Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Observation of The Direction and Neutralization of Gravitational Field
Observation of The Direction and Neutralization of Gravitational Field
Observation of The Direction and Neutralization of Gravitational Field
net/publication/279698263
CITATION READS
1 2,803
1 author:
Yin Zhu
Agriculture Department of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China
70 PUBLICATIONS 50 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Yin Zhu on 04 September 2018.
Yin Zhu(朱寅)
Email: waterzhu@163.com
Abstract
This observation begins from the famous old problem: Why the orbit of the Moon around the Earth is
stable under the condition that the attractive force of the Sun on the Moon is almost 2.5 times that of
the Earth? The orbit of the Moon around the Earth is the most fundamental to the theory of gravity. It
need be understood by high school student. But, till now, it has not been right explained. Here, from
the Hill sphere, we directly showed that the gravitational field of the Moon is trapped or limited in the
𝑀𝑚
Hill radius by the Earth. So, the Sun cannot attract the Moon with the force F = G . We concluded
𝑅2
that, the trapped gravitational field means that it is neutralized as the interacted electric fields. We
emphasized that, an actual gravitational field is always interacting with other ones. There is an energy
exchange between the interacting fields and the fields are varied by the energy flux. So, the
gravitational field only can be right explained and understood with the interacted and varied fields.
Therefore, we need new theory for gravity. And, for there is no positive and negative gravitational
field and to explain the structure of the disc stellar system, we hypothesized that, the gravitational field
is analogous to the magnetic field. Observations show that it is better than the hypothesis that the
gravitational field is analogous to the electric field. We concluded that an artificial Hill sphere could be
constructed. This observation should be a fundamental to develop the new theory of gravity.
Key words: Neutralization of gravity, Direction of gravitational field, Hill sphere, N-body
The gravitational field is fundamental to the theory of gravity. In the Stand Model, it is made up of
gravitons.[1] In Einstein’s general relativity, it is a curved space.[2] Till now, only one single gravitational field,
But, in fact, none of the gravitational field is isolated from other ones. All of the gravitational fields are
always interacting with others. So, the gravitational field only can be right explained and understood with the
interacting fields.
As an electric field is interacting with another one, it is varied and neutralized. The interacting electric field
is no longer extend freely. It is interesting that no one has asked that whether the interacted gravitational field is
varied or neutralized as the electric field. However, it seems not rational to imagine that a gravitational field is not
varied as it is interacting with other ones. But, before satellite was invented and the gravity is difficult to be
observed in laboratory, the gravitational field cannot be tested and detected. The question cannot be answered. Now,
our ability to test gravity in laboratory and observed in deep space was greatly advanced. It is the time to study the
To explain the orbit of the planet in a stellar system, the Roche limit[3] and Hill sphere[4] were presented
and generally used to study the extrasolar system and to design the interplanetary satellite orbiter.[5-7] In our work,
by studying the gravitational force among the Sun, Earth and Moon, from the Hill sphere, it is directly shown that
the gravitational field of the Moon is trapped in the Hill radius by the Earth. The trapped gravitational field shows
that this field is limited or moved into the Hill radius zone. It cannot extend freely. Out of the Hill radius zone, the
𝑀𝑚
gravitational field cannot be measured with F = G .Therefore, the interacting gravitational field is analogous to
𝑅2
the interacting electric field which can be limited or trapped in the interactive zone and neutralized.
The Moon is always moved by the motion of the Earth. It is clear that there is an energy exchange
between the fields of them. We know, the existence of escape velocity is a consequence of conservation of energy.
1 𝑀𝑚
For the Earth, it is determined with 𝑚𝑣𝑒2 = 𝐺 , and v𝑒 = √2𝐺𝑀/𝑟, where v𝑒 is the escape velocity,
2 𝑟
𝑀
φ=𝐺 is the potential energy of the Earth and m is the mass of the spacecraft. We know, the potential energy
𝑟
𝑀 𝑀
φ=𝐺 has a gravitational acceleration g = 𝐺 on the m. As v < 𝑣𝑒 , g can make m orbited around the
𝑟 𝑟2
1 𝑀
Earth with 𝑣𝑜 . It is clear, the energy E = 𝑚𝑣𝑜2 of the satellite partly come from φ = 𝐺 . So, the potential
2 𝑟
𝑀
energy φ = 𝐺 must be varied by m. For the Earth-Moon system, the field of the Earth is partly varied and the
𝑟
So, here, it is emphasized that, the energy of the gravitational fields of the Earth and Moon are varied by
the energy flux between them. For convenience, here, the field line, which was used to study the electromagnetic
field, is used to study the energy flux and the force of the gravitational field. Although it is thought that the field line
is imaginary, the flux, divergence and vorticity of the electromagnetic field were described with it. And, it can be
observed with the iron filings in the magnetic field. For two reasons: 1) There is not the positive and negative
gravitational field, 2) To explain the structure of the stellar system, here, we hypothesized that, the gravitational
field is analogous to the magnetic field. There were some questions about the gravitational field: Is there the
anti-gravity? Is there the repulsive gravitational force?[8] Why the planets in the solar system are almost on a same
plane?[9] and so on. Now, the motion and structure of stellar systems (galaxies) were observed and studied.[10-13]
The map of the universe was observed.[14,15] Some of theories and conjectures about the gravitational force
between the galaxies (stellar systems) were presented.[16-18] With this hypothesis, these questions, observations
and conjectures are tried to explain. Compared with the current hypothesis that the gravitational field is analogous
to the electric field, it seems that there are some of advantage for our hypothesis.
2. Observations
There is a famous problem for the orbit of the Moon around the Earth. From Newtonian gravitational law
𝑀𝑚
F=G , it is easy to calculate that, approximately, there is 𝐹𝑠𝑚 /𝐹𝑒𝑚 ≈2.5, where 𝐹𝑠𝑚 and 𝐹𝑒𝑚 are the force of
𝑅2
the Sun and Earth attracting the Moon respectively. The attractive force of the Sun on the Moon is almost 2.5 times
that of the Earth. Thus, the Moon should fly away from the Earth and move to the Sun.
But, in fact, the orbit of the Moon around the Earth is absolutely stable. It has not been moved to the Sun.
Some explanations were presented for the orbit of the Moon.[19,20] One of the explanations is that the Moon is
orbiting the Sun, the Moon and Earth is double planet.[19] But, this explanation is questioned. The orbit of the
𝑚𝑣 2 𝑀𝑚
Earth around the Sun is determined with =G . If the direction of the velocity of the Earth was changed a
𝑅 𝑅2
little, the orbit of the Earth should be broken in a short time. But, the direction of the velocity of the Moon is not so.
𝑚𝑣 2 𝑀𝑚
It is periodically vertical to or contrary to that of the Earth. There is not =G for the orbit of the Moon
𝑅 𝑅2
around the Sun. Thus, relative to the orbit of the Earth, the Moon only is a satellite of the Earth. They cannot be
binary.
Then, why has the Moon not been moved to the Sun? Factually, it is well observed, the force of the Sun
𝑀𝑚
acting on the Moon only can be the tidal force 𝐹𝑡 = −G 𝑟⃑. (The tidal force is introduced and discussed
𝑅3
detailedly in the Supplementary Data A.). The tidal force is much less than the gravitational force. From the Roche
limit[3,4] it is presented that only as the tidal force of the Sun on the Moon was larger than the gravitational force of
the Earth on the Moon, the orbit of the Moon around the Earth should be broken.
