New measurements of the gravitational constant further confuse the situation. The gravitational constant is a variable

Being one of the fundamental quantities in physics, the gravitational constant was first mentioned in the 18th century. At the same time, the first attempts were made to measure its value, however, due to the imperfection of instruments and insufficient knowledge in this area, it was possible to do this only in the middle of the 19th century. Later, the result obtained was repeatedly corrected (the last time it was done in 2013). However, it should be noted that the fundamental difference between the first (G = 6.67428(67) 10 −11 m³ s −2 kg −1 or N m² kg −2) and the latter (G = 6.67384( 80) 10 −11 m³ s −2 kg −1 or N m² kg −2) values ​​do not exist.

When applying this coefficient for practical calculations, it should be understood that the constant is such in global universal concepts (if you do not make reservations for elementary particle physics and other little-studied sciences). And this means that the gravitational constant of the Earth, the Moon or Mars will not differ from each other.

This quantity is a basic constant in classical mechanics. Therefore, the gravitational constant is involved in a variety of calculations. In particular, without information about a more or less accurate value of this parameter, scientists would not be able to calculate such an important coefficient in the space industry as the acceleration of free fall (which will be different for each planet or other cosmic body).

However, Newton, who voiced in a general way, the gravitational constant was known only in theory. That is, he was able to formulate one of the most important physical postulates, without having information about the value on which he, in fact, is based.

Unlike other fundamental constants, physics can only say with a certain degree of accuracy about what the gravitational constant is equal to. Its value is periodically obtained anew, and each time it differs from the previous one. Most scientists believe that this fact is not associated with its changes, but with more banal reasons. Firstly, these are measurement methods (various experiments are carried out to calculate this constant), and secondly, the accuracy of the instruments, which gradually increases, the data is refined, and a new result is obtained.

Taking into account the fact that the gravitational constant is a quantity measured by 10 to -11 power (which is an ultra-small value for classical mechanics), there is nothing surprising in the constant refinement of the coefficient. Moreover, the symbol is subject to correction, starting from 14 after the decimal point.

However, there is another theory in modern wave physics, which was put forward by Fred Hoyle and J. Narlikar back in the 70s of the last century. According to their assumptions, the gravitational constant decreases with time, which affects many other indicators that are considered constants. Thus, the American astronomer van Flandern noted the phenomenon of slight acceleration of the Moon and other celestial bodies. Guided by this theory, it should be assumed that there were no global errors in the early calculations, and the difference in the results obtained is explained by changes in the value of the constant itself. The same theory speaks of the inconstancy of some other quantities, such as

In Newton's theory of gravitation, and in Einstein's theory of relativity, the gravitational constant ( G) is a universal constant of nature, unchanging in space and time, independent of the physical and chemical properties of the medium and gravitating masses.

In its original form, in Newton's formula, the coefficient G was absent. As the source points out: “The gravitational constant was first introduced into the law of universal gravitation, apparently, only after the transition to a single metric system of measures. Perhaps for the first time this was done by the French physicist S.D. Poisson in "Treatise on Mechanics" (1809), at least no earlier works in which the gravitational constant would appear have been identified by historians.

Coefficient introduction G was caused by two reasons: the need to establish the correct dimension and coordinate the forces of gravity with real data. But the presence of this coefficient in the law of universal gravitation still did not shed light on the physics of the process of mutual attraction, for which Newton was criticized by his contemporaries.

Newton was accused for one serious reason: if bodies are attracted to each other, then they must spend energy on this, but the theory does not show where the energy comes from, how it is spent and from what sources it is replenished. As some researchers note: the discovery of this law occurred after the principle of conservation of momentum introduced by Descartes, but from Newton's theory it followed that attraction is a property inherent in the interacting masses of bodies that consume energy without replenishment and it does not become less! This is some kind of inexhaustible source of gravitational energy!

