is only speculation, the theory were true to an even greater extent on Le Sage. As, however, turned out in the 19th century, Bernoulli's Theory of Gases in principle was correct. (P.30) [C 4 ]

Josip Bošković Rugjer declared in 1771 that Le Sage's theory was the first that could actually explain gravitation by mechanical means. However, he rejected the model because of the enormous quantity and unused ultramundaner matter. In addition Boscovich rejected the existence of direct contact effects, and proposed instead repulsive and attractive long-range effects. John Playfair described Boscovich's arguments like this: [C 5]

"An immense multitude of atoms, Malthus destined to pursue Their never-ending journey through the infinity of space, without changing Their direction, or returning to the place from Which They Came, is a supposition very little countenanced by the usual economy of nature. Whence is the supply of synthesis innumerable torrents; it must not INVOLVE a perpetual exertion of creative power, infinite in extent and in duration Both? "

" An immense number of atoms, destined to its never -ending journey through the infinity of space to pursue, without changing their direction, or ever return to their starting point is an assumption that has very little different from the usual economy of nature. Where is the source of countless streams; includes not a perpetual exercise of creative power one, infinite in both the extent and the duration? "

Georg Christoph Lichtenberg originally believed as René Descartes, that any explanation of natural phenomena must be based on rectilinear motion and direct contact action, and Le Sage's theory met these requirements. [A 10] He referred to Le Sage's theory in his lectures on physics at the University of Göttingen and wrote in 1790 on Le Sage's theory:

"Is it a dream, it is the largest and most sublime of each has been dreamed, and what we can fill a gap in our books that can only be filled by a dream "

However, around 1796 changed Lichtenberg his mind after he was confronted with the argument of Immanuel Kant, who criticized any attempt to reduce attraction to repulsion. According to Kant, every form of matter is infinitely divisible, with the result that the mere existence of extended matter requires the existence of attractive forces which hold together the individual parts. However, this force can not be justified by collisions of surrounding matter, since the parts of the colliding matter would have to be even held together again. To avoid this circular argument, Kant postulated in addition to a repulsive force, the need for a fundamental attractive force. [A 11] Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling again leaned Le Sage's model because of its mechanical materialism from, whereas Schelling took a very idealistic philosophy. [A 12 ]

Partly in consideration of Le Sage's theory attempted in 1805 to determine the speed with which such a medium must move in order to remain consistent with the astronomical observations Pierre -Simon Laplace. He calculated that the speed of gravity, at least 100 million would be times greater than the speed of light in order to avoid irregularities in the moon's orbit. This was to be expected at all a reason for Laplace and others that the Newtonian gravitation is based on action at a distance and can not function Nahwirkungsmodelle like that of Le Sage. [A 13]

Kinetic theory

Since the theories of Fatio, Cramer and Redeker remained largely unknown, it was Le Sage's theory, which experienced a revival in the second half of the 19th century due to the development of the kinetic theory of gases by Clausius, Kelvin and Maxwell.

Since Le Sage lose particles after the collision at speed, due to the energy conservation law a large amount of energy into internal energy modes of the body would have to be converted. This problem appealing, P. Leray in 1869 designed a particle theory, in which he assumes that the absorbed energy is used by the bodies partly to generate heat, partly for the production of magnetism. He speculated that this is a possible answer to the question of where the energy of the stars is coming. [A 14]

Le Sage's own model was modernized primarily by the work of Lord Kelvin in 1872 in the framework of the kinetic theory of gases. After summarizing the theory of Kelvin realized that the absorbed energy is a much bigger problem than Leray believed. The heat produced would lead to burn-out of each body in a split second. Therefore Kelvin described a mechanism which had already been developed in a modified form of Fatio in 1690. Kelvin believed that the particles indeed suffer after hitting a loss of their translational energy component, ie slower, would it stronger vibrate and rotate. The body taken would not heat up, but the particles themselves would again carry off the energy in the form of increased vibration and rotation with him after the collision. This is to understand theory of a vortex nature of matter in connection with Kelvin. Based on his interpretation of the principles of Clausius, after which the relationship between the three power modes remains constant in a gas, it was assumed that the particles would again win over cosmic distances away their original energy configuration by collisions with other particles, and thus the gravitational effect of not having the time decreases. Kelvin believed that it is therefore possible to use the particles as practically inexhaustible source of energy, and thus a kind of perpetuum mobile to construct. However, for thermodynamic reasons, such a construction is not possible, and Kelvin's interpretation of the theory of Clausius had to be discarded. [A 15]

