REVISITING NEWTON’S LAWS

Possible Modification and Cosmological

Consequences

Amitabha Ghosh
Indian Institute of Technology
Kanpur
POINTS TO BE PRESENTED
 Unresolved Issues
 Possible Modification
 Results
 Ultimate Consequences
NEWTON’S LAWS
mi
F

F  mi a a

F
r mgearth mgapple
F F G 2
r
PROBLEMS WITH THESE LAWS
 Ambiguity

 Mystery

 Paradox
AMBIGUITY
The frame of reference ?

F  mi a valid if ‘a’ is measured in an

inertial frame of reference

What is an inertial frame ?

In which F  mi a is valid
MYSTERY

mi  m g

Why ?

This has remained as one of the biggest

mystery in mechanics
 d
PARADOX
m
F  4 r .mG / r
3 2
F
3 
 4 Grm r
3
O
Because the outer
universe can be
considered to be
composed of
concentric spherical
shells and each of
these shells produces
ZERO force on the
particle

But O has been chosen arbitrarily.

Hence F is arbitrary
 MACH’S PRINCIPLE

a
George Berkeley 1717
Ernst Mach 1883

F
Interpretation of Mach’s Principle
1. The inertial properties of an object are
determined by the presence and
distribution of mass-energy throughout
all space
2. The geometry of space-time and
,therefore, the inertial properties of
every infinitesimal test particle are
determined by the distribution of mass-
energy throughout all space
 MACH’S PRINCIPLE

a
F  mi a
mg P

mi  m g F
 QUANTIFYING MACH’S PRINCIPLE
Model of Inertial Induction
Fi +Gravitational Pull = F
a

Fi
m1 m2

m1m2
Fi  G 2 a r

cr
Fi a
m1
m2

Fi is the force due to inertial induction proposed by

D.W.Sciama (1953)
+e1 F F -e2

e1 e 2
F 2
r
+e1 F F -e2
a

e1e2 e1e2
F 2  2 a
r c r
LAWS OF MOTION FROM INERTIAL
INDUCTION

Gm2
a Fi   2
.ma
m Observable c r
Universe
Fi
Gm  dvol 
 2   a
c Universe r 
R0  c
4Gm H
1
 
2
dr.r . a
c2 0
r
 1 ma
10
Actually the result should be ideally Fi=ma
 SOME ISSUES
 Does Mach’s Principle involve instantaneous
action-at-a-distance?
Does the interaction depend on relative
acceleration only?
Let us have a look at our universe
in the large scale
 PICTURE OF THE UNIVERSE

Plot of one
Million
Gallaxies in
the
universe

Universe is
homogeneo
us; quasi
static and
infinite

A mean rest
frame of
the
universe
exists
APPLICATION OF THE PROPOSED MODEL

 Universal Interaction In which the interaction

with the matter present in the rest of the universe is
considered
 Local Interaction In which the interaction with
the nearby matter is considered. Effect of the
interaction with the far away matter is negligible
 Assumptions regarding the matter present in the
universe:
 The universe is infinite and homogeneous in the large
scale
 The universe is quasi static
 The universe is non evolving as a whole
 EXTENSION OF MACH’S PRINCIPLE:
A Simple Model
v
F F
a
m1
m2

Gm1 m 2 Gm1 m 2 2 Gm1m2

F  2 2 v  2 a
r2 c r cr
Extension of Mach’s Principle as
Newton’s static
Mach’s Principle modelled by Sciama
gravitation
As proposed by
Ghosh
 INTERACTION OF A PARTICLE WITH THE
REST OF THE UNIVERSE

dm1
r

v dm1 dm1 2 dm1

m dF  Gm 2
ˆ
r  Gm 2 2
v ˆ
r  Gm 2
arˆ
a r c r c r
dF Integrating over dm1 for the
whole universe

rˆ mv 2 dm maaˆ dm1
F  m  G 2 dm1  2 vˆ  G 2 1  2  G
Universe r c Universe r c Universe
r
mv 2 ma Gdm1
 0  2 vˆ k - 2
aˆ 
c c r