Thus, Roche limit and Hill Sphere answered this problem. The Hill Sphere is developed from the Roche
3 𝑚
r ≈ (1 − e)a √ , (1)
3𝑀
where M and m are the mass of the Sun and Earth, a and e are the semi-major axis and eccentricity of the orbit of
the Earth, respectively. Eq.(1) means that in the radius of r, the Earth dominates the gravity of the Moon. And, the
In the current theory of gravity, it was taught that a gravitational field of a planet can extend infinitely and
𝑀𝑚
can interact with any other gravitational field with F = G . But, in fact, no actual gravitational field is so. All of
𝑅2
the gravitational fields are always interacting with others. Therefore, all of them are trapped or varied. As shown in
𝑀𝑚
Fig.1, as a spacecraft is in the Hill sphere of the Moon, it cannot interact with the Earth with F = G . In this
𝑅2
case, the gravitational field is no longer extend freely. It is trapped and limited.
Spacecraft
Earth
Orbit of Moon
Moon
Fig. 1. The Hill sphere and the trapped gravitational field. As a spacecraft is flying from the Earth to
the Moon, 1) as the spacecraft is out of the Hill sphere of the Moon, the gravitational force between the
𝑀𝑚
Earth and spacecraft is F = G ; 2) as in the Hill sphere of the Moon, the gravitational force between
𝑅2
𝑀𝑚
the Earth and spacecraft is the tidal force 𝐹𝑡 = −G 𝑟⃑. It shows that the field of the spacecraft is
𝑅3
It is emphasized that, Fig .1 is not a theoretical concluding. It actually dominates the orbit of a
Therefore, there are two observations for the trapped field. 1) The field of the spacecraft is trapped in the
Hill radius of the Moon. It cannot extend infinitely. In another words, the gravitational field can be trapped or
moved into a limited zone by a large one. 2) The gravitational force between the Earth and the spacecraft in the Hill
𝑀𝑚
radius of the Moon is no longer F = G . It means that, the observed interactive force for the trapped fields is
𝑅2
The trapped gravitational field is analogous to the interacting electric field. As two electric fields are
interacting, 1) The electric fields are moved to the direction along the interactive force and are trapped in the
interactive zone. 2) None of the trapped (neutralized) electric fields can again interact with the third field with the
𝑄𝑞
force F = k .
𝑟2
Compared with the interaction of the electric field, it is clearly shown that: 1) The two kinds of fields can
be trapped or limited in the interactive zone. 2) The law that the interactive force is inversely proportional to the
square of the distance is no longer valid for the two kinds of the trapped fields. From point 2), it is concluded that,
just as the trapped electric field, the trapped gravitational field is neutralized by another one. In another words, the
interaction of the gravitational field is very analogous to that of the electric field. The interacted gravitational field
A direct evidence for the neutralization of the gravitational field is the gravity of the Earth and Moon
relative to the Sun. If the gravitational field of the Moon could not be neutralized by the Earth, the Moon gravitated
𝑀𝑠 𝑚𝑚 𝑀𝑠 𝑚𝑚
by the Sun was G . But, in fact, it is −G 𝑟⃑, where R and r are the distances between the Earth and Sun
𝑅2 𝑅3
and between the Earth and Moon respectively. (please see the Supplementary data A) It makes the orbit of the
𝑀𝑠 𝑚𝑚
𝐹𝑡 = 2G 𝑟⃑ is usually called the tidal force. But, it is noted, it is not an attractive force. In the
𝑅3
Supplementary data A, we demonstrated that, it is a repulsive force. And, factually, it is treated as a repulsive force
in designing the orbit of artificial satellite although it was wrongly explained as a difference of two gravitational
forces.
Assuming there are two planets A and B. As B is in the Hill radius of A, it was assumed that, the force of a
𝑀𝑠 𝑚𝐴 𝑀𝑠 𝑚𝐵
star on the two planets A and B is F = G −G ⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑,
𝑟𝐴𝐵 where Rs and 𝑟𝐴𝐵 are the distances between the
𝑅𝑠2 𝑅𝑠3
star and A and between A and B, respectively. But, an interesting case is that, as the mass of two planets A and B are
same, and the distances between the star and A and between the star and B also are same, according to the Hill
𝑚𝐴 𝑚𝐵 𝑀𝑠 𝑚𝐴
sphere, A is gravitated by B with F = G 2 while by the star with F𝑡𝑖𝑑𝑒 = −G 𝑟𝐴𝐵 and vice versa.
⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑
𝑟𝐴𝐵 𝑅𝑠3
𝑀𝑠 𝑚𝐴
Therefore, the force of the star on both A and B is only 2F𝑡𝑖𝑑𝑒 = −2G 𝑟𝐴𝐵 which is very little. It means
⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑
𝑅𝑠3
that the gravitational fields of both A and B are neutralized by each other. Therefore, as 𝑚𝐴 > 𝑚𝐵 and B is in the
Hill radius of A, the force of A and B gravitated by the star need be revised as:
𝑀𝑠 (𝑚𝐴− 𝑚𝐵 ) 𝑀𝑠 𝑚𝐵
F=G −G 𝑟𝐴𝐵
⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑⃑ (2)
𝑅𝑠2 𝑅𝑠3
It is noted that, although it is not very accurate, the Hill sphere is practically valid. It was used in designing
the orbit of spacecraft and discovering the habitable planet in the extrasolar system.[4,6,7] Thus, this observation is
In current physics, it is believed that the gravitational field is analogous to the electric field. However, it
has not been proven experimentally. And, it cannot be used to well explain the observation of the galaxy and
stellar system. An important fact is that, more than 60% of the galaxies are spiral one which are in the form of a
disk. Therefore, a problem arises: What is the force that makes the stars and planets in a system almost in a same
plane? In order to answer this problem, here, it is hypothesized that the gravitational field is analogous to the
magnetic field as shown in Fig.2. There are two poles for the gravitational field. For the convenience, it is called the
north and south gravitational poles. And, just as the magnetic field, there are not the negative and positive charges
for the graviton (the magnetic monopole has not been observed).
Planet
Fig. 2. The direction of the gravitational field. The poles are distinguished with the black line and
expressed with the direction of the gravitational lines. The gravitational lines can emit from any place of
the N pole of a planet to arrive at any place of the S pole and close to loops.
We know, the Newton gravitational constant G is a constant on the surface of Earth. Therefore, the
gravitational field appears as an equipotential surface on the surface of the Earth. And, it was assumed that the
gravitational field is analogous to the electric field. But, as shown in Fig. 2, under the conditions: 1) there are
infinite gravitational lines, 2) these lines extend very long, 3) as the N and S poles are distinguished with the
black line, the gravitational lines can run from any point of the N pole to any point of S pole. Then, in principle,
observed on the surface of the Earth the field can appear as an equipotential surface while observed in a very
distant place away from the surface of Earth it can appear as a magnetic field. (It is noted that the poles of
gravitational field are different from that of the magnetic ones. One of the poles of magnetic field is centralized
in a small area of a magnetism although these poles are different with different forms of the magnetism. While
one of the poles of gravitational field covers the whole surface of half the planet.) Therefore, the hypothesis in
Fig.2 can be used to better explain both the Newtonian gravitational law and the structure of the stellar system
and galaxy.