Following Kelvin Peter Guthrie Tait called the 1876 Le Sage theory, the only plausible explanation of gravitation, which was found up to that point [A 16] He went on to say. :

" The most remarkable thing about it [ on Le Sage's theory ] is that if it is correct, it may cause us to look at all forms of energy ultimately as kinetic. "

Samuel Preston Tolver showed that many of the imported by Le Sage postulates for the particles, such as the rectilinear motion, sparse interaction, etc., can be summarized under the assumption that they are - on a cosmic level - like a gas behavior, the particles of a have extremely large mean free path. Preston also accepted Kelvin's proposal of internal modes of motion of the particles. He illustrated Kelvin model, by comparing it with the collision of a steel ring and an anvil. This would not be particularly affected, but the steel ring would be subject to very strong vibrations and therefore lose speed. He argued that the mean free path of the particles constitutes at least the distance between the planets. For larger distances, the particles could (in the sense of Kelvin ) regain their original size translational motion by collisions with other particles. That's why he was ever the opinion, from a certain distance, the gravitational interaction between two bodies would no longer occur, and that regardless of their size. [A 17] Paul Drude hit 1897 before that this would be a possibility, the theories of Carl Gottfried Neumann and Hugo von Seeliger, which suggested an absorption of gravitation in empty space to give a physical basis. [C 6]

A meeting of the Le - Sage- Kelvin theory was published in 1875 by James Clerk Maxwell in the Encyclopaedia Britannica [A 18] Having described the basic mechanism he wrote.:

"Here, then, Seems to be a path leading towards to explanation of the law of gravitation, Which, if it can be shown to be in other respects consistent with facts, june turn out to be a royal road into the very arcana of science. "

"There seems to be a path that leads towards an explanation of gravitation, which - if it can be shown that it is consistent with the facts in other ways - may prove to be the royal road in the real mystery of science. "

However, he rejected the model because according to the laws of thermodynamics, the kinetic energy of the body itself that would align the particles, the energy of the latter is much larger than that of the molecules of the body. As a result of this process the body would burn up in no time. Kelvin's solution would indeed get the mechanical balance between the systems, but not the thermodynamic. He concluded:

" We have devoted more space to this theory than it Seems to deserve, Because it is ingenious, and Because it is the only theory of the cause of gravitation Which Has been so far developed as to be Capable of being attacked and defended. "

"We have dedicated this theory more space than it seems to deserve it, because it is witty and because it is the only theory about the cause of gravity, which is so far developed until now in order to be suited for both offense and defense. "

Maxwell went on to say that the theory by stressful an enormous amount of external energy and therefore violates the conservation of energy as a fundamental principle of nature. Preston replied to Maxwell's criticism by arguing that the kinetic energy of the individual particles can be made arbitrarily small by their number is increased and therefore the energy difference is assumed not as big as Maxwell. However, this issue was discussed in more detail later by Poincaré, which showed that the thermodynamic problem still remained unsolved.

Caspar Isenkrahe published his first model in 1879, which until 1915 was followed by many other publications. Unlike his predecessors, he developed a more detailed application of the kinetic theory of gases in Le Sage model. As Le Sage, he argued that the particles are absolutely hard and therefore the tangential elastic collisions, inelastic and perpendicular to the surface of the body and received the same factor of 2/3. However, he was of the opinion that when the shocks a real energy loss occurring, and that therefore the energy conservation law is no longer applicable in this area, but this was inconsistent with the thermodynamic principles and is. Isenkrahe explained that the energy losses due to the small number of collisions are negligible. He criticized the Kelvin - Preston model, because he saw no reason why the reflected particles should be more vibrate and rotate, because it was ultimately just as well be the opposite. From the fact that only at enormous porosity of matter, the proportionality of gravitation can be maintained to the ground, he drew the conclusion that the effect of thermal expansion would make the body more difficult. That is because with a lower density, a mutual screening of the antibody molecules is less common. [A 19]

In a different model Adalbert Rysanek developed 1887 a very careful analysis of the phenomena which he was aware of Maxwell's law of particle velocities in a gas. He distinguished between a light and a gravitational ether ether, because according to his calculations, the absence of a resistance of the medium at the orbit of Neptune requires a lower speed of gravity particles of 5 x 1019 cm / sec. Similar arguments were put forward by Bock [A 20]. How Leray Rysanek argued that the absorbed energy could explain the origin of the solar energy, which might additionally the absorbed energy will also be passed on to the luminiferous ether. However, these details [A 21] were too imprecise to overcome the objections of Maxwell.

