A. Schmidt
All in the bucket !
Link zum Text in deutsch
The article describes a classical experiment
of a rotating water bucket, which is
known as Newton's bucket experiment. He saw this as an argument
to the existence of an absolute motion towards an
"absolute space". The following interpretation
shows, that this phenomenon is not a reference to
an "absolute space".
Isaac Newton imagined, that at the beginning of
the experiment a bucket with water is hanging on
a rope without motion. The surface of water
is plane ( A
) . In the next step the bucket begins to rotate.
In the first seconds only the bucket is in rotation
( B ) and the water
remains plane. Afterwards, also the water content begins
to rotate and at the end of the experiment, bucket and
water are in the same rotation ( C
). In the final state exists no motion between
bucket and water like at the beginning .But the difference between
starting and final state is , that in state (
A ) the surface of water is plane
and in state ( C
) the surface is curved concave.
Newton took the conclusion, that the difference
between starting and final state is caused
by an absolute motion of water
in comparison to an "absolute space". However, the existence
of an "absolute space" was also in Newtons living times
disputed by other scientists .
In the 19. century the physicist and philosopher
Ernst Mach also dealt with this experiment.
He was convinced, that an "absolute space" is not
existing. He supposed in a desperate act, that, if the
rest of mass points in the universe would rotate around
the water bucket, this would result the same concave
curved surface of water. This idea is known as Mach's principle
. The following part of this article shows, that
there is no contradiction between this
experiment and the non-existence of an "absolute space".
In the first step we have to imagine, that we fly in
a spaceship in an empty area of the universe. From
the headquarter comes the order, that we have to move in
a circle until the next destination is made. In this
case you would shake with your head and complain
about such stupid order. In an empty space it is impossible
to move in a circle, because you can only change your direction
by several (energy consuming) direction alterations.
The resulting lane is only an addition of several lines
and not a real circle.
If we want to follow such resolute order, we have to
look for a planet and fly around this planet
in a stable orbit, which is a real circle without consumption
of energy. In this state, gravitation and centrifugal
force are in balance. Now we can take the conclusion,
that for a real circle motion we need
two mass points ( or better
at least two ) in an empty space. A circle motion is
in the deepest nature not an one
point phenomenon .
In
the next step we have to imagine, that such circle moving
also is possible with two equal masses in space.
In this case, both masses are circling around
each other. Gravitation and centrifugal forces are in
balance.
At
last, it is possible to fix a bar between the two
masses. In this step we change from two masses into
one mass body. Now we have a rotating body in space.
If this rotation is harmonious ( gravitation and
centrifugal force in balance ) , there is no force to the
connecting bar. However , when the speed of rotation is
increasing, a draft force occur to the bar. In this case,
electric binding power between atoms of the bar prevent an
increasing ( harmonious ) distance between the
mass points. This space/time non-harmonious of the
gravitation circle motion is balanced by a space/time non-harmonious
of the binding electrons in atomic orbitals. The
binding electrons now are moving in "shifted" orbitals
and so the length of the bar is a little bit bigger.
Finally
we go back to the bucket. When we consider our new
point of view about rotation, we can divide the water
bucket in two rotation systems. One is the bucket itself
and the other the water content. The red and the blue
balls as well as the yellow and green are two
point systems, representative
of all points from the water bucket. When the bucket begins
to rotate, the atoms of the bucket wall have to balance
the new centrifugal force with their binding electrons
and so the wall will be stretched a little, little bit.
In the other system, the water content is in rotation.
But here, the binding forces between the single
water molecules are not strong enough to balance the
centrifugal force. In this case, the balance results
by an increasing water level into the direction
of the bucket wall, which create a weight counter pressure.
Summary: The
mistake of Newton and Mach was, that both saw
the rotation of the water content as an one point space/time
phenomenon. Newton, in contrary to Mach, was in
this point of view very content, because he wanted
to show a rotation relative to an absolute space. On
the other hand, Mach was desperate looking for a solution
of this problem without banishing the concept of a non-absolute
space. However the second point in space is not in a far distance
but in the bucket itself.
In the same way, like it is impossible for a single
spaceship to move in a circle, a rotation is ever
a
two (at least) point space/time phenomenon.
link to
NEWS OF THE SECOND
LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS
contact: dreheimer@email.de
internetaddress of this site: www.dreheimer.com
Gratis Counter by GOWEB
