Non-curvature of Space by Matter
Of ferman: Fernando Mancebo Rodriguez--- Personal page. ----Spanish pages

Email: ferman25@hotmail.com
Email: ferman30@yahoo.es

Non-curvature of Space by Matter

Supposed demonstrations are continually exposed that the theory of Relativity in relation to the curvature of space, is correct.
However, and to my understanding, they are only misinterpreted and erroneous deductions, which make me suspect that an attempt is only made to give value to research and observations for the mere fact of being in agreement with Relativity.
As can be seen in the drawing, the idea and theory of the curvature of space produced by matter or mass does not have consistency since a simple observer can appreciate that any object attracted by a large mass does not curve in its direction of approach, but rather that goes in a straight line and not towards a pole of that great mass.
It can also be analyzed and discussed the fact that any moving body that undergoes a curvature in its path, is slowed down by the change of direction of the inertial force that it carries, and therefore could never be accelerated as actually occurs in the attraction of an object by a large material mass.
On the other hand, if gravity was not an accelerating force, and it was only a cause of the curved space, then situated on the surface of the earth we would only be a curved body, but not accelerated towards the center of the earth, that is say, we would not weigh anything, could jump and fly as we pleased, etc.
But this does not happen, because we do weigh ourselves (me 65 kg.), And if we make a small jump, the earth counteracts this movement with a contrary force produced by gravity, which is therefore a force.
A supposed deformation of space, which only the great scientific minds know how to imagine correctly (but not explain), is only deformation, not thrust force.
Therefore, in the observation and measurement of movement, inertia, momentum, etc. from an attracted mass it is extracted as a consequence:
1.- That this attracted mass does so in a direct line towards the attracting mass.
2.- That it is not slowed down by having a curved road.
3.- That the attracted mass is impelled in its movement by fields of force (gravity) that, because it is concentric on the star that attracts it, this force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the mass that it is attracts.
As can be seen, there are three simple and clear observations that are always made in any approach movement between stars and attracted objects.
Now, as Relativity is considered for now, more as a dogma of faith than as a theory to discuss and verify, since it is preferred to ignore the simple and visible, and to look for new imaginary methods to make true what at first glance seems to be impossible.
Perhaps it is because we live in times of virtual and imaginary effects and we want to get away from the sad and boring of simple scientific research and discussion.
It is very funny that with our mathematical formulas we can create a parallel and virtual universe, in which there are virtual particles; being able to be in two or more places at the same time; create entanglements of particles; get mass and matter out of nothing; create wormholes that take us throughout the Universe, etc. etc.
Really funny!

As we see in the drawing, perhaps a bit exaggerated, the curvature of the space of Einstein and Schwarzschild is so far-fetched and far from visible reality that it is impossible to give it the least credibility, if you are a bit critical and minimally we review the proposal of these scientists.
Three simple observations:
1.- If space is deformed by matter, this which is also space will be deformed to the same degree of curvature and shape, and thus, a material nucleus (e.g. the sun) would follow this deformation., (as is seen in the drawing)
2.- If this deformation of space exists, each of the planets would also rotate in different planes of rotation on the sun (depending of the radius to the sun) following this curvature, as seen in the drawing.
But we see that this is not the case, and they all have a similar plane of rotation.
3.-All the stars, sun, planets, etc. They have a force of cohesion and compression of their masses in a spherical shape, reaching a great pressure inside them, for which a huge compression force is needed on the mass of the star, an issue that would not occur if the nuclear matter were only deformed into curve (which cannot even be imagined its shape for the simple reason that it is not possible)
Therefore I understand that it is a theory for faithful followers, but not for critics who look for the pros and cons of each theory.

The example of Saturn, like that of our planet, the sun, the observation of galaxies, etc. they show us that Einstein's curvature of space and Schwarzschild's metric are wrong theories.
However, for those who do not like the "raw" reality, they can scape of it with theoretical assumptions of imaginary black holes, those which everyone sees and knows perfectly (sorry for the sarcasm)

Saturn says no! to Einstein and Karl Schwarzschild

As we see in the drawing, Saturn is a planet that seems to be built on purpose to demonstrate the erroneousness of the theories of curvature of space by large material nuclei.
The completely flat orbital shape of its rings and moons tells us clearly that this planet does not curve space.
And we see it clearly, if we wish to do so, when verifying that from its more near vicinity to the distant moons, not even the smallest detail of that proposed Einstein curvature is observed.
If we go to other planets and observe the rotation and also flat situation of their moons, we observe that there is no curvature either.
If we go to the sun, we also observe the same thing.
And if we go to the galaxies, the rotation in a flat way of its star disc is also observed, with a more compact formation in its center.
So we ask ourselves, where do we have to go to observe the curvature of space?
Well, to our relativistic mind to imagine black holes that yes, those fulfill the Schwarzschild metric.

Below is a comparison of my model and that of Einstein (Schwarzschild)

I put drawing on the comparison of my model (TOE.1992) and Einstein's model (Schwarzschild)
In this model the deformation (of both gravitational and magnetic fields) is in spiral way due to the rotation of the large nuclei of matter.
With this spiral deformation, stationary orbits are created on the spin equator where orbitals (planets, moons, electrons, etc.) are driven and stabilized in them.
As we can see, the location of the elements that rotate around the nuclei (stars in the galaxies, planets in the solar systems, moons in the planets, electrons in the atoms, etc.) coincide with the deformation spiral of the magnetic fields and gravitational about the equator of rotation.
With this rotation, the north-south N-S polar direction is also created, with which stars, atoms, etc. are aligned. when creating molecules.

Thank friends