1888 Paul du Bois- Reymond argued against the Le Sage theory that an exact Massenproportionalität as in Newton's model to achieve (which presupposes an infinite permeability ), the pressure of the particles must also be infinite. Although he considered the argument that the Massenproportionalität was not confirmed experimentally for very large masses, but he saw no reason to abandon the proven Newtonian action at a distance due to a mere hypothesis. He led ( like others before him) from that immediate shock effects themselves are completely inexplicable and the ground is also based on long-range effects. The chief aim of such a theory, exclude all long-distance effects, is therefore not feasible. [A 22]

Waves

In addition to the kinetic theory, the concepts used in the 19th century by waves in the ether for the construction of similar models were used. Thereafter, an attempt was made to replace Le Sage particles by electromagnetic waves. This was done in conjunction with the theory of electrons of the time in which the electrical nature of the entire material was accepted.

1863 published F. and E. Keller a gravitational theory in which they designed a Le Sage Mechanism in conjunction with longitudinal waves of the ether. They assumed that these waves propagate in all directions and would lose some momentum after the impact on the body, so that between the bodies of the pressure fails somewhat lower than from the outer sides. [A 23] in 1869 created Lecoq de Boisbaudran practically the same model as Leray (heat, magnetism ), but he replaced as the basement particles by longitudinal waves. [A 24]

Hendrik Antoon Lorentz tried in 1900 to agree on the gravity with its Lorentz ether theory. He noted that Le Sage's particle theory was not compatible with her. However, the discovery that electromagnetic waves produce a kind of radiation pressure, and relatively easy to penetrate in the form of X-rays can matter led to replace Lorentz on the idea that particles with extremely high frequency EM radiation. He could actually show that by shadowing an attractive force between charged particles (which were seen as basic building blocks of matter ) is created. However, this is done only under the condition that the total radiation energy is absorbed. The fundamental problem was the same as in the Teilchenmodellen. That's why he rejected the model and how he carried on, even train instabilities would be expected due to the finite speed of propagation of waves. [A 25]

Coming back to topic discussed Lorentz 1922, the findings of Martin Knudsen about the behavior of gases with very high free path, which was followed by a summary both of Le Sage's particle theory as well as its own electromagnetic variant. However, he reiterated his conclusion from 1900: Without absorption, there is no gravity in this theory [A 26].

1904 [A 27] drew Joseph John Thomson a Le Sage model on EM- base into consideration, in which the radiation is much more penetrating than ordinary X-rays. He argued that the US-led Maxwell heating can be avoided if it is assumed that the absorbed radiation is converted into heat, but is of much greater penetrating power re-emitted as a secondary radiation. He noted that this process could explain where the energy of the radioactive substances coming. However, he said, an internal cause of the radioactivity was much more likely. In 1911 Thomson back to this issue and stated that this secondary radiation very similar to the effect was to cause the electrically charged particles in the penetration of normal matter, being produced as a secondary process X-rays [A 28] He wrote. :

" It is a very interesting result of recent discoveries did the machinery Which Le Sage Introduced for the purpose of his theory Has a very close analogy with things for Which We now have direct experimental evidence [ ... ] X- rays, HOWEVER, When absorbed do not, as far as we know, give rise to more penetrating Rontgen rays As They shoulderstand to explain attraction, but less penetrating rays Either to or to rays of the same kind. "

"It's a very interesting outcome of recent discoveries that introduced by Le Sage in the service of his theory machinery has a very close analogy with things for which we now direct experimental certainty have [ ... ] but X-rays do not cause the emergence of still more penetrating X-rays as they are necessary to generate the attraction, but it caused the same or less penetrating rays. "

In contrast to Lorentz and Thomas Thomson Tommasina used around 1903 [A 29] waves with very long wavelength, small wavelengths he used to explain chemical effects. 1911 [A 30 ] suggested Charles Francis Brush also a model with long wavelength waves before, but he later changed his mind and drew waves before with extremely high frequency.