Is there the possibility that the gravitational field is made up of two kinds of fields which are
respectively analogous to electric field and to magnetic one? And, is there the gravitomagnetic effect? In current
observation, none of the mass, including both the highspeed strong and low speed weak fields, is contradicted
with the Newtonian gravitational law. Therefore, no observation supports these possibilities. For example, if
there was the gravitomagnetic effect, its effect for the highspeed stars/planets should be different from the low
Under the hypothesis in Fig. 2, as two planets are interacted with each other, their fields are changed as
shown in Fig.3. As the N poles of the two planets are positioned contrarily, the directions of their gravitational lines
are same. An attractive force between them is produced. On another hand, if the N (or S) poles of the two planets
are in the same direction, the directions of gravitational lines of them are contrary to each other. A repulsive force
B A
Fig.3. The interaction between two fields. The N and S poles of planets A and B are contrary to each other.
The gravitational lines emit from the N pole of planet A to arrive at the S pole of planet B. These lines
form loops as the magnetic lines do. The black line is vertical to the line NS at the middle of line NS.
two planets are positioned on the black line which is vertical to and through the middle point of the line NS.
stable. And, in any time, as the planet B is moved away from the stable status, it shall be returned to the stable status
Thus, the little body can emerge in any place in a field just as the iron filings in a magnetic field. The Jupiter and its
moons may be a strong evidence for this hypothesis. There are 68 moons for the Jupiter. The three big ones are in
the plane vertical to the NS line and many of the little ones are not in the same plane.
In the solar system, planets are interacting with the Sun. Therefore, the direction of the gravitational field
as shown in Fig. 2 and the interaction of the fields as shown in Fig. 3 determine that the planets in the solar system
are positioned in almost a same plane which is vertical to the line NS connecting the NS poles of the Sun.
There was an hypothesis[9,16] for the solar system. It was assumed that, as the origin of this system, these
planets are in a plane by the rotating of this system.[9,16] But, I prefer to believe that this hypothesis in Refs.[9,16]
can be combined with the hypothesis in Figs.2 and 3. It indicates that the plane structure of the solar (stellar) system
is determined by a constant force although the hypothesis in Refs.[9,16] is important. In addition, more than 60% of
the galaxies are spiraling ones which appear as a pancake.[10,11] A single structure can be formed for an occasional
reason. A lot of the analogous structures must be for a certain reason. An explanation for the structure of the
galaxies is that the motion of stellar system (galaxy) is affected by the tidal force.[16-18] And, in the Hill sphere, the
tidal force is an important role. Here, the tidal force shall be restudied to show the reason for the Hill sphere.
It is well known that at one point on the surface of the Earth the largest tidal force can be observed for two
times in 24 hours.[21] It means that the direction of the tidal force of the Sun can be contrary to that of the attractive
force of the Sun. We have a detailed demonstration in the Supplementary Data A. But, according to the current
theory of gravity, in any case, the gravity is attractive which is always directed toward to the source (Sun, planets
and moon). Then, why the direction of the tidal force of the Sun is contrary to that of its attractive force?
Therefore, although the tidal force is taught in high school, it has not been well known. It need be
explained within a new way. The hypothesis in Figs. 2 and 3 could be such a way. As shown in Fig. 4, as the
Moon is interacted with the Earth, the N and S poles of the fields of the Moon and Sun are in the same direction.
Thus, the direction of gravitational lines of the Sun is contrary to that of the Moon. The lines between the Sun and
Moon cannot be closed to a loop. The repulsive force between the Sun and Moon is produced as shown in Fig.4.
Therefore, the tidal force of the Sun acting on the Moon at point M2 in Fig. A1 (Please see the Supplementary
Data A) is directed along the red arrow which is contrary to the direction of the attractive force of the sun.
It is noted that, the Earth and Moon was interacted first and bound as one unit. Here, we call it the
“Hill-sphere-unit”. The Earth-Moon system is a “Hill-sphere-unit” while the Sun-planets-moons system is a larger
“Hill-sphere-unit”. The “Hill-sphere-unit” is such a unit that it only can work as a whole unit to interact with other
object. For example, the Moon or Earth cannot interact individually with the Sun. Only the un-neutralized part of
field of the Earth as shown in Fig. 3 can interact with the Sun. This is the reason why the Moon has not been
moved to the Sun although the calculated attractive force of the Sun is almost 2.5 times that of the Earth.
N S
Sun
Moon Earth
S N
Fig. 4. The repulsive and neutralized gravity among three bodies. The Earth and Moon is first bound as a
“Hill-sphere-unit”. The gravitational lines of the Sun or Moon can be closed to loops respectively with that of
the Earth. But, the directions of gravitational lines of the Sun and Moon emitting from the N poles of them
are contrary to each other. And, the same case occurs in the S poles. The gravitational lines of the Sun and
Moon cannot be closed to loops as shown with the red arrow. It could result in a repulsive force between the
Moon and Sun. The repulsive force is directed along the black arrow.
Therefore, Fig. 4 gives a new explanation for the Three-body problem and tidal force.
𝑀𝑚
A crucial evidence for this explanation is the Sun-Pluto-Charon system. According to F = G , the
𝑅2
gravitational force of the Charon on the Pluto should be almost 112 times that of the Sun on it. If the gravitational
𝑀𝑝 𝑀𝑐 𝑀𝑠 𝑀𝑝
force of the Sun and Chron on the Pluto was 𝐺 ±𝐺 , and, the orbit of the Pluto around the Sun was
𝑟2 𝑅2
𝑣2 𝑀𝑝 𝑀𝑐 𝑀𝑠 𝑀𝑝
determined with 𝑀𝑝 =𝐺 ±𝐺 as usually thought (where s, p and c denote the Sun, Pluto and
𝑅 𝑟2 𝑅2
Charon, R and r are the distances between the Sun and Pluto and between the Pluto and Charon, respectively.), this
orbit should have been broken by the Charon. But, in fact, this orbit is absolutely stable. This fact cannot be
explained with the current theory, including the Hill sphere. Here, it is shown that it can be explained with the
neutralization of gravitational field. As shown in Figs. 3 and 4, in the Sun-Pluto-Charon system, the field of the
Charon is neutralized by that of the Pluto. While only part of the field of the Pluto is neutralized by that of the
𝑀𝑚
Charon. The neutralized fields of both the Pluto and Charon cannot be gravitated by the Sun with F = G . Only
𝑅2
𝑀𝑚
the un-neutralized part of the field of the Pluto can be gravitated by the Sun with F = G . So, the orbit of the
𝑅2
Pluto around the Sun cannot be broken by the Charon although the calculated gravitational force of the Charon on
the Pluto is almost 112 times that of the Sun on it. Therefore, only as the Pluto-Chron system is a “Hill-sphere-unit”,
the orbit of the Pluto around the Sun cannot be affected by the Chron. In this case, the field of the Chron is
The Hill sphere can be explained with Figs. 3 and 4. As the fields of Earth and the Sun are interacting, the
whole field of the Earth is neutralized and limited in the Hill radius zone by the Sun. In this case, the gravitational
𝑀𝑚
field of the Earth out of the Hill radius is no longer interacted with any other field with F = G . Approximately,
𝑅2
the limited zone is determined with Eq.(1).From the Three-body problem we know, the Sun can perturb the Moon
with tidal force. Therefore, from the Roche limit, Eq.(1) could be rewritten as
𝑅𝑚 3 𝑚
=√ (3)
𝑅𝑀 𝑀
where RM+Rm=R, R is the distance between the Sun and Earth, M and m are the mass of the Sun and Earth
respectively.