Leibniz called Newton's principle of gravity "an immaterial and inexplicable force." The suggestion of an attractive force in a perfect void was described by Bernoulli as "outrageous"; and the principle of "actio in distans" (action at a distance) did not meet then with much favor than it does now.

Probably, not from scratch, physics met with hostility Newton's formula, it really does not reflect the energy for gravitational interaction. Why do different planets have different gravity, and G for all bodies on Earth and in Space is a constant? Maybe G depends on the mass of the bodies, but in its pure form, the mass does not have any gravity.

Taking into account the fact that in each specific case the interaction (attraction) of bodies occurs with a different force (effort), this force must depend on the energy of the gravitating masses. In connection with the above, in Newton's formula there must be an energy coefficient responsible for the energy of the attracted masses. A more correct statement in the gravitational attraction of bodies would be to speak not of the interaction of masses, but of the interaction of energies contained in these masses. That is, energy has a material carrier, without which it cannot exist.

Since the energy saturation of bodies is related to their heat (temperature), the coefficient should reflect this correspondence, since heat creates gravity!

Another argument about the non-constancy of G. I will quote from a retro textbook on physics: “In general, the ratio E \u003d mc 2 shows that the mass of any body is proportional to its total energy. Therefore, any change in the energy of the body is accompanied by a simultaneous change in its mass. So, for example, if a body is heated, then its mass increases.

If the mass of two heated bodies increases, then, in accordance with the law of universal gravitation, the force of their mutual attraction must also increase. But here a serious problem arises. As the temperature rises to infinity, the masses and force between gravitating bodies will also tend to infinity. If we argue that the temperature is infinite, and now sometimes such liberties are allowed, then the gravity between two bodies will also be infinite, as a result, the bodies should contract when heated, not expand! But nature, as you see, does not reach the point of absurdity!

How to get around this difficulty? It is trivial - it is necessary to find the maximum temperature of a substance in nature. Question: how to find it?

temperature is finite

I believe that a huge number of laboratory measurements of the gravitational constant have been and are being carried out at room temperature, equal to: Θ=293 K(20 0 C) or close to this temperature, because the tool itself - the Cavendish torsion balance, requires very delicate handling (Fig. 2). During measurements, any interference must be excluded, especially vibration and temperature changes. Measurements must be carried out in a vacuum with high accuracy, this is required by a very small value of the measured quantity.

In order for the "Law of Universal Gravitation" to be universal and universal, it is necessary to connect it with the thermodynamic temperature scale. To do this, we will help the calculations and graphs, which are presented below.

Let's take the Cartesian coordinate system OX - OU. In these coordinates, we construct the initial function G=ƒ( Θ ).

Let us plot the temperature on the x-axis, starting from zero degrees Kelvin. On the ordinate axis, we plot the values ​​of the coefficient G, taking into account that its values ​​should be in the range from zero to one.

Note the first reference point (A), this point with coordinates: x=293.15 K (20⁰С); y \u003d 6.67408 10 -11 Nm 2 /kg 2 (G). Let's connect this point with the origin of coordinates and get the dependence graph G=ƒ( Θ ), (Fig. 3)

Rice. 3

We extrapolate this graph, extend the straight line to the intersection with the value of the ordinate equal to one, y=1. There were technical difficulties in plotting the graph. In order to build the initial part of the graph, it was necessary to greatly increase the scale, since the parameter G has a very small value. The graph has a small elevation angle, therefore, to lay it on one sheet, we will resort to the logarithmic scale of the x-axis (fig.4).

Rice. 4

And now, attention!

The intersection of the graph function with the ordinate G=1, gives the second fiducial point (B). From this point we lower the perpendicular to the abscissa axis, on which we obtain the value of the coordinate x \u003d 4.39 10 12 K.

What is this value and what does it mean? According to the construction condition, this is the temperature. The projection of the point (B) on the x-axis reflects - the highest possible temperature of a substance in nature!

For convenience of perception, we present the same graph in double logarithmic coordinates ( fig.5).

