Gravitational waves from orbiting binaries without general relativity: a tutorial on not how to do physics

The best way to show how ridiculous is the theory of gravitational waves is to present the arguments used by Hilbron in a tutorial on gravitational waves that does not use general relativity. Although his expressions for the  polarization, angular distributions, and overall power results differ from those of GR, waveforms that are very similar to the pre-binary-merger portions of the signals observed by the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO-VIRGO) collaboration.

The Luminosity Attributed to Gravitational Waves is Incompatible with a Black-Body Spectrum

In our last blog we derived the speed of gravity from the observational period and variation in the period of the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16 that was discovered by Taylor and Hulse. The luminosity spectrum they used went back to a 1963 paper of Peter and Mathews who took the rate of energy emission of Einstein's rotating dumbbell,

$$L=\frac{G}{5c^5}\left(\frac{d^3Q_{ij}}{dt^3}\frac{d^3Q_{ij}}{dt^3}-\frac{1}{3}\frac{d^3Q_{ii}}{dt^3}\frac{d^3Q_{jj}}{dt^3}\right),$$

and evaluated the quadrupole moments using a Keplerian ellipse

Derivation of Laplace's Equation for the Speed of Gravity from Newtonian Dynamics

 Derivations of Laplace's formula for the change in period of the moon, that yielded a formula for the speed of gravity, has been derived by a number of authors. The key point is to consider the tangential force acting on the moon due to aberration due to the finite speed at which (supposedly) gravity propagates. To the central force, $\mu/a^2$,  where $\mu$ is the gravitational parameter containing the mass of the earth, $GM$, and $a$ the semi-major axis, the aberration term $v/v_G$ is appended where $v_G$ is the speed at which gravity supposedly propagates.

The Relativity of Kepler's Laws

Everyone thinks of Kepler's laws as being static with the period of orbital motion enters into his third and not time increments. That is, it is the period that is proportional to the area to the power $3/2$, and not the time increments themselves. Yet, time does enter into his law, and there are two different time depending on which focus is used as a reference.

Optical Basis of Kepler's Equation

Kepler's equation gives the orbit of a particle on an ellipse in terms of the time $t$, or better in terms of the mean anomaly, 

$$M=t\sqrt{\frac{GM}{a^3}}=E-\varepsilon\sin E,$$

where, $a$ is the radius that inscribes the ellipse, as shown in the figure below, $E$, is the central angle called the eccentric anomaly, and $\varepsilon$ is the eccentricity of the ellipse.

From Newtonian Gravitation to Maxwell's Fish-Eye to Cassini Ovals

It is known [Needham, Am. Math. Monthly 100 (1993) 119-137] that there are only three pairs of integer exponents for dual force laws

$$[1,-2]\hspace{25pt}[-5,5]\hspace{25pt}[-4,-7].$$

 $[\tilde{a},a]$ stands for  pair of exponents in the force laws

$$\frac{d^2z}{dt^2}=-z|z|^{\tilde{a}-1},$$

and

$$\frac{d^2w}{d\tau^2}=-w|w|^{a-1},$$

where $z$ and $w$ are related by the conformal transform,

$$w=z^{\alpha},$$

Snell's Law for Rotational Motion

It has been burned into our minds that the index of refraction must be the inverse of the velocity in units where $c=1$. This has many ramifications like Snell's law here the ratio of the sine of the angle with respect to the normal and the velocity of the ray is constant. And in nonhomogeneous, but spherically symmetric, media where the index of refraction varies with the radial coordinate, the frequency of the wave remains constant making the velocity equal to the wavelength. 

Solving the orbital equation,

Optical Theory of Gravitation: What Newton Didn't Do

Following the publication of the first edition of Principia, Newton set himself to correct and revise it. Newton proposed three distinct methods for producing the solution to the equation of motion of Kepler's problem. In the first edition, curvature played a minor role, but all this changed in the new edition where curvature was elevated to play a major role in determining the law of force.

Incompatibility of the Schwarzschild solution and Newton's Inverse Square Law

Newton proved, save claims to the contrary, that under an inverse square law force every orbit is a conic section. And the reverse is also true that every orbit which is a conic section corresponds to and inverse square law for the force. Newton showed this by using uniform circular motion in which the radius of curvature is constant.

The radius of the Schwarzschild metric is not constant, but, rather

$$\kappa=-\frac{\mathcal{R}}{r^3}\left(1-\frac{3\mathcal{R}}{4r}\right),$$

Time Dilation and Space Contraction from Keplerian Orbits

We have discussed repulsive gravity within the context of the conformal equivalence between the squares of Hookean ellipses and the orbits in a gravitational field. In particular attractive oscillators corresponds to attractive gravity while a negative Hookean law is equivalent to repulsive gravity. Here, we show that oscillators and gravitational forces lead to non-Euclidean geometries. This has been discussed before by Milnor, "On the geometry of the Kepler problem" in Not. Am Math Soc90 (1983) 353-365.