Further assessments

1905 George Howard Darwin calculated the gravitational force between two bodies at extremely small distances, to see whether a Le Sage model deviations from the law of gravity occur. He came to the same conclusion as Lorentz, that the joints must be completely inelastic, and in contrast to the assumption of Le Sage not only at normal incidence, but also in radiation tangential to the matter surface. This is accompanied by a tightening of the thermal problem. In addition, it must be assumed that all of the elementary constituents of matter of the same size. He further stated that the emission of light and related to the radiation pressure of performing an exact match of Le Sage model. A body with different surface temperature will move towards the colder part. [A 31] Later, he finally said that he had the theory seriously considered, but he himself would not continue to employ her. He did not believe that any scientist accepts it as the right way to an explanation of gravitation. [A 32 ]

Based in part on the calculations of Darwin, Henri Poincaré published in 1908 a detailed critique. He concluded that the attraction in such a model is proportional to where S is the surface area of all the molecules of the earth, v is the velocity of the particles and the density ρ of the medium. Following Laplace he meant that in order to preserve the Massenproportionalität, the upper limit for S is the ten-millionth part of the earth's surface maximum. He explained that the resistance is proportional to Sρv and thus the ratio of resistance and attraction is inversely proportional to Sv. To keep the resistance as low as possible in relation to attraction Poincaré calculated as a lower limit for the speed of the particles of the tremendous value of V = 24.1017 • c, where c is the speed of light. There are now lower limits for V is known and fixed, and Sv is also an upper limit for S, it is possible from the density and thus the heat charge which is proportional to Sρv3. This is sufficient to every second to heat the soil to 1026 ° C. Poincaré noted dryly that " the earth would not seem to bear such a state long ". Poincaré also analyzed some wave models ( Tommasina and Lorentz ), noting that these same problems as the particle models have ( huge wave velocity, heating ). According to the description of the proposed by Thomson model of the re- emission of secondary waves, Poincaré said: "At such a complicated hypotheses one is compelled if one wants to make the theory of Le Sage viable. "

He added that with total absorption in the framework of the model of the Lorentz Earth's temperature would rise to 1013 ° C per second. Poincaré examined Le Sage's model is also related to the principle of relativity, where the speed of light is an impassable limit speed. In the particle theory, therefore, he noted that it was difficult to set up a with the new principle of relativity to be agreed impact law. [A 33 ]

1913 examined David Hilbert in his lectures on physics both Le Sage, and especially Lorentz ' theory. He stated here that the theory does not work because, for example the distance law is no longer valid when the distance between the atoms large enough compared to their wavelength. However, Erwin Madelung, a colleague Hilbert at Göttingen University, used the Lorentz diagram for explanation of the molecular forces. Hilbert classified Made Lungs mathematical model to be very interesting, although some statements were not experimentally testable. [C 7]

1964 Richard Feynman also examined such a model, especially to find out if it is possible to find a mechanism for gravity without the use of complex mathematics. However, after calculating the resistance, the body must learn in this Teilchenmeer, he gave his efforts for the same reasons (unacceptable levels of speed ) as they have been described previously [B 1] He concluded. :

" ' Well', you say, 'it was a good one, and I got rid of the mathematics for awhile. Maybe i could invent a better one '. Maybe you can, Because nobody knows the ultimate. But up to today, from the time of Newton, No one has invented another theoretical description of the mathematical machinery behind this law Which does not say the same thing Either over again, or make the mathematics harder, or predict some wrong phenomena. So there is no model of the theory of gravitation today, other than the mathematical DOCUMENT "

" 'Good ,' you will say, ' it was a good model, and I was the math for a while go. Maybe I could find a better model. " Maybe you can, because no one knows everything. But by the time of Newton until now no one other theoretical description of the mathematical machinery has been behind this law, which is not either the same thing over repeated only mathematics has made ​​heavier or predicted some wrong phenomena. Thus, there is still no other model of the gravitational theory than in mathematical form. "

Predictions and criticism

Matter and particles

A basic prediction of the theory is the extreme porosity of the matter. As already described, matter must consist mostly of empty space, so that the particles can penetrate virtually unimpeded and so take all parts of the body evenly on the gravitational interaction. This prediction was confirmed ( in some way ) in the course of time. Really consists matter mostly of empty space (apart from the fields ) and certain particles such neutrinos can penetrate practically without hindrance. However, the idea of the elementary constituents of matter as classical entities, their interactions by direct contact and are dependent on the shape and size (at least as it was portrayed by Fatio to Poincaré ), is not the representation of elementary particles in modern quantum field theories.

