All in the bucket !

Deutsche Seite


The article describes  a classical  experiment of  a rotating bucket, which  already was carried out by Isaac Newton. He saw  this experiment as an argument for 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".

rotationeimer engl  
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 ). 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.
The following part of this article shows, that there is no contradiction  between this experiment and the non-existence of an "absolute space". 

Raumschiffengl
 
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.
satellittumerdeengl
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 moving we need two mass points ( or better at least two ) in an empty space. A circle moving  is in the deepest nature not an one point phenomenon .
gleicheungleicheengl
In the next step we have to imagine, that such rotation  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.
eikörperzweikörper eng
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     (or molecules) of the bar prevent  an  increasing ( harmonious ) distance between the mass points. This space/time  non-harmonious of the gravitation circling 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.

 
hanteleimer engl  
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.   


Summary: The mistake of  Newton and Mach was, that both  the water rotation saw 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.
But 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 perpetual motion machine 
 

E-Mail: newtonexperiment@email.de

Info-Datenschutz