Eq.(3) means that in the section of the interacting area at the distances Rm relative to the Earth or RM relative
to the Sun, the fields of the Sun and Earth are wholly neutralized. In this section, relative to a third field, the gravity
of both the Sun and Earth are zero. If a body is positioned in this section, it cannot be moved to the Sun or to the
Earth. Off course, only the part of the field of the Sun that takes part in the interaction is neutralized while the whole
field of the Earth is neutralized. And, RM and Rm can be called the neutralized radius.
This concluding is accordant with the Hill sphere. In Fig. 1, the gravitational force of the spacecraft first
𝑀𝑒 𝑚
dominated by the Earth with F𝑒 = G . As it entered into the Hill sphere of the Moon, the force becomes
𝑅2
𝑀𝑚 𝑚 𝑀𝑒 𝑚 𝑀𝑚 𝑚
F𝑚 = G by the Moon. In the process of F𝑒 = G becoming F𝑚 = G , there is F=0. It is clear,
𝑟2 𝑅2 𝑟2
But, Eq.(3) is different from the Hill sphere Eq.(1). Eq.(3) means that both the interacted fields are trapped
while the Hill sphere only indicates that the field of the Moon (or planet) can be trapped by the Earth (or Sun). It is
clear, Eq.(3) is more suitable for the observation: In Fig. 1, the Moon acting on the spacecraft out of the Hill radius
of the Moon only is the tidal force, i.e. the interacted field of the Earth also is trapped by that of the Moon
From Figs.1 and 4 we know, as the spacecraft is flying from the Earth to the Moon, it first interacting
mainly with the Earth. As arriving at the Hill radius of the Moon, the interaction between the Earth and the
spacecraft is broken. It interact mainly with the Moon. A time is spent for this process. In this time, the spacecraft
has flown a distance Rf. Therefore, in Eq.(3), the factual distance for the Moon acting on the spacecraft with F =
𝑀𝑚
G is Rp=Rm-Rf. For the same reason, as it is flying from the Moon to the Earth, there is Rp=Rm+Rf. This result
𝑅2
is valid for the Hill radius of RM. Therefore, the factual radius that the Earth or Moon acting on the flying spacecraft
𝑀𝑚
with F = G is
𝑅2
𝑅𝑝 = 𝑅𝑚 ± 𝑅𝑓 (4)
Eq.(4) is important to know how the interacting gravitational field of the spacecraft is changed.
Eq.(4) can be proven or disproven by travel to the Moon. Now, several travels to the Moon were performed.
The accurate Hill radius can be obtained from these travels. And, the Hill sphere of Eq.(1) is approximate. There are
3 3
different ways to deduce it and different equations (such as r ≈ a √𝑚⁄𝑀 and r ≈ a √𝑚⁄3𝑀) for it. And, there
5⁄
is the Laplace sphere[4] r ≈ a(m/M) 2 .Thus, the accurate of the Hill sphere need be further experiment. And,
the current way to deduce the Hill sphere[4] is questioned. (Please see the Supplementary Data A.)
3. Predictions
With above conclusions, some of the observations about the stellar systems/galaxies are tried to explain
3.1. The structure of the stellar system and the distribution of the galaxies
From the direction and neutralization of the gravitational field, for the structure of a stellar system, it could
be concluded that: 1) For a stellar system with a core, the stars are orbiting around the core and the planet is orbiting
around a star. 2) The mass of the core is much larger than that of stars. 3) The whole fields of the stars are
neutralized while that of the core is not wholly neutralized. 4) The stars and planets are positioned on the plane that
is vertical to the NS line of the core as shown in Fig.3. 5) The un-neutralized field of the core can interact with other
massive mass (center of galaxy). It results in that the stellar system is orbiting in a galaxy, just as the solar system is
In short, a stellar system is like a large solar system. In a stellar system, the planets and moons in the solar
system are corresponding to the stars and planets respectively. The gravity of the planets is neutralized by their star
and that of the stars is neutralized by the core of the stellar system.
Therefore, the structure of a galaxy is analogous to the structure of the solar system. The stellar systems in
the galaxy are orbiting around the center of the galaxy.[22] Their motions are determined with the gravitational
force between the core and stars. And, it can be concluded that galaxies in the universe are almost distributed in a
very big pancake. Further, it can be concluded that, in the universe, the galaxies shall be distributed on different
layers. Therefore, observed on the Earth, along the direction of the line NS connecting NS poles, the galaxies are
separated into different layers while observed in the direction vertical to NS the galaxies are connected with each
There are a lot of spherical (Elliptical) stellar systems (galaxies).[10,11,23] In fact, the 24 GPS satellites
around the Earth consists of a spherical stellar system.[24] And, the Jupiter and its Moons are also a such one. If the
direction of the gravitational field is as that shown in Figs. 2-4, it could be concluded that: 1) If the satellite is not in
the plane determined by the black line in Fig. 3, it shall be moved along the gravitational line. Near the equator (the
black line), the inclinational angle of the orbital plane of the satellite (between the orbital plane and equatorial plane)
shall become less. While, near the poles, the satellite is attracted to the poles of the Earth as a little magnet is
attracted to one of the poles of a much big magnet. And the inclinational angle shall become larger. And, 2)
compared with a disc stellar system, in the spherical (Elliptical) stellar systems, the mass of the core is much larger
The Earth is elliptical. The radius of it along the NS poles is less than that vertical to NS. It could be
explained with Fig.2. In the N and S poles, the density of gravitational lines is larger than that in other places of it. It
could result in that the gravitational force in the poles is larger than that in other places.
Observing the Fig.3 on the above of N pole of planet A and S of B, we can have Fig.5 in which the
gravitational line between planets A and B is connecting the N pole of A and S pole of B. As A is rotating, the
gravitational line NS is moved to NS’. It makes B moved from S to S’, and, at the same time, makes that the
direction of the orbit of B is the same as the direction of the rotation of A. And, as B arrived at S’, relative to that it
is at S, it rotated an angle∠SNS’. Thus, as B is orbiting around A, it is rotating in the same direction. The rotation
of A, the orbit and rotation of B are in the same direction. But, in fact, there are many gravitational lines between A
and B. Thus, the change of these lines affected by the rotation of the planet is more complicated than that shown in
Fig.5. But, the change of other lines can be known from the way in Fig.5.
A
N S P
S’ p
Fig. 5. The direction of the orbit and rotation of the planet. Planet A is rotating along the arrow. The
rotation of A makes the gravitational line moved from S to S’. And, makes the planet B orbited from S to
On another hand, as the planet B is orbiting, it makes the gravitational line NS moved. It can result in that
the planet A rotated. Therefore, the rotation and orbit of the planets are determined with both the motion and
rotation of A and B.