It is nothing but a drag

 Attenuation of Gravity
Gravitational Force  1
r2
 E (energy of graviton)
 m1m2
G  E
E 2
Cosmic drag F   2 c
c c 

 E
c 
Drop in energy for traversing a distance ‘dr’ dE   Fdr   Edr
c
dE 
  dr
E c  r
 E (r )  E (0)e c

 r
 G  G0 e c

Using this expression for G on the RHS of the expression for F

We get  mv  2

F  vˆ  ma
c
INERTIAL INDUCTION OF A MASS PARTICLE
WITH THE REST OF THE UNIVERSE

v
F
m a

mv 2
F   ma
c

 r
G  G0 e c

  G0   1.2 x10 18 s 1

 EXTENSION OF MACH’S PRINCIPLE:
Detailed Model
Newton’s
Static
Accl. Dependent
+ Inertial
Vel. Dependent
+ Inertial Induction
dM
Gravitation Induction (Extension of 
(Mach’s
Principle)
Mach’s Principle)
r

a û r 
dF1

 GmdM v m 
dF1  ruˆ r   dF3
3 
r dF2

 f ( )  1 for  0
 GmdM 2 
dF2  2 2 v f ( )u r  f ( )  0 for  
ˆ
c r 2
 f ( )  1 for  

 f ( )  1 for  0
 GmdM  
dF3  af ( )uˆ r  f ( )  0 for 
2
c r 2
 f ( )  1 for  

 PHENOMENOLOGICAL MODEL OF DYNAMIC
GRAVITATIONAL INTERACTION

All masses are relativistic gravitational masses

though the subscript g has been dropped

 GmdM GmdM 2 GmdM

dF  3
ruˆ r  2 2 v f ( )uˆ r  2
af ( )uˆ r
r c r c r
 The total force on m due to the interaction with the whole
universe 
 2
 G.2r 2 sin  .v 2 mf ( ) cos ddr
F  2  uˆv 2 2
0 0
c r


G.2r1 sin  .amf ( ) cos ddr1
2 2
 2   uˆa
0 0
c 2 r1
 
Gm 2 2 Gm 2
 uˆv   . 2 2 v r dr  uˆa   . 2 ar1 dr1
0
cr 0
c r1
 
2 2
where   4  sin  cos f ( )d  4  sin  cos f ( )d
0 0

    2    
   2  Gdr mv uˆv   2  Gr1dr1 mauˆ a .....(1)
c 0  c 0 
 2   
 
  mv uˆ v   2  Gr1dr1 ma
c c 0 
This is nothing but a
drag on m moving at a
velocity v w.r.t. the
Mean Rest Frame of the
universe
 Attenuation of Gravity
Gravitational Force  1
r2
 E (energy of graviton)
 m1m2
G  E
E 2
Cosmic drag F   2 c
c c 

 E
c 
Drop in energy for traversing a distance ‘dr’ dE   Fdr   Edr
c
dE 
  dr
E c  r
 E (r )  E (0)e c

 r
 G  G0 e c

    G0
Using this  2  Gdr 
c 0  c
    G0
 2  1 1 
Gr dr
c 0  2
Substituting in (1) the total force on a particle of

v
gravitational mass m moving with velocity and

a
acceleration w.r.t. the mean rest frame of the universe
(which is assumed to be quasi static)

 G0 2 G
F  mv uˆv  2 0 mauˆ a
c 
G0 2 
But mv uˆv has been written as mv 2uˆv
c c
 G0
Hence 
c c
in
Or,   G0

Finally using this 

  
F   mv uv  ma
2
ˆ
c

Cosmic Drag Newton’s

Second Law
The Magnitude of Cosmic Drag
To determine the magnitude of the cosmic drag the value of  is
necessary, which depends on the nature of f ( ) and f ( ) .

It can be shown that f ( )  cos  . cos  and f ( )  cos  . cos 

satisfy the necessary condition. With these functions   .

