Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.
Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.
New printer friendly PO pages!
Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!
Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!
Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!
... see more
(propose a free ad)
Please use comments to point to previous work in this direction, and reviews to referee the accuracy of the paper. Feel free to edit this submission to summarise the paper (just click on edit, your summary will then appear under the horizontal line)
(Is this your paper?)
The article summary is as follows:
We can establish a mathematical correspondence between the classical Lagrangian approach and geodesic analysis as suggested by the standard general relativity (GR), in finding the nature of planetary orbits:
The question is: Is the classical flat space three-dimensional Lagrangian analysis geometrically superior to the GR analysis of a four-dimensional curved space, in finding planetary orbits, when we can get similar results in a three-dimensional flat space by modifying potential? We can get this expression for the modified potential by rearranging the curved space four-dimensional metric (or the corresponding total energy equation). The flat space analysis will always have a proper geometric support.
We already know that, the arrangement of charges in the source and speed of the source modifies the potential function, in electrodynamics.
user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required