Coefficient G cannot have a value greater than one by definition. This point closed the absolute thermodynamic temperature scale, the beginning of which was laid by Lord Kelvin in 1848.

The graph shows that the G coefficient is proportional to body temperature. Therefore, the gravitational constant is a variable, and in the law of universal gravitation (1) it must be determined by the ratio:

G E - universal coefficient (UC), not to be confused with G, we write it with an index E(Eergy - energy). If the temperatures of the interacting bodies are different, then their average value is taken.

Θ 1 is the temperature of the first body

Θ2 is the temperature of the second body.

Θmax- the maximum possible temperature of a substance in nature.

In this spelling, the coefficient G E has no dimension, which confirms it as a coefficient of proportionality and universality.

Let us substitute G E into expression (1) and write down the law of universal gravitation in general form:

It is only thanks to the energy contained in the masses that their mutual attraction occurs. Energy is the property of the material world to do work.

Only due to the loss of energy for attraction, interaction between cosmic bodies is carried out. Energy loss can be identified with cooling.

Any body (substance), cooling down, loses energy and due to this, oddly enough, is attracted to other bodies. The physical nature of the gravitation of bodies consists in striving for the most stable state with the least internal energy - this is the natural state of nature.

Newton's formula (4) has taken a systematic form. This is very important for calculations of space flights of artificial satellites and interplanetary stations, and will also make it possible to more accurately calculate, first of all, the mass of the Sun. Work G on the M known for those planets, the motion of satellites around which was measured with high accuracy. From the motion of the planets themselves around the Sun, one can calculate G and the mass of the sun. The errors of the masses of the Earth and the Sun are determined by the error G.

The new coefficient will finally make it possible to understand and explain why the trajectories of the orbits of the first satellites (pioneers) so far did not correspond to the calculated ones. When launching satellites, the temperature of the outgoing gases was not taken into account. Calculations showed a lower thrust of the rocket, and the satellites rose to a higher orbit, for example, the Explorer-1 orbit turned out to be 360 ​​km higher than the calculated one. Von Braun passed away without understanding this phenomenon.

Until now, the gravitational constant had no physical meaning, it was just an auxiliary coefficient in the law of universal gravitation, which serves to connect the dimensions. The existing numerical value of this constant turned the law not into a universal one, but into a particular one, for one temperature value!

The gravitational constant is a variable. I will say more, the gravitational constant, even within the limits of the earth's gravity, is not a constant value, because gravitational attraction involves not the masses of bodies, but the energies contained in the measured bodies. For this reason, it is not possible to achieve high accuracy of measurements of the gravitational constant.

Law of gravity

Newton's law of universal gravitation and the universal coefficient (G E =UC).

Since this coefficient is dimensionless, the universal gravitation formula received the dimension dim kg 2 /m 2 - this is an off-system unit that arose as a result of the use of body masses. With dimension, we came to the original form of the formula, which was due to Newton.

Since formula (4) identifies the force of attraction, which in the SI system is measured in Newtons, we can use the dimensional coefficient (K), as in Coulomb's law.

Where K is a factor equal to 1. To convert the dimension to SI, you can use the same dimension as G, i.e. K \u003d m 3 kg -1 s -2.

Experiments testify: gravitation is not generated by mass (substance), gravitation is carried out with the help of energies contained in these masses! The acceleration of bodies in a gravitational field does not depend on their mass, so all bodies fall to the ground with the same acceleration. On the one hand, the acceleration of bodies is proportional to the force acting on them and, therefore, proportional to their gravitational mass. Then, according to the logic of reasoning, the formula for the law of universal gravitation should look like this:

Where E 1 and E 2 is the energy contained in the masses of interacting bodies.

Since it is very difficult to determine the energy of bodies in calculations, we will leave the masses in Newton's formula (4), with the replacement of the constant G to the energy factor G E.

The maximum temperature can be more accurately calculated mathematically from the relationship:

We write this ratio in numerical form, given that (G max =1):

From here: Θmax\u003d 4.392365689353438 10 12 K (8)

Θmax is the maximum possible temperature of a substance in nature, above which the value is impossible!

