Aether Displacement is the most correct unified theory to date
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Albert Einstein's Theory of Relativity In Words of Four Letters or Less
Next: God, the ant, & Space_Time
From: mpc755 on 3 Jul 2010 18:44 On Jul 3, 5:42 pm, cjcountess <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 3, 9:53 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > You speak with a tone of confidence and athority which may convince > > > many people that you are correct, but they evidence sugest otherwise. > > > > Until you realize that, your theory is only partialy correct > > > > Conrad J Countess > > > I have always stated Aether Displacement is the most correct unified > > theory to date.- Hide quoted text - > > Wow, people hear what they want to hear > > Your last comment in no way answers mine. > > The "Aether Displacement Theory", as you call it, is only partialy > correct > > Space pushes back on matter in direct proportion to its mass (m=Ec^2) > or (E=mc^2), is directly proportional to it (F=mv^2) > > On that we agree, but Aether or space, energy, and matter, are all > aspects of the sane thing. > > Space is the most dispersed form, energy in the form of EM waves are > as ripples in that space Aether is the material of space. Aether waves are energy. The material of space physically ripples. The physically rippling is energy. > and rest mass particles are higher frequency > forms of that same energy, that attains rest mass, because frequency > cycles have a spherical motion as standing spherical > waves. The pushing back of space on the spherical energy helps it > keep its composure as it is caught in this warp of space-time. > Displaced aether pushes back towards matter. The pushing back is energy. > Electrons are the closes thing to "Black Hole" on quantum level, > because at "c^2", where the centipital/centrifugal forces are > balenced, the "inertia/gravity", mass has exceeded the energys > capibility to radiat. > > As my central idea is (E=mc^2) = (E=mc^circled) and (c=sqrt-1) where I > demonstrate geometricaly that matter is formed from energy in circular > and or spherical rotation, I can not possibly agree with you. It is > also curious to me that I could not convince you also. > Matter is formed from compressed aether. The compressing is energy. > With the geometrical evidence that I present that c^2 looked at > geometricly as > > c in the linear direction > > x c in the 90 degree angular direction > > = "c^2" as "c in circular motion," with a balence of "centrifugal/ > centripital" forces, and angular momentum of (h/2pi) > > And if amplitude is constant, wave makes 2 rotations, at 90 degree > angle, to complete 1 wave cycle, making it "standing spherical wave", > of (spin 1/2) and angular momentum (h/2pi/2)and have -1 charge if spin > is counter to trjectory. > > All these are attributes of electron and it would be stitisticaly very > improbable for all this to alighn if it were not truly the geometrical > structure of elecctron. > > Thus the evidence convense me that matter is formed from energy in > rotation and as such is physical also. > Matter is formed from aether. Matter and aether are different states of the same material. Energy is not a material. Physical changes in the state of the material is energy. > And thus I cannot agree with you beyond the push back of space as > contributing to gravity. > The aether pushes back. The material of space pushes back. The physical pushing back of the material of space is energy. Gravity is pressure exerted by displaced aether towards matter. Pressure exerted by displaced aether towards matter is energy.
From: BURT on 3 Jul 2010 18:55 On Jul 3, 3:44 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 3, 5:42 pm, cjcountess <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 3, 9:53 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > You speak with a tone of confidence and athority which may convince > > > > many people that you are correct, but they evidence sugest otherwise. > > > > > Until you realize that, your theory is only partialy correct > > > > > Conrad J Countess > > > > I have always stated Aether Displacement is the most correct unified > > > theory to date.- Hide quoted text - > > > Wow, people hear what they want to hear > > > Your last comment in no way answers mine. > > > The "Aether Displacement Theory", as you call it, is only partialy > > correct > > > Space pushes back on matter in direct proportion to its mass (m=Ec^2) > > or (E=mc^2), is directly proportional to it (F=mv^2) > > > On that we agree, but Aether or space, energy, and matter, are all > > aspects of the sane thing. > > > Space is the most dispersed form, energy in the form of EM waves are > > as ripples in that space > > Aether is the material of space. Aether waves are energy. The Energy forms are always together with their surrounding aether. Time is such a relationship. It touches energy. But they are immutably different and together in Unification. Mitch Raemsch > material > of space physically ripples. The physically rippling is energy. > > > and rest mass particles are higher frequency > > forms of that same energy, that attains rest mass, because frequency > > cycles have a spherical motion as standing spherical > > waves. The pushing back of space on the spherical energy helps it > > keep its composure