It is known that the orbit and rotation of a planet are determined with many factors. Such as the initial
motion (the orbit of an artificial satellite is determined with the direction and value of the initial velocity), the mass
distribution of the planet,[25] the status of the origin of the solar/stellar system,[9,16] etc. Therefore, the orbit and
rotation of real planets are not simply same as that described in Fig.5. For example, the directions of some of them
are contrary. But, the main planets in the solar system can be explained with Fig.5. And, in the galaxies, the stellar
systems are moving in a certain direction. Therefore, although the other factors are important, the orbit and rotation
Both the small body and planet are obeyed the Newtonian gravitational law. Therefore, we can make a
M𝑚
Hill sphere. In this system, the smaller ball is gravitated by a larger one with F = G while by the Earth with
𝑟2
𝑀𝑒 𝑚
F𝑡𝑖𝑑𝑒 = −G 𝑟⃑. From Eq.(1), we know, the condition to make a Hill sphere on a little height above the surface
𝑅𝑒3
of the Earth is determined with the mass and radius of a body. Therefore, the density of a material is higher, it is
better for making it.
4
The mass of a ball is determined with m = 𝜋𝑟 3 𝑑, where r is the radius of the ball, d is the density of the
3
material to make this ball. According to Eq.(1), on a little height above the surface of the Earth, the condition for the
4
𝑟3 𝜋𝑟 3 𝑑
Hill sphere of a ball is =3 , where R and M are the radius and mass of the Earth respectively. It is easily
𝑅3 3𝑀
calculated that, as the density of the material is larger than 16.55g/cm3, it can be used to make the balls. (Here
d0=16.55g/cm3 is called the Hill density.) Because r can be offset, the value of mass of these balls in this system can
be free. The densities of Tungsten/Gold, Platinum, Iridium and Osmium are 19.3g/ cm3, 21.45 g/ cm3, 22.42 g/ cm3
and 22.57 g/ cm3, respectively. Using these materials, a Hill sphere could be made.
4 4
The Hill radius and the radius of a real ball is determined with 𝜋𝑟03 d0 = 𝜋𝑟𝑖3 𝑑𝑖 , where r0 and d0 are
3 3
3
the Hill radius and Hill density respectively, d0=16.55g/cm . di and ri are the real value of the ball respectively. Thus,
𝑟0 3
we have = √𝑑𝑖 ⁄𝑑0 . For different materials, we have Table 1.
𝑟𝑖
Table 1 shows that, for a ball made with (such as) Platinum, if its real radius is 1cm, its Hill radius shall be
1.09cm. Therefore, a small ball with the radius of 0.09cm can be positioned in the Hill radius of it. Because the
radius of the ball is free. We can make very big balls to have better result.
To test the gravitational field, the artificial Hill sphere can be made up of a main ball and one or several
small balls and a lot of very little bodies with different forms.
As shown in Fig. 6, ball B is in the Hill radius RA of ball A, m is a little mass which is in the Hill radius RB
𝑀𝐵 𝑚
of B, A is gravitated by the Earth. Therefore, the m is gravitated by B with 𝐹𝐵 = G and gravitated by A with
𝑅𝐵 2
𝑀𝐴 𝑚
𝐹𝐴 = −G 𝑅𝐵 . It means that the gravitational force of A on the m only is the tidal force. They can be replaced
𝑅𝐴 3
with the atom in an atom interferometer which was used to measure the Newtonian universal gravitational constant
G.[26,27] It also can be designed as the device of torsion balance which was used to measure the density of the
RA
m RB B A
Fig. 6. The artificial mini solar system. The m is a little mass. MA and MB are two metal balls. RA and
RB are the Hill radius of A and B respectively. m is in the Hill radius of RB, B is in that of RA and A is in
The artificial Hill sphere can be used to test the gravitational field. 1) As pointed out above, the Hill sphere
Eq.(1) is not accurate. An accurate and precision formula for the Hill sphere could be obtained with this system. 2)
The Newtonian universal gravitational constant G can be measured with very much higher accurate and precision
than other methods. If the balls are large enough, the mass of the balls, the distance between them and the gravity
between them can be measured with very high accurate and precision. Therefore, the G can be calculated with very
high accurate and precision. 3) The gravitational lines could be observed by analogous to that the magnetic lines
detected with the iron filings. Put many little metal filings on the surface of a large ball with the density larger than
16.55g/cm3, the gravitational lines may emerge. Under the condition that the filings are sufficient enough, the
gravitational lines may be observed. 4) By moving one of the balls with different speeds, the gravitomagnetic
The artificial Hill sphere can be used to test the neutralization of the gravitational field. As shown in Fig. 6,
as ball B is in the Hill radius of ball A, Eq.(2) can be tested simply by measuring the weight of A and B with a scale.
In the usually thought and for usual bodies, the measured weight of A and B ought to be (𝑚𝐴 + 𝑚𝐵 ). But,
according to Eq.(2), as B is in the Hill radius of A, the measured weight of A and B could be (𝑚𝐴 − 𝑚𝐵 )
𝑀𝑒 𝑚𝐵
(G 𝑟𝐴𝐵 is very little). It should be a certain evidence for the gravitational neutralization.
𝑅𝑒3
This experiment can be further tested with different RA, RB and MA, MB, and with different time of the
interaction between A and m and B and m. For example, 1) The m is between A and B. As MA=MB and RA=RB,
letting MB first interact with m. It should be observed that FA≠FB for that the field of m is neutralized by MA. 2)
Different MA, MB and RA, RB in Fig. 6. It could be observed that: the attractive force between m and MA and
repulsed force between m and MB, or vice versa. 3) And, as m and MB is interacted first, if MA is so large that
𝑀𝐴 𝑚 𝑀𝐵 𝑚
2G 𝑅𝐵 > 𝐺 , it could be observed that, between m and MA, a repulsed force is produced first and an
𝑅𝐴 3 𝑅𝐵 2
attractive force is produced subsequently. It is analogous to that the Roche limit[2] emerges. (It is noted that it is
different from the Roche limit. Please see the Appendix A.) 4) Under the assumption that the direction of the
gravitational line of the Earth is along the NS poles as shown in Fig. 2, as the line RA and RB are along the line NS
of the Earth, the result may be different from that they are vertical to line NS. 5) The stars, Planets and Moons are
rotating. It is important to make the ball rotated to show the effect of this rotation on the gravitational field.
The mass in Fig.6 can be replaced by the electromagnetic field. In this case, the difference and similarity
between the gravitational and the electromagnetic field shall be further discovered.
It is a crucial problem: The Hill sphere is valid for the planets which are massive bodies. Is it valid for the
small bodies? However, the experiments[26-28,30] were performed to measure the Newtonian universal
gravitational constant G and test the Newtonian inverse square law. These experiments showed that the law of
5. Discussions
The Hill sphere is a well-practiced theory. So, our observation that the gravitational field of the Moon is
limited or trapped into the Hill radius zone by the Earth stands on solid ground. It is clearly and directly shown that,
The content in our work is far removed from current physics. But, factually, if we shall observe an actual
object, it is necessary. For example, the stellar system moving around the center of the Milk Way is a strong
evidence for the neutralization of the gravitational field. If the gravitational field could not be neutralized, the force
𝑚𝑖
of the Milk Way gravitating the stellar system should be determined with ∑𝑔
⃑⃑⃑⃑,
𝑖 where ⃑⃑⃑⃑=
𝑔𝑖 G 𝑟⃑, m is the mass
𝑟2
of a star, planet or moon and i is the number of the planet, star and moon in the Milk Way,𝑟⃑ is a vector.
