The Best Proof of the Existence of Correlation

between Gravitational and Inertial masses

……… page 9 of “ Mathematical Foundations of………

(44 )
Then, we arrive at the conclusion that all these experiments
M i = n i2 m i 0 (min ) say nothing in regard to the relativistic behavior of masses in
relative motion.
which shows the quantization of inertial mass; ni is the Let us now consider a planet in the Sun’s gravitational
field to which, in the absence of external forces, we apply
inertial quantum number. Lagrange’s equations. We arrive at the well-known equation:
We will change n in the quantized expression of M g by 2 2
⎛ dr ⎞ 2 ⎛ dϕ ⎞ 2GM i
n g in order to define the gravitational quantum number. Thus ⎜ ⎟ +r ⎜ ⎟ − =E
⎝ dt ⎠ ⎝ dt ⎠ r
dϕ
we have
M g = n g2 mi 0(min ) (44a ) r2
dt
=h
Finally, by substituting mg given by Eq. (43) into the where M i is the inertial mass of the Sun. The term

relativistic expression of M g , we readily obtain E = − GM i a , as we known, is called the energy constant;

a is the semiaxis major of the Kepler-ellipse described by the
mg planet around the Sun.
Mg = = By replacing M i into the differential equation above by
1−V 2 c2 the expression given by Eq. (46), and expanding in power
series, neglecting infinitesimals, we arrive, at:

⎢⎣
(
= M i − 2⎡ 1 − V 2 c 2 )− 12
− 1⎤ M i
⎥⎦
(45) ⎛ dr ⎞
2
⎜ ⎟ +r ⎜
2 ⎛ dϕ ⎞
2
⎟ −
2GM g
=E +
2GM g ⎛V 2
⎜
⎜ c2
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎝ dt ⎠ ⎝ dt ⎠ r r ⎝ ⎠
V = ωr = r (dϕ dt ) , we get
By expanding in power series and neglecting infinitesimals, we
arrive at: Since
2 2 2
V ⎛ dr ⎞ 2 ⎛ dϕ ⎞ 2GM g 2GM g r ⎛ dϕ ⎞ 2
M g = 1− Mi ⎜ ⎟ + r ⎜ ⎟ − = E + ⎜ ⎟
c2 ⎝ dt ⎠ ⎝ dt ⎠ r c 2 ⎝ dt ⎠
which is the Einsteinian equation of the planetary motion.
1 − V 2 c 2 > 0 , the equation above can be rewritten
Since
as follows:
Multiplying this equation by (
dt dϕ 2 and )
⎛ V2 ⎞ remembering that (dt d ϕ )2 = r 4 h 2 , we obtain
M g = ⎜1 − 2
⎜
⎟M i
⎟
(46 )
⎝ c ⎠ ⎛ dr ⎞
2
⎛ r 4 ⎞ 2GM g r 2GM g r 3
⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ + r 2 = E⎜ 2 ⎟ + +
Thus, the well-known expression for the simple pendulum ⎝ dϕ ⎠ ⎜h ⎟ 2
c2
⎝ ⎠ h
period, T =2π (Mi Mg)(l g) , can be rewritten in the following Making r =1 u , and multiplying both members of the
form: 4
equation by u , we get
l ⎛⎜ V2 ⎞
⎟
T = 2π 1+ 2 for V << c ⎛ du ⎞
2
E 2GM g u 2GM g u 3
g ⎜⎝ 2c ⎟
⎠ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ + u 2 = 2 + +
Now, it is possible to learn why Newton’s experiments using ⎝ dϕ ⎠ h h2 c2
which leads to the following expression
simple penduli do not found any difference between M g and
d 2u GM g ⎛ 3 u 2h2 ⎞
M i . The reason is due to the fact that, in the case of penduli, +u = ⎜1 + ⎟
dϕ 2 h2 ⎜⎝ c2 ⎟⎠
2 2 −17
the ratio V 2c is less than 10 , which is much 2 2
smaller than the accuracy of the mentioned experiments.
In the absence of term 3h u c2 , the integration of the
The Newton’s experiments have been improved upon equation should be immediate, leading to 2π period. In order
(one part in 60,000) by Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel (1784–1846). to obtain the value of the perturbation we can use any of the
In 1890, Eötvos confirmed Newton’s results with accuracy of well-known methods, which lead to an angle ϕ , for two
7
one part in 10 . Posteriorly, the Eötvos experiment has been successive perihelions, given by

repeated with accuracy of one part in 10 . In 1963, the

9 6G 2 M g2
experiment was repeated with an even greater accuracy, one
2π +
11
c2h2
part in 10 . The result was the same previously obtained. Calculating per century, in the case of Mercury, we arrive at an
2 angle 43” for the perihelion advance.
In all these experiments, the ratio V 2c 2 is less This result is the best theoretical proof of the accuracy of
−17 Eq. (45).
than 10 , which is much smaller than the accuracy of Let us now consider another consequence of the
−11 existence of correlation between M g and M i . ………..
10 , obtained in the previous more precise experiment.