What's wrong with gravity theory?

[sjastro]

If I was to summarize your post in a nutshell it would be the use of word salad as a substitute for your lack of knowledge and understanding of the science.
Let’s look at some of your claims about the science but ignore the corresponding word salad.

Elliptical orbits can not be conserved. That's why our solar system is relatively clean of elliptical debris. Many have doubted my premise, but I believe the images of satellite moons orbiting in volcanic/geyser debris have given favor for this idea.

If elliptical orbits are not mechanical energy conserved then elliptical orbits cannot exist long term.
Mechanical energy is conserved as the KE+PE (KE = Kinetic energy, PE = potential energy) at any point in the orbit has the same value.
Introduce an external force and KE+PE can no longer be constant.
It’s for this reason the orbits of artificial satellites are beyond the Earth’s atmosphere otherwise atmospheric drag which is an external force converts orbital mechanical energy into heat and the orbit will decay.

The solar system is clearly not relatively clean of elliptical debris due to the presence of the asteroid belt between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.

I think that a gravity field only comes from a dipole or bonded matter.

If gravity came from a dipole the inverse square law wouldn’t apply instead it would be the inverse cube law as in the case for electric and magnetic dipoles.
On a more advanced level gravitational fields can have a quadrupole symmetry which if varied with time emit gravitational waves.

The motion of the proton is right handed and the electron is left handed.

This is simply not true.
Being fermions protons and electrons have two distinct spin states which can either be in the same or opposite direction to its linear momentum. In other words protons and electrons can exist as either right handed or left handed particles; otherwise the Pauli Exclusion Principle is violated and we would not be able explain a variety of mechanisms such as how molecular bonds are formed, to the strong force that hold protons and neutrons in a nucleus.
The only particle that is observed to be exclusively left handed is the neutrino.

And the proton has more mass and inertia.......that means the electron does almost all the displacement.

No it doesn’t.
It simply means more work is required to move a proton.
Plasmas can form double layers where ions which can be considerably more massive than protons are separated from electrons.
If the electron does nearly all the displacement double layers cannot form in both laboratory and astrophysical plasmas.

Don't think of light as having a velocity........think of it as an area acceleration.

Both the speed of light and of a marble is dimensionally the same (L/T) and represents velocity.
Since photons are massless they travel at a speed c in a vacuum and are independent of the motion of the observer doing the measurement, as shown in Special Relativity.

 

[Ophiolite]

The solar system is clearly not relatively clean of elliptical debris due to the presence of the asteroid belt between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.

Not to mention the Kuiper Belt and the Oort Cloud.

 

[sjastro]

There is another aspect about gravity in which I do not agree. This is the "evidence" of gravity bending light.

I can remember in high school of doing experiments with a flash light and a large fish bowl of different solutions. In some solutions there was a sharp density gradient, called a boundary, and the sharp density gradient would bounce or reflect the flash light beam. If the solution had a gradual density gradient, the beam would bend or bow like an arc. Not sure, but I think the solution was sugar water.

The sun also has a gradient, but it's not neutral matter.....it's plasma. A ring of plasma. The light from distant stars only bends, within that ring. If gravity were bending the light, the bending effect would follow the square wave law, with distance from sun. But the bending effect stops at the ring.....no bending occurs outside the ring. Plasma density gradients bend light.

YouTube has many examples of density gradients, only they use lasers now.

As in reference to the sun.....it's called a plasma limb.

We have watched and mapped the "elliptical" orbits of stars around our black hole(~25,000 thousand years ago). We find no distortion in the light from these stars as they rotate around that black hole. This alone is a huge red flag. So......either gravity does not bend light, OR we don't have a black hole. Either one, means, we got to start over with gravity.

It appears that our understanding of reality is discombobulated.

I think we should start over with light.

Once again more word salad.
The Hipparcos mission very accurately measured the positions of over 100,000 stars.
In order to accomplish this it had to subtract the error caused by the gravitational bending of light.
Gravitational bending was found to be significant even at 90⁰ to the ecliptic well beyond any starlight passing to a plasma atmosphere.
If refraction was the cause, the bending of light would be wavelength dependant.

The recent image of the Black Hole in the galaxy M87 clearly shows the gravitational lensed photon sphere.

 

[devin553344]

What you term the "acceleration field" is not uniform. Without questioning your calculations I will accept that the acceleration due to gravity is 6000 m/s^2 at the surface of the sun just as it is 9.8 m/s^2 at the surface of the earth. In both cases these acceleration numbers drop off quite rapidly by the inverse square law of gravity. At the distance of the earth from the sun, it is powerful enough to keep our planet in orbit but far too small to pull a person off the surface. If you wish I can do the calculations for you.

JackRT, BSc, MSc, BEd

Thanks JackRT, I figured it out, I forgot to multiply 1000 to the kilometers

 

[Astrophile]

What you term the "acceleration field" is not uniform. Without questioning your calculations I will accept that the acceleration due to gravity is 6000 m/s^2 at the surface of the sun just as it is 9.8 m/s^2 at the surface of the earth. In both cases these acceleration numbers drop off quite rapidly by the inverse square law of gravity. At the distance of the earth from the sun, it is powerful enough to keep our planet in orbit but far too small to pull a person off the surface. If you wish I can do the calculations for you.

JackRT, BSc, MSc, BEd

In fact, the gravitational acceleration at the Sun's surface is 274 m/s². Devin 553344 used a Sun-Earth distance of 149,600 km (less than the Sun's radius) rather than 149,600,000 km, and therefore obtained a value of g that was a million times too large.