Evidence of FitzGerald Contraction in the Solar System
Definition. "FitzGerald contraction" will mean here that matter contracts according to beta^2/2 but space does not.
The latitude of the solar apex motion in "ecliptic coordinates". The best available determination of the solar apex motion seems to be the Hipparcos satellite full data set, which gives (Abad et al, Astronomy & Astrophysics, Jan 2003) 24 km/s toward Declination +34, RA 276; error is 1 km/s and 2 degrees. For brevity, I will introduce about another degree of error, by using the perpendicular to Earth's orbit, to approximate the direction of orbital angular momentum of the entire solar system. So, the axis of the solar system differs (using RA = 270), 90 - (23.5 + 34) = 32.5 degrees, from the solar apex motion. Perhaps Jupiter's orbit, and the sun's pole, precess about the apex direction; the direction of the sun's pole is consistent with this.
Axial tilts of the rapidly rotating planets. A planet should rotate most easily when its axis is parallel to the solar apex motion, because then its FitzGerald contraction does not change direction relative to the planet's body. If the drag is as the sine of the angle, then the motion seems to gravitate, as if by a potential, toward the situation where the solar apex motion vector is on the precession circle, because the largest integral for r^(-k) * ds, occurs when the circle touches the origin. Indeed Earth, Mars, Saturn and Neptune have axial tilts ranging monotonically from 23 to 29 degrees; as the orbital speed becomes less important, the values approach 32.
Other planets outside a planet's orbital plane, work to change that planet's axial tilt. This effect is by far the weakest on Jupiter, so it may have yet to find the stablest (32 deg.) axial tilt.
Mechanism of the drag on rotation. The Miller, Morley/Miller and Michelson/Morley experiments all found an interferometer phase shift as if Earth, and everything near it, were FitzGerald contracted according to, mainly, the component of the solar apex motion along Earth's axis. The equatorial component of solar apex motion, and the orbital motion, displayed minified effects, on the net FitzGerald contraction.
Perhaps from gravitational energy considerations, only a solid inner planetary core inside a molten outer core, can respond to changing FitzGerald contraction during rotation. Uranus is less dense than Neptune. A molten core could provide Uranus' magnetic field. A lack of any solid inner core could explain why Uranus' rotational axis was perturbed all the way to 98 degrees, heedless of the 32 degree optimum. Perhaps without a molten outer core, Mars lacks a magnetic field; but, a molten outer core in an earlier epoch caused its former geologic activity, and set its axial tilt.
Internal heat production. When there are solid inner and liquid outer cores, heat production could be proportional to the mass of the solid inner core, and some power, perhaps the fourth, of the rotation frequency. My calculation shows that the FitzGerald compression of atoms in Earth's solid core (1.7% of Earth's mass) would, by increasing the atomic electric field energy, involve about 10^4 times the needed heat, if all of the energy became waste
heat.
The known internal heat productions of Earth (44 terawatts), and of Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune (all 1 to 3 times absorbed solar radiation), together with their rotational frequencies, imply plausible ratios of their inner core masses. Uranus' lack of internal heat could be additional evidence of its lack of a solid inner core.
A much different solar apex motion billions of years ago could have caused a different axial tilt of the planets then.
- Joseph C. Keller
Topic Author