as it is caught in this warp of space-time. > > Displaced aether pushes back towards matter. The pushing back is > energy. > > > Electrons are the closes thing to "Black Hole" on quantum level, > > because at "c^2", where the centipital/centrifugal forces are > > balenced, the "inertia/gravity", mass has exceeded the energys > > capibility to radiat. > > > As my central idea is (E=mc^2) = (E=mc^circled) and (c=sqrt-1) where I > > demonstrate geometricaly that matter is formed from energy in circular > > and or spherical rotation, I can not possibly agree with you. It is > > also curious to me that I could not convince you also. > > Matter is formed from compressed aether. The compressing is energy. > > > > > > > With the geometrical evidence that I present that c^2 looked at > > geometricly as > > > c in the linear direction > > > x c in the 90 degree angular direction > > > = "c^2" as "c in circular motion," with a balence of "centrifugal/ > > centripital" forces, and angular momentum of (h/2pi) > > > And if amplitude is constant, wave makes 2 rotations, at 90 degree > > angle, to complete 1 wave cycle, making it "standing spherical wave", > > of (spin 1/2) and angular momentum (h/2pi/2)and have -1 charge if spin > > is counter to trjectory. > > > All these are attributes of electron and it would be stitisticaly very > > improbable for all this to alighn if it were not truly the geometrical > > structure of elecctron. > > > Thus the evidence convense me that matter is formed from energy in > > rotation and as such is physical also. > > Matter is formed from aether. Matter and aether are different states > of the same material. Energy is not a material. Physical changes in > the state of the material is energy. > > > And thus I cannot agree with you beyond the push back of space as > > contributing to gravity. > > The aether pushes back. The material of space pushes back. The > physical pushing back of the material of space is energy. > > Gravity is pressure exerted by displaced aether towards matter. > > Pressure exerted by displaced aether towards matter is energy.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: mpc755 on 3 Jul 2010 19:08 'Scientists supersize quantum mechanics' http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100317/full/news.2010.130.html "Next, the researchers put the quantum circuit into a superposition of 'push' and 'don't push', and connected it to the paddle. Through a series of careful measurements, they were able to show that the paddle was both vibrating and not vibrating simultaneously." The 'push' and 'don't push' cause the associated aether waves. "Large quantum states could tell researchers more about the relationship between quantum mechanics and gravity something that is not well understood." The relationship between quantum mechanics and gravity is the aether's state of displacement. The relationship is well understood in Aether Displacement.
From: mpc755 on 3 Jul 2010 19:12 'Scientists supersize quantum mechanics' http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100317/full/news.2010.130.html "Next, the researchers put the quantum circuit into a superposition of 'push' and 'don't push', and connected it to the paddle. Through a series of careful measurements, they were able to show that the paddle was both vibrating and not vibrating simultaneously." The 'push' and 'don't push' cause the associated aether waves. "Large quantum states could tell researchers more about the relationship between quantum mechanics and gravity something that is not well understood." The relationship between quantum mechanics and gravity is aether displacement. The relationship is well understood in Aether Displacement.
From: cjcountess on 4 Jul 2010 12:18
The "Geometrical interpretation of E=mc^2 = E=mc^circled and/or sphered", produces a "standing spherical wave", with exact dimensions of electron. It demonstrate how (E=hf) turns to (E=mc^2) at high end of the "EM spectrum", which can also be called the "enery/matter" spectrum, as it shows a wave turning into a particle, "Lorentz Contraction" of EM wave, turn to "space-time curvature", of EM waves, which is also "Special Relativity", turning to "General Relativity", as "c^2" is revealed to = "G" as both are "L/T^2" and "c^2" is the ultimate "L/T^2" and also = to "h/2pi/2", merging with "Quantum Machanics" as this is also the exact measure of quantum particle = "c^2" = "G" = "h/2pi/2" (c^2 = G = h/2pi/2) (E=mc^2) = (F=mv^2) on quantum level THIS IS THE DIRECT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN "SPECIAL RELATIVITY" "QUANTUM MACHANICS" and "GRAVITY" Push back of space is direct logical extension of "Geometrical interpretation of E=mc^2", because as it shows that waves and particles form from energy pushing against light barrier, which is space itself, light barrier or space, pushes back on waves and particles, with force of F=mv^2 = to "mass/energy", of wave or particle measured as, E=hf/c^2, E=m/c^2 or E=mc^2. And so F=mv^2 of wave or particle is directly proportional to E=hf/c^2 or E=mc^2 of particle If I have direct logical connection between "Geometrical interpretation of E=mc^2", and "space pushing back on mass/energy in direct proportion to its quantity, you should be able to see it also. Otherwise the difference in our ideas seem to be choice of words. Conrad J Countess Conrad J Countess |