Using the average matter density of the universe

  7 10 27 kgm 3

  1.2110 18
s 1
COMPARATIVE MAGNITUDES OF INERTIAL
INDUCTION TERMS

Local Interaction – Velocity-dependent Inertial Induction

is much more significant

Universal Interaction – Primary contribution is from

acceleration-dependent Inertial Induction. All moving bodies
are subjected to a cosmic drag due to velocity dependent
inertial induction.
REDSHIFT OF PHOTONS
Redshift of light (or electromagnetic wave) will be
used frequently. So, a brief introduction is
presented below.

   
Source Observer
The wavelength of the photon increases means that it
is shifted towards red. The function

z 

is called the redshift.
vrecession
The redshift is caused by a recession z
of the source (called the Doppler c
effect )
and by the loss of photon energy
(called the tired light effect).
 CONSEQUENCES OF UNIVERSAL
INTERACTION: Cosmological Red Shift without Universal
Expansion
c
E  h
dx

A photon of energy E is subjected to cosmic drag

E
c
E
Hence dE   dx
c
Since E  h the above relation becomes
d  ( )dx
c
Using the initial condition    0

0

 exp  ( ) x
c

 When ( ) x  1 the above relation is linearized as follows:
c
   0 
  x
0 0 c
 
Or,  x
0 c
Thus the redshift of an object at a distance r becomes

 
z  r
 c
The exact expression is

 r
z  1  e c

When the gravitational potential
energy of a particle of rest mass
m is determined using this model
it comes out as -4/3 mc² !!!
GENERAL RESULTS FROM THE PROPOSED
MODEL

 A Mean Rest Frame Exists. This removes the ambiguity

about the frame of reference

 The force law is derived from the gravitational interaction

establishing the exact equivalence between the
gravitational and inertial masses

 The gravitational constant decreases exponentially with

distance. This removes the gravitational paradox
 The gravitational potential energy of a particle of rest mass
m comes out as -4/3 mc². Indications are there that the
total energy content in the universe is zero.

So all the three major problems of Newton’s

laws are resolved
INTERACTIONS OF LOCAL NATURE

Interaction of light with matter

Interaction of matter with

matter
PHOTON – MATTER
INTERACTION
LOCAL PHOTON – MATTER INTERACTION
M
 0 0  0  
R

GRAV. PULL

 G0 M
z  2
M 0 c R
 0 0  0  
R

GRAV. PULL

INERTIAL DRAG

 GM
z  1.67 02
0 c R
 EXCESS REDSHIFT IN WHITE DWARFS
The gravitational redshift of
the photons emerging from the 0 
surface of a star is given by the
following equation:
  0 GM GM 1 
z ~ 2  2 (1  sin 2  ) R

0 c R c R 3 M

GM 1 2 GM
~ 2 (2  sin  )  2
c R 3 c R
Since white dwarfs are very high density stars the gravitational
redshifts of the light from such stars are much higher than normal
stars. The added magnitude of the redshift due to velocity
dependent inertial induction will make the star to appear more
massive if the whole magnitude is assumed to be due to just
gravitational redshift.
   0 GM
According to conventional theory z ~ 2
0 c R

GM 2GM
With the proposed theory z~ 
c 2 R 3c 2 R

So c2R
M~z
G
3 c2R
M~ z
5 G
Method No. of stars Mean mass
Photometry 110 0.55 ms
Photometry 31 0.60 ms
Binary stars 7 0.73 ms
Two-colour Diagram 40 0.60 ms
Two-colour Diagram 35 0.45 ms
H-line profiles 17 0.55 ms
All together 240 average ma = 0.60 ms
Gravitational red shift (conventional) 83 average mr = 0.80 ms
Gravitational red shift (considering 83 average m` = 0.50 m
 PHOTONS GRAZING MASSIVE OBJECTS
 0
r
c c
  0  4G0 M 
M z = exp  1
0
2
 3c r 