Approximately, the total mass of the Milky Way is 5.8×1011 times that of the Sun[32] and the mass of center of it is
only 4.5×106 times that of the Sun.[33] If the star (or stellar system) was dominated by ∑𝑔
⃑⃑⃑⃑,
𝑖 it should result in that
the stellar system in different locations of the Milk Way could not be orbited around the center of the Milk Way for
that the barycenter of mass of the Milk Way is determined with ∑𝑟𝑖 𝑚𝑖 /∑𝑚𝑖 . For the stellar system in different
locations of the Milk Way, the barycenter of the mass is different. Therefore, the only condition for the stellar
systems orbiting around the center of the Milk Way is that the gravitational field of these stellar systems can be
words, the center of the Milk Way dominates the core of the stellar systems, this core dominates the stars, and the
star dominates the planets. The mass of cores, stars and planets of a stellar system cannot affect the orbit of another
stellar system.
We know, the dark matter was presented from the Galaxy rotation curves.[34] But, a recent observation[35]
shows that, the orbits of stars and other matter in the spiral galaxy are dominated by the Newtonian law of gravity.
The two observations are contradicted with each other. So, we stressed that, as there are problems to observe
and to explain the orbits of the Earth-Moon and Pluto-Chron system, we need valid theory and much more
accurate and precession observation to have valid knowledge for the orbits in a galaxy. It is noted that, in both
of the observations,[34,35] the Hill sphere was not considered. The orbit of the Moon around the Earth cannot be
right explained as the Hill sphere is not considered. Therefore, we cannot believe that the orbits in the galaxy can be
right explained with the observations[34,35] in which the Hill sphere was not considered.
We think, the theory of orbit of artificial satellite is the best developed one. The other theories need be
accordant with it. It is shown that the Hill sphere is accordant with it while the N-body problem is not. In another
word, the force of both the Sun and Earth on the Moon described with the Lagrange’s planetary equation or the Hill
𝑀𝐸 𝑚𝑀 𝑀𝑆 𝑚𝑀
sphere is right. But, described with the N-body problem, there is G 2 −G 2 . It is not right.
𝑟𝐸𝑀 𝑟𝑆𝑀
Before 1900, Three-body problem was generally researched. Today, the results are very useful in studying
spacecraft and stellar system.[4-7] But, this research has not been advanced in late. In the Lagrange’s planetary
𝑀𝑖 𝑚𝑗 𝑀𝑘 𝑚𝑗
equation, the gravitational force of N-body is usually written as ∑(G 2 −G 2 ). But, the actual used force
𝑟𝑖𝑗 𝑟𝑘𝑗
𝑀𝑘 𝑚𝑗 𝑀𝑘 𝑚𝑗 𝑀𝑖 𝑚𝑗 𝑀𝑘 𝑚𝑗
is the tidal force ∑𝐹𝑇 = ∑𝐺 3 𝑟𝑖𝑗 . In this case, it is believed that, ∑𝐺 3 𝑟𝑖𝑗 = ∑(𝐺 2 −𝐺 2 ). But,
𝑟𝑘𝑗 𝑟𝑘𝑗 𝑟𝑖𝑗 𝑟𝑘𝑗
𝑀𝑖 𝑚𝑗 𝑀𝑘 𝑚𝑗
as demonstrated in the Supplementary Data A, the tidal force cannot be obtained from G 2 −G 2 . So,
𝑟𝑖𝑗 𝑟𝑘𝑗
although the Lagrange’s planetary equation is rightly practiced, the explanation for it is wrong.
The hypothesis that the gravitational field is analogous to the magnetic field seems very beyond expectation.
But, we emphasize that, in the current theory of gravity, it is also only a hypothesis that the gravitational
field is a right sphere or is analogous to the electric field. Not only it has never been confirmed with
observation and experiment, but also there has been little theoretical argument for it. It only is a traditional
belief. Now, we know, the gravitational fields are always being interacted and varied. So, it is clear, the hypothesis
that the gravitational field is in the form of a static right sphere is wrong. According to the law of magnetic force,[31]
for the uniform magnets with such a distance that their magnetic poles can be considered to be point magnetic
𝜇 𝑚 𝑚
charges, the force between two magnetic poles is given by 𝐹⃑ = 0 1 2 2 𝑟⃑, where m1 and m2 are the magnetic pole
4𝜋𝑟
strength, r is the distance between two poles, 𝑟⃗ is the unit radial vector. (It is noted that, the fields of the interacted
charges are no longer an equipotential surface. But, it is still suitable for the inverse square law. For example, the
𝑄𝑞
force between charges Q and q is F = k . If Q>q, Q is not neutralized wholly. It still can interact with another
𝑟2
(𝑄−𝑞)𝑞1 𝑀𝑚
charge q1 with F = k .) Therefore, the Newtonian gravitational law F = G is valid for any one of both
𝑟2 𝑅2
the hypotheses that the gravitational field is analogous to magnetic one or to electric one. Thus, there is no
advantage for the hypothesis that the gravitational field is analogous to the electric field. Conversely, the hypothesis
that the gravitational field is analogous to the magnetic field is advantage to explain the structure of galaxy and the
The disc galaxy is a strong (maybe a solid) evidence for the hypothesis that the gravitational field is
analogous to the magnetic field. There are two observations. First, along the line NS vertical to the orbital plane of
a disk galaxy, the gravitational force between two stellar/solar systems is almost zero. Second, no orbit of a stellar
system is along the direction of NS. It indicates that the gravitational field of a star or a planet is in the form of a
limited pancake, instead of an infinite sphere as the current hypothesis. The observations was discussed detailedly
in Ref.[36]. And, it also is supported with these observations: 1) the orbital inclination angle of big mass is smaller
than that of the small one. 2) the tidal force is repulsive. 3) any gravitational field is varied and always interacting
with other ones. 4) many of the galaxies and stellar systems are in the form as a disk. But, we think, this hypothesis
There are three ways to test the direction and neutralization of the gravitational field. First, it is to perform
the experiment in Fig.6. Maybe, the direction of the gravitational field is complicated than that shown in Fig. 1. For
example, it may be multipole (for instance, qudrupole). In this case, the direction of this field also can be tested with
experiment based on this hypothesis. Second, to explore the deep space shall be greatly developed. It shall be
significant to perform the exploring the fields along the direction of the NS of the solar system. The direction of the
gravitational field shall be observed in this exploring. Third, many observations for the galaxies and stellar systems
were obtained.[11-18] The map of the universe was observed.[15,16] It is a significant work to figure the galaxies
in a coordinate system that takes the NS poles of the Earth for one axis and that vertical to NS axis for other axes. In
this coordinate system, the distribution of the galaxies predicted in the above shall be clearly shown. It shall be a
It is stressed that, here, the tidal force is reexplained. The tidal force is a very old theory. It was practiced
very well. But, we think, our conclusion stands on solid ground. In the Supplementary Data A, we clearly
demonstrated that, in any case, the tidal force is not an attractive force and cannot be produced from
attractive force. So, just as that the orbit of the Moon around the Earth has never been right explained, the tidal
force also has never been right explained although it was right practiced. And, we think, it just is the wrong
explanation of the tidal force that resulted in that the orbit of the Moon around the Earth cannot be right
explained.