Each Fatio / Le Sage model postulates the existence of a fulfilling the room, isotropic fluid or radiation of enormous intensity and penetrating power. This has some similarity to the background radiation mainly in the form of the microwave background ( CMBR ). The CMBR is actually a space -fulfilling, isotropic radiation, but its intensity is much too low, as well as their penetrating power. Although the other hand, neutrinos possess the necessary penetration power, but this radiation is not isotropic ( since individual stars the main sources of neutrinos ) and its intensity is even lower than that of the CMBR. In addition, both types of rays propagate not faster than light out, which is another prerequisite, at least according to the above calculations. From a modern point of view, and not in connection with Fatios model, the possibility of neutrinos was pulled and refuted as Überträgerteilchen in a quantum gravity Feynman considered. [B 2]

Shielding

This effect is closely related to the assumed porosity and permeability of matter which is necessary to maintain the proportionality to the mass. In order to perform accurate: Those atoms which are not hit by the particles would not participate in the screening and thus the heavy mass of the body more ( B10, above). This effect may, however, the reduction of its components can be minimized by any corresponding increase in the porosity of the material, i.e.. Thus, the probability that these components are well aligned and protect each other, reducing (B10, below). Whole, this effect can not switch off, because to achieve a complete penetrability, the constituents of matter should no longer interact with the particles, but would also have the disappearance of any gravity result. This means that above a certain limit would have a difference between inertial and gravitational mass, be so to observe a deviation from the principle of equivalence.

Any shielding of gravity is thus a violation of the equivalence principle and therefore incompatible with the law of gravitation Newton's and general relativity theory (ART) of Einstein. So far, however, no screening of the gravity was observed. [C 8] For more information about the relationship Le Sage and shielding of gravitation, see Martins. [ C9 ] [ C10 ]

Regarding Isenkrahes suggestion of a connection between density, temperature and weight: Because his argument is based on the change in the density, and the temperature can be lowered and raised at a constant density implies Isenkrahes theory is no fundamental relationship between temperature and weight. ( While there is indeed such a connection, but not in the sense of Isenkrahe. Refer interaction with energy). The prediction of a relationship between density and weight could not be confirmed experimentally.

Speed

One of the main problems of the theory is that a body is moved relative to the reference system in which the velocity of the particles in all directions is the same, would feel resistance in the movement direction. This is because the speed of the impacting body on the particles is greater in the direction of movement. Similarly, the Doppler effect can be observed at wave models. This resistance leads to a steady reduction of orbit around the sun and is ( according to Fatio, Le Sage and Poincaré ) is proportional to uv, where u is the velocity of the body and v is the particle. On the other hand, the force of gravity is proportional to V ², with the result that the ratio of resistance to the force of gravity is proportional to U / V is. At a velocity U of the effective resistance can thus be made arbitrarily small by increasing v. As calculated by Poincaré, v has at least 24.1017 · c be so much greater will be the speed of light. This makes the theory incompatible with the mechanics of special relativity, in which no particles (or waves) can be spread faster than light, because due to the relativity of simultaneity would occur depending on the reference system to causality violations. Even if superluminal speeds would be possible, which would again lead to an enormous heat production - see below.

A also dependent on the particle is the aberration effect of gravity. Due to the finite speed of gravitation it comes to time delays in the interaction of the heavenly bodies, which, in contrast to the resistance lead to a steady increase in the orbits. Again, a greater velocity than that of light must be assumed. While Laplace yet stated a lower limit of 107 · c, recent observations showed a lower limit of 1010 · c. [B 3] It is not known whether also occur in Le Sage model effects as in the ART, which this form compensate for the aberration.

Range

The shadow effect only applies exactly to 1 / r ², when there is no interaction of the particles with one another occurs - that is, the inverse square law is a function of the mean free path of the particles. However, they collide they " blurs " the shadow at a distance. This effect is dependent on the particular model and represented here assumed internal power modes of the particles or waves. To avoid this problem in general, postulated Kelvin and others, that the particles could be defined as small any time, so they would rarely encounter in spite of large number - thus, this effect would be minimized. The presence of large scale structure in the universe, such as galaxies speaks at least for a range of gravity over at least several million light years.