Typical object M r z
Typical star ~Mo ~ro ~10-6
Typical white dwarf ~Mo ~ro/80 ~10-4
Typical neutron star ~2Mo ~10km ~0.5
Jupiter ~2Mo/100 ~ ro/100 ~10-8
Black Hole ~1
Conventional theories do not predict any resultant red
shift of photons.
OBSERVATIONAL RESULTS FOR GRAZING REDSHIFTS
 UNEXPLAINED EXCESS REDSHIFT AT THE
SOLAR LIMB

 '

R


SUN  ''

Because of granulation effect the solar matter oozes out of the surface in
the form of bubbles. It expands sideways and then again sinks below the
surface. The redshift of the coming out of the sun and reaching earth can
be expressed in the form of an equivalent Dopplerian velocity of recession
1 2
veq  0.636(2  sin  )  cos   0.2 sin  Km/s
3
OBSERVATIONAL RESULTS OF EXCESS
REDSHIFT IN THE SOLAR LIMB
Thus in all the three cases of photon-matter
interaction the proposed model produces correct
results

It resolves the unexplained mass discrepancy in white

Dwarfs

It explains the unexplained redshift of light grazing

past the sun

It resolves the long standing issue of excess redshift in

The solar spectrum at the limb
MATTER-MATTER
INTERACTION
 TRANSFER OF ANGULAR MOMENTUM

Resultant
Spin F force

The resultant force pushes

the body forward causing a
F
gain in its orbital angular
As a result of the velocity dependent momentum. Gain in angular
inertial induction the spinning body is momentum
subjected to a resisting torque and it
slows down. Loss of angular
momentum
NO SUCH TRANSFER OF ANGULAR MOMENTUM FROM ONE
BODY TO ANOTHER IS POSSIBLE IN CONVENTIONAL
MECHANICS
SECULAR RETARDATION OF EARTH’S
ROTATION


  6  10  22 rad s2
 
 moon  1.3  10  23 rad s 2

Conventional explanation of this

Secular retardation is tidal
friction due to the moon
 MECHANISM OF TIDAL FRICTION
Force due to
gravitational pull of the
tidal bulge

Moon

Ocean


Torque due to
Earth
tidal friction

According to this theory the moon should have been so close to

the earth 1000 million years ago that both the earth and the
moon should have been destroyed because of mutual
gravitational pull. But though there is sedimentological evidence
of tidal phenomenon for last 3000 million years there is no sign
of any close approach
 2
GM s .m  R 
2   R
rs  c 
R
2
 GM s .m  R 
R T 2  
rs  c 
EARTH

SUN

T  4.75  10 N  m
16
 ~ 5.5  10  22 rad .s  2 !!!!

Furthermore there is NO close approach problem of the moon

 SECULAR ACCELERATION OF PHOBOS
 phobos
 phobos   mars
Phobos

Observed  mars

 phobos ~ 0.6  10 3 deg . yr  2
The calculated value of  phobos
Using the proposed theory
MARS
~0.46X10 -3 deg yr-2 !!!!
SECULAR RETARDATION OF DEIMOS
In a similar manner the secular change in the orbital
Speed of the other satellite Deimos can be calculated.
We get the following theoretical result:


 Deimos =-4.94x10-23 rad s-2

The observation is very inaccurate for Deimos. The

Following observational result is available which is
Very approximate:


 Deimos =-2.46x10-23  6x10-23 rad s-2
SECULAR RETARDATION OF MARS

Interaction with the sun produces a secular retardation

of the spin of Mars. The magnitude can be calculated as
done in case of the Earth and we get a magnitude as
follows:

 Mars  1.25  10  22 rad s-2

Still no observation has been made to detect any

secular retardation of Mars. Perhaps because it
is not expected to be present in the absence of
any sizable satellite that can absorb the loss of
angular momentum of Mars. Phobos and Deimos
are like specs of dust in comparison to the Moon
and transfer of any noticeable angular momentum
will throw them out of the solar system . However if
ever a secular retardation of Mars is detected there
will be no other explanation but the inertial induction
 TRANSFER OF SOLAR ANGULAR MOMENTUM
At present the sun consists of 99.9% of the total mass of the solar system but only 0.5%
of the total angular momentum of the solar system is possessed by the sun!!!