I want to note right away that this is far from an abstract figure, it says that everything is finite in physical nature! Physics describes the world based on fundamental concepts of finite divisibility, finite speed of light, respectively, and the temperature must be finite!

Θ max 4.4 trillion degrees (4.4 teraKelvin). It is hard to imagine, according to our earthly standards (feelings), such a high temperature, but its final value puts a ban on speculation with its infinity. Such a statement leads us to the conclusion that gravity cannot be infinite either, the relation G E =Θ/Θ max puts everything in its place.

Another thing is if the numerator (3) is equal to zero (absolute zero) of the thermodynamic temperature scale, then the force F in formula (5) will be equal to zero. The attraction between the bodies must stop, the bodies and objects will begin to crumble into their constituent particles, molecules and atoms.

Continued in the next article...

The gravitational constant is the basis for converting other physical and astronomical quantities, such as the masses of the planets in the universe, including the Earth, as well as other cosmic bodies, into traditional units of measurement, such as kilograms. At the same time, due to the weakness of the gravitational interaction and the resulting low accuracy of measurements of the gravitational constant, the ratios of the masses of cosmic bodies are usually known much more accurately than individual masses in kilograms.

The gravitational constant is one of the basic units of measurement in the Planck system of units.

Measurement history

The gravitational constant appears in the modern record of the law of universal gravitation, but was absent explicitly from Newton and in the works of other scientists until the beginning of the 19th century. The gravitational constant in its current form was first introduced into the law of universal gravitation, apparently, only after the transition to a single metric system of measures. Perhaps for the first time this was done by the French physicist Poisson in the Treatise on Mechanics (1809), at least no earlier works in which the gravitational constant would appear have been identified by historians [ ] .

see also

Notes

1. In general relativity, notation using the letter G, are rarely used, because there this letter is usually used to denote the Einstein tensor.
2. By definition, the masses included in this equation are gravitational masses, however, the discrepancy between the magnitude of the gravitational and inertial mass of any body has not yet been experimentally found. Theoretically, within the framework of modern ideas, they are hardly different. This has generally been the standard assumption since Newton's time.
3. New measurements of the gravitational constant confuse the situation even more // Elementy.ru, 09/13/2013
4. CODATA Internationally recommended values ​​of the Fundamental Physical Constants(English) . Retrieved June 30, 2015.
5. Different authors give different results, from 6.754⋅10 −11 m²/kg² to (6.60 ± 0.04)⋅10 −11 m³/(kg s³) - see Cavendish experiment#Calculated value.
6. Igor Ivanov. New measurements of the gravitational constant further confuse the situation (indefinite) (September 13, 2013). Retrieved 14 September 2013.
7. Is the gravitational constant so constant? Archival copy dated July 14, 2014 at the Wayback Machine
8. Brooks, Michael Can Earth's magnetic field sway gravity? (indefinite) . New Scientist (September 21, 2002). [Archived at the Wayback Machine Archived] February 8, 2011.
9. Eroshenko Yu. N. Physics news on the Internet (based on electronic preprints), UFN, 2000, vol. 170, no. 6, p. 680
10. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 110801 (2010) at ArXiv.org
11. Physics news for October 2010
12. Quinn Terry, Parks Harold, Speake Clive, Davis Richard. Improved Determination of G Using Two Methods // Physical Review Letters. - 2013. - 5 September (vol. 111, no. 10). - ISSN 0031-9007. - DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.101102 .
13. Quinn Terry, Speake Clive, Parks Harold, Davis Richard. Erratum: Improved Determination of G Using Two Methods // Physical Review Letters. - 2014. - July 15 (vol. 113, no. 3). - ISSN 0031-9007. - DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.039901 .
14. Rosi G. , Sorrentino F. , Cacciapuoti L. , Prevedelli M. , Tino G. M.