Calculation of the gravitational constant at measurements by a dynamic method

Gravitational constant calculation methodologies

“…The methodologies of calculating G are described in [1]. In methodology 1, the periods of anharmonic oscillations are determined by the Runge-Kutta method.…”

“…In position 1, the attracting bodies are placed at the ends of the block, in position 2 they are absent, and in position 3 they are rotated by π/2. The positions, oscillation periods and values of G ij according to methodologies 2 [1] and 3 [2][3][4] for one inverse measurement run (positions 3, 2, 1) and one direct run (positions 1, 2, 3) in the first experiment as well as one direct and one inverse run in the second experiment are given in the table. The results are actually indistinguishable.…”

“…It contradicts the dislocation theory of inner friction [5]. After removing a calculation error made in [1] and using the actual values attraction torgue data from [4], average value of G as compared with [2] in first experiment was overstated by 192 ppm and in second experiment was understated by 206 ppm. In this case the first five values of G ij understate the average value of G at 1120 ppm, and overstate its last eight to 386 ppm.…”

“…The equality of all combinations of G ij was provided by an oscillation period diminished by 15 ms in the first experiment and increased by nearly 5 ms in the second experiment. One also cannot exclude the influence of a magnetic interaction [1], which is hard to single out against a more powerful factor.…”