Conventional Velocity-
mechanisms dependent
are active & inertial
prominent induction is
only during operating
this pre- during the
main- whole period
Collapse - 106 yrs sequence
period

Onset of main sequence -

107 yrs

Main sequence period

- 4.6x109 yrs
Taking the angular momentum of the original
cloud as 1044kg.m2.s-1(from other existing
estimates) and taking the mass of the
detached disc as ~2% (estimated from the
existing evidences) the present solar angular
momentum comes out as 1.4x1041kg.m2s-1
when a transfer mechanism based on inertial
induction is considered. This value is
1.5x1041kg.m2s-1.This model also agrees with
the observed phenomenon of old stars being
slow rotators and vice versa
A number of other unexplained phenomena can be
nicely explained using the proposed model. This model
also removes the problem of large proportion of dark
matter in clusters of galaxies. The required mass
distribution in spiral galaxies resulting in flat rotation
curve also comes out as a result of the proposed
inertial induction.

It is indeed very surprising that so many unconnected

phenomena are explained by this theory though there
are NO free adjustable parameters in the model
 CONCLUSIONS
The proposed theory of “Extended Mach’s Principle” based on the
model of “Velocity Dependent Inertial Induction” leads to a number
of interesting consequences and results as presented below in a
consolidated format
Model of the universe:
Infinite, non-evolving and non expanding satisfying the Perfect
Cosmological Principle

Consequences of universal interaction Consequences of local interaction

1.Exact equivalence of gravitational 1.Excess redshift of photons grazing massive bodies

and inertial mass
2.No ambiguity about the frame of
reference
3.No gravitational paradox
4.Law of motion modified; a small
cosmic drag acts on all bodies
moving with uniform velocity
5.Cosmic drag produces the
cosmological redshift
6.No need of large amount of dark
matter
explained
2.Excess redshift at the solar limb explained
3.Mass discrepancy of white dwarf stars resolved
4.A mechanism for angular momentum transfer
without physical contact is obtained. It explains-
(i) Secular retardation of the earth’s spin without
close approach problem
(ii) Secular acceleration of Phobos and Deimos
(iii) Longstanding problem of solar angular
momentum transfer is resolved
5.Mass distribution in spiral galaxies
explained
The diurnal and annual variations of the anomalous
redshift in the signals from Pioneer 10 and 11 also
match very nicely (both in magnitude and phase)
with the predictions from this theory
Final Recommendation and Comments

The secular change in the spin rate of planet

mars should be detected if any. That can yield
a positive decision either in favour or against
the hypothesis of “velocity dependent inertial
induction”.

As planet mars played the most crucial central

role in transforming old astronomy into
the modern one , it can again help
to decide the nature of our
universe
 REFERENCES

1. A.Ghosh, Pramana-Jr.of Physics,v23,p-L671(1984)

2. A.Ghosh, Pramana-Jr.of Physics,v26,p-1(1986)
3. A.Ghosh, Pramana-Jr.of Physics,v27,p-725(1986)
4. A.Ghosh,S.Rai,A.Gupta, Astrophysics & Space
Science,v141,p-1(1988)
5. A.Ghosh, Earth, Moon & Planets,v42,p-169 (1988)
6. A.Ghosh, Apeiron, no.9-10 (1991)
7. A.Ghosh, Progress in New Cosmology: Beyond the
Big Bang (Proc. Of the 13th Krakow Int. Summer
School on Cosmology, Lodz, Poland, 1992), Plenum
Press (1993)
8. A.Ghosh, Physics Education (India),v11,p-417 (1995)
9. A.Ghosh, Apeiron, v2, p-38 (1995)
10.A.Ghosh, Astrophysics & Space Science,v227,
p-41(1995)
11.A.Ghosh, Origin of Inertia, Apeiron, Montreal (2000)
Affiliated East West Press, New Delhi (2002)
THANK
YOU