6. Conclusions
We emphasize that, the Hill sphere is such a theory that it is essential for designing the interplanetary
satellite orbit and for exploring and understanding the orbits of (extra)solar system. And, it was successful in
practice. So, we think, the Hill sphere is the greatest development of the theory of gravity after the Newtonian
theory of gravity. The Hill sphere is very simple in mathematics and physics. It can be easily understood by high
school student. So, it need be taught in the textbook of high school. But, now, only a few of physicists knew it. So,
the current education of physics was misled. At the same time, the orbit of the Moon around the Sun is the most
fundamental to the theory of gravity. It need be understood by high school student. But, factually, it was understood
As a theory cannot explain the orbit of the Moon around the Earth, we cannot believe that this theory can
explain the universe. In some of current theories of gravity, the actual object is omitted. The conclusion is usually
not obtained from observation but from the very complicated equations. And, the theory is such one that is “so
elegant that can be purely theoretical theory confirmation”.[37] Therefore, it is far away from observation and to
understand an actual object. So, we need new theory of gravity. We think, in the new theory, these objects are
fundamental: 1) To right explain the orbits in the solar system, including the orbits of the Moon and Pluto. 2) To
explain the orbit in the galaxy and the reasons that determine the shape of the galaxy. 3) To explain the interacted
and varied fields and to try to manipulate the field. The current theories of gravity, including Einstein’s general
Now, we are quickly stepping into a new apace time. In that time, interplanetary travel is the main theme.
Therefore, the Hill sphere shall play much more important role. And, in a recent paper, it was presented that the
gravitational field could be varied with strong magnetic/electric field and this variation could be used for the space
repulson.[38] It is a support for our observation that the gravitational field is always varied. Therefore, a new theory
Note: This work was first posted on the researchgate.net in Apr. 2014. And, it was revised for 10 times. And,
several works to support it were done. From that time, several readers had comments on them.
References
[1] N. Mistry, A brief introduction to particle physics (Laboratory for Elementary Particle Physics, Cornell University)
[2] S. Weinberg, Gravitation and cosmology: principles and applications of the general theory of relativity, (John
[3] E. Roche, Académie des Sciences de Montpellier: Mémoires de la Section des Sciences 243, 1(1849)
[5] M. Cuntz, & K. E. Yeager, On the validity of the hill radius criterion for the ejection of planets from stellar
[6] M. E. Paskowitz, & D. J. Scheeres, Robust capture and transfer trajectories for planetary satellite orbiters,
[7] W. S. Koon, M. W. Lo, J. E. Marsden, et al, Low energy transfer to the Moon, Dynamics of Natural and
[9] T. Montmerle, Jean-Charles Augereau, M. Chaussidon, M . Gounelle, B. Marty, A. Morbidelli, Solar System
Formation and Early Evolution: the First 100 Million Years, Earth, Moon, and Planets, 98, 39–95 (2006)
[10] R. Drimmel, & D. N. Spergel, Three-dimensional Structure of the Milky Way Disk, The Astrophys. J. 556,
181(2001)
[11] F. Bournaud, & F. Combes, Gas accretion on spiral galaxies: Bar formation and renewal, arXiv:
astro-ph/0206273
[12] J. Perez, & J. J. Aly, Stability of spherical stellar systems, Mon. Not. of Roy. Astron. S. 280, 689-699 (1996)
[13] C. Alard, Another bar in the Bulge, Astro. Astrophy. Lett. 379, L44–L47(2001). arXiv:astro-ph/0110491
[14] III J. R. Gott, M. Jurić, D.Schlegel et al, A Map of the Universe, The Astrophys. J. 624, 463 (2005)
[16] J. M. Hahn, & R. Malhotra, Orbital evolution of planets embedded in a planetesimal disk, Astron. J. 117,3041 (1999)
[17] I. Trujillo, C. Carretero, & S. G. Patiri, Detection of the effect of cosmological large-scale structure on the
[18] K. Bekki, W. J. Couch, M. J. Drinkwater, et al, A new formation model for M32: A threshed early-type spiral
[19] A. B. Turner, The Moon's Orbit Around the Sun. J. of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada 6, 117 (1912)
[20] M. E. Alexander, The weak friction approximation and tidal evolution in close binary systems, Astrophysics
and Space Science 23, 459-510(1973)
[21] Z. Kowalik, & J. Luick, The Oceanography of Tides, Ch. 1, 5-14 (Fairbanks2013)
[22] S. Leong, Period of the Sun's Orbit around the Galaxy (Cosmic Year), (The Physics Factbook, 2002)
[23] J. Loveday, The APM bright galaxy catalogue, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.278, 1025-1048 (1996)
[24] R. B. Langley, The orbits of GPS satellites, GPS World 2, 50-53 (1991)
[25] L. Whipple, & P. J. Shelus, Long-Term Dynamical Evolution of the Minor Planet (4179) Toutatis, Icarus
105,408–419(1993)
[26] M. Kasevich, & S. Chu, Measurement of the Gravitational Acceleration of an Atom with a Light-Pulse Atom
[27] A. Peters, K. Y. Chung, & S. Chu, High-precision gravity measurements using atom interferometry,
[28] H. Cavendish, Experiments to Determine the Density of the Earth, Philo. Trans. Roy. S.469-526 (1798)
[29] O. Heaviside, A gravitational and electromagnetic analogy, The Electrician 31, 81–82(1893)
[30] L. C. Tu, S. G .Guan, J. Luo, C. G. Shao, & L. X. Liu, Null test of Newtonian inverse-square law at
submillimeter range with a dual-modulation torsion pendulum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 201101(2007)
[31] R. Resnick, & D. Halliday, Physics, Part I (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1968) Fundamental Relationships,
http://geophysics.ou.edu/solid_earth/notes/mag_basic/mag_basic.html
[32] M. J. Reid, et al, Trigonometric parallaxes of massive star-forming regions. VI. Galactic structure, fundamental
[33] A. M. Ghez, et al, Measuring distance and properties of the Milky Way's central supermassive black hole with
[34] V. Rubin, N. T honnard, W. K. Ford, Jr., Rotational Properties of 21 Sc Galaxies with a Large Range of Luminosities and
Radii from NGC 4605 (R=4kpc) to UGC 2885 (R=122kpc), The Astrophys. J. 238, 471 (1980)
[35] S. S. McGaugh, F. Lelli & J. M. Schombert, Radial acceleration relation in rotationally supported galaxies,
arxiv:1609.05917
[36] Y. Zhu, The direction of gravitational field and motion of stellar system
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299453309_The_direction_of_gravitational_field_and_motion_of_stellar_system
[37] R. Dawid, Under determination and theory succession from the perspective of string theory, Phil. Sci. 73, 298–332 (2007)
[38] Y. Zhu, Gravitational-magnetic-electric field interaction, Results in Physics 10, 794–798 (2018)
Supplementary Data A
The Three-body problem has been studied long time ago. The orbit of the Moon around the Earth
perturbed by the Sun was studied in detailed with the Lagrange’s Planetary Equation.[A1] The Lagrange’s
Planetary Equation was well used to study the orbit of the artificial satellite perturbed by the Sun.[A2] Now, it is
well known, the gravitational force of the Sun or Moon on the satellite is directly called the tidal force. And, this
𝑀𝑚
orbit cannot be acted by the Sun/Moon directly with the force F = G .
