When I saw her, I want'd her greatly.
And the Archangel said to me, "Why, do your wonder?
. . . I shall tell you the mystery of that woman."
- Revelation 17:6-7

There was a New York Times best seller called Science is at an End that proved science could progress no further. It was hailed as a hallmark work by scientists all around the world. My PhD research here at the University of Texas at Austin has been to argue the opposite. I have a sexed up rebuttal here on my website, showing a dozen glaring flaws in astronomy, orbital mechanics, relativity, and astrophysics. Clearly, science is only beginning. Now, I will turn now to the space research that has aroused so much controversy in the minds of prudish scientists the whole world round.


a numerical model


Most people don't realize that Celestial Mechanics has explanations for all the phenomena physicists explain using Relativity Theory. In fact, Relativity Theory was first derived in the context of Celestial Mechanics, by the famous French mathematician Poincare in the late 1800's. Einstein arrived at the same results by a different approach several decades later. In the early 1900's when Einstein was doing his best work, there were literally thirty experts in Celestial Mechanics who were his equal intellectually; if not smarter. . . These brilliant men were deriving applications beyond Relativity Theory long before physicists ever heard of the word - and we've been ahead of the curve ever since!

We're the mysterious "dark force" that astronomers say is causing all the objects in the Universe to move apart at an acclerating rate. Sure, they're moving apart when studied in the context of Relativity Theory. In the much more structured, mathematically exact science of Celestial Mechanics, the Universe is stable - it's the speed of light, "c" that varies. If physicists have recently managed to slow light down to zero velocity, how can any rational person assume that it's velocity is fixed at the other end of the spectrum?

Be that as it may, there are many nice things about Celestial Mechanics. It is much less abstract ~ you will see that 90% of the material in my textbook on the Two Body Problem is basic geometry and trigonometry, and the rest is first year calculus. Celestial Mechanics is also far more generalized and with LOTS of room for more elaborate theories. We're still working on the Three Body Problem (which has no solution in closed form); I have some material on the Ten Body Problem (i.e. the Sun + nine planets); and there are also some comments on the Many Body Problem, which reduces down to the equations for an incompressible fluid. (This was proven over 100 years ago and is generally accepted by all space scientists.)

Celestial Mechanics shows that space acts just like a fluid at velocities on the order of the speed of light, not like Relativity's brick wall. This is quite obvious in solid state physics, which studies electric current that goes at a high percentage of the speed of light. Relativistic affects have never been observed in electric circuits; hence the "Relativity Barrier" does not exist either physically or mathematically. As an example, satelites in Low Earth Orbit exhibit relativistic affects in their ninety minute orbits; yet, electric current going around the world in a second, has no relativistic component. What more proof do you need?

Electric current is the flow of electrons, each one going a little distance before it releases its charge to the next electron. They all move in a "conduction band" at near the speed of light. Does electric current going across a continent exhibit exponentially increased resistence, as Relativity says it should? No. Does the wire get much, much heavier, as Relativity says it should? No. Does the wire heat up - dissipating most of the electron's mass as energy - as Relativity says it should? No. Are scientists well aware of this paradox - do they strive to silence anybody who dares to speak of it? Yes.

Well, perhaps the "brick wall" metaphor is a little too strong. Relativity is more like the Vestal Virgin's hymen, a delicate membrane - a light barrier, much like the sound barrier. Why do I say this? Because the Theory shows a fundamental basis for the "G Spot," as you will see in the System Wave section. As in the Geometry Study paper, the excitement of this "G Spot" leads to an astronomical orgasm - accelerating a spacecraft with a burst of enery, right into the Abyss. I called this "G Spot" of our solar system, by a little more conventional name which still carries some sexual overtones.



jump gate


The Jump Gate research is based on a computer simulation of the Earth to Mars trajectory, called Mars Pathfinder 2.0. The simulation found a crease in space by which it seemed possible to achieve a much faster mission profile to Mars. The technical name is a "Gravity Assisted Bi-Elliptic Transfer Orbit," or Grabet Orbit for short. Details on this computer program are in the "Mars" section. The Theory of F and G Forces was developed to establish a theoretical basis for this super-fast trajectory. The Theory suggests far faster mission scenarios are possible, perhaps on the order of a Babylon 5 Type Jump Gate. Theoretically. Actually, the Theory preceeded the Mars trajectory application and was then elaborated upon using the principles of Celestial Mechanics. The trajectory program is thus mostly a test or application of the Theory.

The F and G Equations of Celestial Mechanics are a solution to the Two Body Equation, for the gravitational forces of one body orbiting another. I show these "F and G Equations" represent two new gravitational forces. These "F and G Forces" have contributed to the very high failure rate of missions to Mars (nine of twelve missions have failed; all six Russian probes were lost years ago, and three recent US missions were lost). One of the forces originates near Mars' orbit, and it is not accounted for in typical trajectory models. It may have contributed to the problems landing spacecraft on Mars - 2/3rds of all such missions have failed. This force near Mars may also be the cause of a mysterious aspect of the geology of Mars which "the experts" allege could only have been done by huge oceans of water existing there for aeons.

Yet, liquid water on Mars is physically not possible because Mars is so small that any water would quickly evaporate to space. So it is necessary to find another cause for the "water wash" patterns on Mars. The second force, originating near the Sun, is shown to cause a distortion in space usually attributed to Relativity. Independent, analytical proof of these "f and g forces" is presented from many perspectives: complex analysis, relativity theory, Celestial Mechanics, solid state physics, dynamics, fractal theory, via a numerical model of the Earth to Mars trajectory.


Best Southern Regards,

bill h. clark ii
10.1.2005