  # kepler's unrecognized discover of relativity

### kepler's second law

Kepler's second law, that the radial line between Sun and planet sweeps through equal area during any pre-selected lapse of time, can be mathematically expressed as A = RV/2 = constant where A is the value of swept area, R is the radial distance, and V is the tangential velocity. For any pre-selected value for the lapse of time involved in the motion of the planet, Kepler's law advises that A is a mathematical constant. It can be combined with the '1/2' term. To obtain another mathematical constant such that RV=Constant.

But if RV = Constant, it must follow that the mathematical value of R is the inverse value of V. And if that be true then R and V must be mathematically related observations about one common factor, with the common factor being simply the constant value of the product of R and V. It is obvious that man does not perceive radius and tangential velocity as the same common factor. And it must follow that either there is something wrong with what man perceives - or there is something wrong with the mathematics we use to define the values for that which we do perceive. That variation between what man perceives and mathematical values is the substance of the concept of 'relativity' - a concept which was not scientifically recognized until early in the twentieth century. (We will pick this up again in the section about Einstein).

### Kepler's Third law

Kepler's third law, that a relationship exists for the family of planets wherein the square of the planet rotational period divided by the cube of the planet radius is a constant, contains another clue pointing to relativity which seems to have been overlooked. In mathematical form Kepler's third law is that P^2 / R^3 = Constant. We can recognize that if that be true, then P and R must be two related mathematical perceptions about a single state of reality. And that relationship is indicated by the constant which is simply a factor of mathematical proportionality. Which again forces us to the question of something being wrong about either the things which man perceives - or something wrong with the mathematics used in analysis of that which we perceive. Again we are faced with the factor of relativity which remained undiscovered by the scientific community until 300 years after Kepler's efforts.

The ingenious nature of Kepler's work must be recognized. But Kepler simply could not be aware that the Sun is not rigidly fixed in space, or that his equations revealed a concept of relativity. For these concepts were not discovered until long after Kepler's death.

RETURN