𝑅2
But, under the condition of Fig.A1, a usual way to deduce the tidal force is:[A2]
𝐺𝑀𝑆 𝐺𝑀𝑒
𝐹𝑡 = − , (A1)
(𝑅−𝑟)2 𝑟2
where s and e denote the Sun and Earth, R and r are the distances between the Sun and Earth and between the
But, in actual practice, the tidal force of the Sun on the Moon is[21, A2]
𝐺𝑀𝑠
𝐹𝑡 = − 𝑟(3𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 − 1) (A2)
𝑅3
It is stressed that Eq.(A2) is accordant with every one of the observations:at any one point on the surface of
the Earth, the largest tidal force by the Sun and Moon emerges two times in 24 hours.
From Fig. A1, we know, Eq.(A2) shows that at the point M1, the direction of the tidal force is along the
green arrow, it is the same as that of the attracting force of the Sun. While at the point M2, the direction of the tidal
force is along the red arrow, it is contrary to the attracting force of the Sun.
In Fig. A1, if the direction of the force of the Sun on the Moon was along the attracting force of the Sun, as
the Moon is at point M2, the relationship of the force among the Sun, Earth and Moon should be
𝐺𝑀𝑆 𝐺𝑀𝑒
F= + (A1a)
(𝑅+𝑟)2 𝑟2
But, from Eq.(A1a), we cannot obtain the tidal force of Eq.(A2) as usually did from Eq.(A1). And,
crucially, if Eq.(A1a) was valid, the orbit of the Moon around the Earth should have been broken very early. So, it
It is stressed that only under the condition that the force of the Sun on the Moon at point M2 is repulsive,
the tidal force Eq.(A2) can be obtained. Therefore, in the current way to deduce the tidal force, the repulsive
But, in fact, both Eqs (A1) and (A1a) are invalid for the orbit of the Moon affected by the Sun. If they
𝑣2 𝑀𝑒 𝑚
were valid, the obit of the Moon around the Earth determined with m =𝐺 should be broken for that the
𝑟 𝑟2
orbit of the Moon is always acted by the gravitational force of both the Sun and Earth. But, the orbit of the Moon is
𝑣2 𝑀𝑒 𝑚 𝑣2 𝑀𝑒 𝑚 𝑀𝑠 𝑚
only determined by m =𝐺 , not by m =𝐺 ±𝐺 .Therefore, in traditional way to study the
𝑟 𝑟2 𝑟 𝑟2 (𝑅±𝑟)2
orbit of the Three-body problem, only the Lagrange’s Planetary Equation is valid. And, in the Lagrange’s Planetary
Equation, the gravitational force of the Sun on the orbit of the Moon/satellite around the Earth only is tidal
𝑀𝑒 𝑚 𝑀𝑠 𝑚
force.[A1,A2] It means that the gravitational force among three bodies cannot be 𝐺 ±𝐺 .
𝑟2 (𝑅±𝑟)2
So, although the Lagrange’s Planetary Equation was rightly practiced with the tidal force, the
A crucial evidence for understanding the Three-body problem is that the orbit of the Pluto around the Sun
𝑀𝑚
is not broken by its moon Charon. From F = G , it is easy to know that the gravitational force of the Charon on
𝑅2
the Pluto is almost 112 times that of the Sun on it. If the relationship of the gravitational force among the Sun, Pluto
and Charon was that as described in Eqs.(A1) and (A1a), the Pluto could not be orbited around the Sun.
Therefore, both the Sun-Earth-Moon and Sun-Pluto-Charon systems show the complementation evidence.
𝑀𝑚
The Sun-Earth-Moon system shows that the Sun cannot act on the Moon with F = G . (Please remember that
𝑅2
𝑀𝑠 𝑚 𝑀𝑒 𝑚 𝑣2 𝑀𝑒 𝑚 𝑀𝑠 𝑚
𝐺 is almost 2.5 times 𝐺 . If the orbit of the Moon was determined by m =𝐺 ±𝐺 , the
(𝑅±𝑟)2 𝑟2 𝑟 𝑟2 (𝑅±𝑟)2
Moon should be moved to the Sun.) The Sun-Pluto-Charon system shows that the Charon cannot act on the orbit of
𝑀𝑚 𝑀𝑚
the Pluto around the Sun with F = G . The two systems show that, the tidal force is independent of F = G .
𝑅2 𝑅2
But, the Sun-Pluto-Charon system cannot be explained with the Hill sphere. Here, it was tried to explain it
From Fig.4, we know, the stability of both the orbit of the Pluto around the Sun and that of the Moon
around the Earth can be explained with the neutralization of the gravitational field. In the Sun-Earth-Moon system,
the field of the Moon is neutralized by the Earth. The Earth and Moon is a “Hill-sphere-unit”. The Sun cannot
𝑀𝑚
gravitate the Moon with F = G as shown in Figs. 1, 3 and 4. For the same reason, the Pluto and Charon also
𝑅2
is a “Hill-sphere-unit”. Only the un-neutralized part of the field of the Pluto can be gravitated by the Sun with F =
𝑀𝑚 𝑀𝑚
G . And, the orbit of the Pluto around the Sun cannot be affected by the Charon with F = G .
𝑅2 𝑅2
It is noted that, a “Hill-sphere-unit” is not binary planet. Now, the Pluto and Charon was generally
explained as binary planet.[A3] The other moons of the Pluto are orbiting around the barycenter of the
Pluto-Charon system.[A3] But, as soon as we describe the orbit of the Pluto with a figure, we shall know this
explanation is questioned.[A4] The line of the Charon moving around the Sun is not circular or elliptic but is
convex. While the orbit of the Pluto around the Sun is a clear standard orbit.
Conclusions: 1) Tidal force is a repulsive force. It is not the difference of two gravitational force as taught
in current theory. 2) Three-body problem must be re-explained with the neutralization of gravitational field. 3) The
Hill sphere is needed to understand the N-body problem and tidal force.
Reference
[A2] G. Seeber, Satellite Geodesy, 2nd, Chapter 3.2, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin. New York. (2003)
[A3] M. R. Showalter, D. P. Hamilton, Resonant interactions and chaotic rotation of Pluto’s small moons, Nature
[A4] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295672153_The_neutralization_of_gravitational_field_and_the_orbits_of_moons_of_the_Pluto
Ftide
S Sun
E M1
M2
Fig. s1. The direction of the tidal force. The Sun is stationary. E is the Earth. M is the Moon which
is orbiting along black arrow. Assuming the incline angle of the orbit is zero and the orbit is circle.
The tidal force of the Sun on the Moon is directed along the line EM. The Sun and M1, E and M2 are
on a straight line. At point M1, the direction of the tidal force and that of the attracting force of the
Sun are all along the green arrow. At the point M2, the direction of tidal force of the Sun on the
Moon is along the red arrow. It is contrary to the direction of the attracting force of the Sun.