Energy

As explained in the historical section, is another problem with this model, the absorption of energy, and thus the production of heat. Aronson was for a simple example: [C 11]

  • If the kinetic energy of the particles are smaller than those of the body, the particles will move according to the collisions with greater speed and the body will repel.
  • Are body and particles in thermal equilibrium, there is no force.
  • The kinetic energy of the body is smaller than that of the particles, an attraction force is produced. But as shown by Maxwell and Poincaré, would these inelastic collisions bring the body in a split second to distraction, especially if a particle is assumed greater than c.

Isenkrahes deliberate violation of conservation of energy as a possible solution was just as unacceptable as Kelvin's application of the theorem of Clausius, which, as has Kelvin himself notes, leading to a perpetual motion mechanism. The proposal of a secondary re-emission mechanism for wave models (analogous to Kelvin change power modes ) attracted the interest of J. J. Thomson, however, was not taken very seriously by Maxwell and Poincaré. Doing so is a large amount of energy would spontaneously convert from a cold to a warmer form, which is a gross violation of the second law of thermodynamics.

The energy problem was also discussed in connection with the idea of ​​a mass increase and the expansion theory. Ivan Ossipowitsch Jarkowski 1888, Ott Christoph Hilgenberg in 1933 combined its expansion models with the absorption of an ether. [C 12] This theory is largely no longer regarded as a valid alternative to plate tectonics. In addition, would increase significantly due to the equivalence of mass and energy and the application of the calculated Poincaré energy absorption values ​​of the radius of the Earth in no time.

As predicted in the ART and based on experimental confirmations, interacts gravity with every form of energy, and not only with normal matter. The electrostatic binding energy of the nucleons, the energy of the weak interaction of nucleons and the kinetic energy of the electrons carry all the heavy mass of an atom in, as evidenced in high- precision measurements of Eötvös - type. [B 4] This means that a faster movement of the the gas particles causes an increase in the effect of gravity of the gas. Le Sage's theory does not predict such a phenomenon, nor do the other known variations of the theory.

Non- gravitational applications and analogies

Lyman Spitzer calculated in 1941 [B 5] that absorption of radiation between two dust particles leads to an apparent attraction force which is proportional to 1 / r ² (where it obviously analogous theories of Le Sage, and especially the investigations of Lorentz to radiation pressure were unknown). George Gamow, who described this effect as mock gravity, suggested in 1949 [B 6], that after the Big Bang, the temperature of the electrons has fallen faster than the temperature of the background radiation. Absorption of radiation leads to the calculated by Spitzer Le Sage mechanism between the electrons, which is said to have played an important role in the formation of galaxies after the Big Bang. However, this proposal was refuted in 1971 by Field [B 7], who showed that this effect has been much too small, as the electrons and the radiation were located approximately in thermal equilibrium. Hogan and White suggested 1986 [ B 8 ] that a form of mock gravity galaxy formation influenced by absorption vorgalaktischen starlight. But 1989 [ B 9 ] showed Wang and Field, that any form of mock gravity is not able, bring a large enough effect materialize in order to influence the formation of galaxies.

The Le Sage mechanism has been identified as a significant factor in the behavior of complex plasmas [B 10]. Ignatov showed that by inelastic collisions creates an attractive force between two particles suspended in a collision-free, non-thermal plasma dust grains. This attractive force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the dust particles, and can compensate for the Coulomb repulsion between them. [B 11]

In quantum field theory the existence of virtual particles is assumed, leading to the so-called Casimir effect. Hendrik Casimir found out that in the calculation of the vacuum energy between two plates only particles of certain wavelengths occur. Therefore, the energy density between the plates is less than the outside, which leads to an apparent force of attraction between the plates. However, this effect has a very different from the theory Fatios theoretical basis.

Recent Developments

The investigation of Le Sage's theory in the 19th century identified several closely related problems. These include the enormous heating, unstable orbits by resistance and aberration, and not observed shielding of gravity. The recognition of these problems, together with a general shift away from kinetic gravity models resulted in a progressive loss of interest. Finally, Le Sage and other theories have been superseded by Einstein's general theory of relativity.

Although the model is no longer regarded as a valid alternative, attempts at revitalizing be undertaken outside the mainstream, such as the models of Radzievskii and Kagalnikova (1960 ), [B 12] Shneiderov (1961 ), [B 13] Buonomano and Engels (1976 ), [B 14] Adamut (1982 ), [B 15] Jaakkola (1996 ), [B 16] Van Flandern (1999) [ B 17 ] and Edwards ( 2007). [ B 18 ] Various Le Sage models and related topics in Edwards et al. discussed [B 19]

249110
de